Full text of "Vindication"

See other formats

MBMWMMMIM

THE

IVERIES GOMPANIES

EOYAL COMMISSION.

THE LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES'
VINDICATION.

TUB writer of this siuceie, however imperfect, Vindication of the City of
London Livery Companies from the foul charges made in so broadcast a
manner through a band of men interested in their 6vcrthrow, desires to im-
press on his readers, be they many or few, that he is not a member of
either of their ancient and deservedly revered fraternities, and that he
has not any or the most distant connection with any such.

Personally his knowledge of Prime "Wardens and Courts of City
Liveries is on par with any participation in their entertainments. " He
knows them not" The Aucicnt Guilds are none the less dear to his
heart.

As an unobtrusive, humble dweller in the peaceful country, and removed
from the troublous stream of public matters, he has no object to serve be-
yond aiding, if possible, the cause of truth and well-doing as against men-
dacity and wrong, and he prays that God may defend the right !

He would desire nothing better than that the <:old ways" may
l>c his to the end, and has been cheered in his labour of love by a
strong and fervent conviction that the London City Liveries are worthy
stewards and administrators of noble gifts, the which they well and truly
guard.

Rightly estimating the modern Pharisee, who shows his voidance of
any bowels of compassion and mercy through the abhorrent selfishly con-
ceived doctrine that almsgiving creates pauperism, he prefers to hug the
blessed words so comforting to the great heart of Edmund Burke, " Give
" alms of thy goods, and never turn thy face from any poor man."

The enemy has declared that the jealousy existing between the
Companies is so great as to render them powerless for defence.

He trusts that steel wythes of surpassing strength may gird an united
phalanx faggot of resistance, and that the world may sec that the enemy
is none other than

" A fellow by the baud of nature mark'd, quoted and sign'd to do a deed of shame."

King John, act. ii. sc. 1.

January, 1885.

'Continuing the matter connected with the Livory Compuuie!, the writer is
preparing a companion volume, aud which will shortly be ready, detailing the in-
teresting histories and charters developed before the Royal Commission.]

THE ROYAL COMMISSION.

L__ _

THE LONDON CITY LIVERY
COMPANIES'

VINDICATION.

" The Enemy said, ' We will divide the spoil.' "

Exodus xv. 9.

" Their only crime was that they were rich, generous, hospitable, and charitable, and
for thij the malice of their enviers condemned them to die."

History of the Barmecides.

" Men, that make

Envy, and crooked malice, nourishment,
Dare bite the best. I do beseech your lordships,
That, in this case of justice, my accusers,
Be what they will, may stand forth face to face,
And freely urge against me."

Henry VIII., net v. sc. 2.

Eontton :

PRINTED BY GILBERT AND EIVINGTON, LIMITED,
52, ST. JOHN'S SQUARE, CLEUKEMVELL.

1885.

15358.',

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

PAGE

The more than questionable origin of the Royal Commission — Sir Hardinge
Gifiard defines the promoters' purposes — The Companies' rights incontest-
ably shown and proved through early stage of the Commission sitting —
The Commissioners' acknowledgment of fairness of the Companies' returns
— The Inquiry : triumphant results to the City Companies — Virulence of
the Companies' enemies' attacks — Proved strictly private character of
the various Companies' property — The Companies' faithful discharge of
duties in the past on a par with present admirable business management
— Governing bodies' devotion to duties of their trusts without parallel
— The late Lord Derby and Lords Eldon and Lyndburst would have
exerted their eloquence on side of the Companies— Expression of hope
that Lord Derby and the Duke of Bedford may in dealing with their large
properties manifest like sense of duties seen in the City Companies'
acts — Messrs. Firth's, Bcale's, and Phillips' attacks increase in virulence
' — The Companies' permitting attacks to pass unchallenged adding to their
bolduess — The Secretary of the Commission, instead of an unbiassed in-
strument, proves to be an active partisan — He issues an authorized
private Circular as coming from the chairman and his colleagues with
object of promoting active agitation — Further assigned purposes through
wrong usage of the Commissioners' authority — Unauthorized usage of the
Lord Chancellor's name by the Secretary — Intimation that the Lord
Chancellor will not oppose any Government measure based on the Com-
mission's recommendations— Metropolitan and Provincial press to be
induced to agitate against the Companies — The dignified silence main-
tained by the Companies the cause of agitators' adoption of a course
resulting in their overthrow — Seci'etary Warr's conduct brought under
notice of House of Commons — The Secretary of State's explanation —
Labours of the Commission an ordeal resulting in honour to the City
Companies 3

CHAPTER II.

Dishonourable charges of Mr. Firth against the Livery Companies — The charge
of bank-notes being placed beneath plates at alleged weekly dinners
generally — Firth, when called upon to prove such as general practice,
applies same to Cutlers' Company only — Mr. Beaumont and Mr. Graves,
of Cutlers' Company, utterly deny the truth of the charges — Correspon-
dence of Sir Frederick Bramwell and Mr. Prideaux, of Goldsmiths'
Company, on the subject ; in which Mr. Firth adduces a pretended case
eaid to have been furnished him by a Quaker long since dead — A second
circular with object of exciting further agitation against Companies
through the means of the newspaper press — The second circular avails of
the name of Sir Sydney Waterlow, recommending him as a candidate
for mayoralty under the hoped-for new municipality of London — -Tho
Companies' chief assailant's antecedents — The worthless character of
Mr. Beale's and his associates' evidence before the Commission — General
properties of the respective Livery Companies proved to be private —
Firth's misrepresentation as to salaries pretended as paid to the mem-
bers of the Livery Courts — Facts as to the large numbers of University
exhibitions held by the Goldsmiths' Company — Firth's misrepresentation
as to allowances pretended to be made to decayed Goldsmiths — The
banquets given by the various Livery Companies made the bill of indict-

vi CONTENTS.

PAGE

ment against the Companies — Persistent repetition of falsehoods as to
such — Any presence of the would-be spoilers at the Companies' dinners
an abomination to right-minded men — Britain's naval and military
Iteroea from time immemorial chief guests at such entertainments —
Cross exaggerations as to cost of such entertainments — Tricksters and
slanderers no fitting pnrtnkers of such feasts — The entertaining illustrious
men honourable to the Companies and the nation — The occasions in past
days a leading means of Jewish emancipation through Jews' presence at
the feasts 14

CHAPTER III.

Greatness of the prize offered the freebooters in spoliating the Companies —
Freemasons' Societies marked as next objects for attack— Too faithful
discharge of duties reason of attack on Livery Companies with view to
plunder— Lord Chancellor Selborne testifies before the Commission— His
Lordship declines to entertain any question of redistribution of the
City Companies' funds— The several Companies' adhesion to the cause of
supporting Technical Education voluntary— The Lord Chancellor replies
emphatically and decisively to crucial question as to the various Livery
Companies' properties being strictly private ownership— His Lordship
repeats declaration that the Companies' control of their properties is
absolute— The Lord Chancellor's assurance that the Courts of Assistants'
attendance and conduct of business eminently thorough, and that
the fees received are in no way gifts or dividends — His Lordship asserts
that no sums of money are ever divided among the Courts of Assistants
except for business attendance — Emphatic declaration of the Lord Chan-
cellor that no General Charitable Trust exists upon the charters of the
Mercers' Company — Firth's discomfiture and utter breakdown — The
Grocers* Company's Laxton (Oundle School) case; Lord Langdale's de-
cision thereon— The Kneseworth case of the Fishmongers' Company —
Herbert's case from his work on the twelve great Companies . . .28

CHAPTER IV.

Mr. Firth's indictment against the Livery Companies summarized into nine
propositions — The entire nine disproved and refuted — General beneficence
and management the highest evidence of the Companies' observance of
trust responsibilities — Goldsmiths' Company's, as the other Companies',
test -of their charities' expenditure having grown more than proportionably
with their increasing wealth — The Goldsmiths' Company's holding of
seventy-six exhibitions at the Universities — Firth's misstatement as to
craftsmen's associations with the Companies— His false assertion as to the
properties of the Companies being leased to members for purposes of in-
dividual gain— Mr. Prideaux, of the Goldsmiths' Company, disproves this
charge of Firth — Mr. J. R. Phillips' antecedents as a writer opposing the
Companies— His proposal to realize the Companies' entire properties and
convert into " hotch-potch " — Notwithstanding every effort, witnesses
against the Companies unobtainable — Such as appeared were examples
interested through prior disputes — The Mercers' Company's regal expen-
diture on St. Paul's School — Its founder, Dean Colet, a wise believer in
the Mercers as his executors — Mr. J. H. Warner and Mr. W. Ruck, of the
Grocers' Company, before the Commission — Mr. Warner's evidence — Mr.
Firth has a keen eye to cash balances — Froude's definition of the City
Guilds — Modern London and provincial clubs in no respect analogous
with the old City Companies ......... 38

CHAPTER Y.

CONTENTS. vii

PAGE

Drapers, and Mr. Owen Roberts, F.S.A. , of the Clothworkers, attend
the Commission as representatives of the City and Guilds Technical
Institute — The Lord Chancellor states his membership in the Mercers'
Company as extending through three generations — His Lordship ex-
plains that City and Guilds Technical Institute originated with tho
Clothworkers' Company — Mr. Gladstone in 1875 urging the Companies
to aid Science and Art Education — His Lordship continues his history and
objects of the Technical Institute, and refers especially to Professor
Huxley's views thereon— The site at South Kensington — Incorporation
of the Institute — Nomination of Governors, &c. — Laying foundation-stone
of Central Institute by the Prince of Wales in 1881— Building's costs and
contributions thereto — Annual subscriptions to tho Institute — Students
in various schools — Sir Frederick Bramwell explains nature of governing
body — Lord Chancellor and Sir Frederick Bramwell's statements as to
application of funds — Other details as to the Technical Guilds — Great
services rendered by Mr. Dalton of the Drapers' Company, who boldly
denounced the Firth and Beale agitators — The bounteous charities of the
Drapers' Company stated — The Salters' Company, and tributes to Mr.
Alderman Fowler, M.P 54

CHAPTER VI.

The old Guilds of London true examples of faithfulness — City Liveries'
charitable gifts evidences of their observing the doctrine of charity
universal — Their Charities administered at cost comparing favourably
with any other statement as to hospitals and general charities of London
—The clerks of the various City Companies deserving of honour for
able discharge of duties — W. G. Prideaux and Wm. Beckwith Towse
examples of the great labour falling on executive officers — The Fish-
mongers' donations over a period of ten years given as fair example of
each of the various Companies proportionally with means — All the various
Companies generous donors according to their means ... .83

CHAPTER VII.

The testimony given by her Majesty's Charity Commissioners in itself a refuta-
tion of the false words of Companies' slanderers— Evidence of Mr. Hare, her
Majesty's Senior Inspector of Charities ; his definition of functions of the
Charity Commissioners under the Act of 1853 — Charity Commissioners'
powers to call for any documents relating to Charities — Case of Wax Chand-
lers' Company applying a surplus to their own funds — Vice-Chancellor
Hall and Lord Selborne advise Merchant Taylors' Company as to their
surplus— Charity Commissioners practically in possession of the whole of
the charitable trusts of the Guilds — Suggestions of Mr. Hare— Explanations
of Mr. Hare relating to his evidence — Evidence of Mr. Longley, her
Majesty's Commissioner of Charities — He testifies that the Companies are
exceedingly liberal in the administration of their trusts, and that all the
Companies have rendered proper accounts — Mr. Longley says the various
Companies are anxious their alms-folk shall have sufficient stipends — Mr.
Longley testifies that the Mercers' Company's large income of St. Paul's
School is judiciously expended ; and that the management of the Mercers'
Company is excellent — Mr. Longley states that he never knew of any
member of a court taking lease of property and subletting at higher rate
— Necessity of heed being given to the important declarations of the
Charity Inspectors so favourable to the Companies . . . . . 101

CHAPTER VIII.

Dsclaration and protest of the Grocers'. Company as to the Commission being
a breach of the liberties of the subject — The Company's special memo-
randum— Cites various decisions of the courts bearing on their properties
Mercers' Company's declaration accompanying their returns — Evidence
of Mr. Travers Smith of Fishmongers' Company — Mr. Beale before the
Commission, his close connection with Firth and Warr — Beale as a writer
and public agitator, his hunting-grounds, and connection as assumed orator
for Chelsea Clubs — He admits his agitation against the Companies —
Particulars of incomes, &c., of the various Livery Companies — Able
character of the Dissent Report — The Dissent Report — Protest of Mr.
Alderman Cotton .. . ......Ill

Viil CON 1 EN if.

CHAPTER IX.

PACK

Mr. Thwaitoa* nublo bequest to tho Clothworkers' Company — Attempt to s

•amo » warning of what ina\ \> • r.\pi-et.-il in tlic i-ariy future— Bequests
to IHT M:ij.-M v ami the late Karl of Beaconsfield — Tlio Koyal Commission
a resuh of u change in tin- political constitution of tho City of London re-
presentation— Extreme views held by a majority of the Royal Commission
— Perversion of facts in regards to the status of tho Companies resulting
from tho Groat Firo of London — The terra " public " wrongly applied to
the Companies —Tho term "corporation" explained — The Livery Com-
panies " public " only in the same sense as tho railways and banks —
IVnal clans;' of the ancient Guilds — Tho historic development of tho City
Companies — Unanimity of the spoilers ; their various pretexts favourable
to the communists— Sacrifices submitted to in olden times to satisfy the
rapacity of royal plunderers — Recapitulation of somo of the many in-
famous charges brought against tho Companies— Speech of Sir Hardinge
liifiard referring to the falsities of the Companies' enemies, their attacks
on property-rights, and a recent unworthy utterance of a Cabinet
Minister — Alderman Fowler's great services to the causo of the Com-
panies— The Spectacle Makers' and Armourers' Companies instances of
tho high character and nobility of heart of all the so-called '' Minor
Companies " — Matters introduced into the Commission Inquiry having
r -fen-nee to the several estates in Ireland the property of certain of tho
Companies, and the using the occasion for an attempt to securo lowering
of r.-n:s — Tho Ironmongers' and Salters* Companies' administration of
their respective properties— Sir Thomas Nelson's admirable statsments of
the Liveries' case before the Commission 14G

CHAPTER X.

Companies evid -ncing bjforj t'.ie Commission : — The Grocers', the Drapers',
tlie Goldsmiths', the Salters', the Ironmongers', the Clothworkers', the
Apothecaries', the Needlemakers', and the Stationers' .... 163

CHAPTER XI.

Memoranda of facts replying to misrepresentations of witnesses : — Supple-
mentary statement on b.'half of the Fishmongers' Company— Memorial
of the Goldsmiths' Company — Observations ot Sir Frederick J. Bramwcll
:iiid Mr. Prideaux on behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company — Memorial of
the Skinners' Company — A short historical account of the connection
of the Livery Companies of London with the County of Londonderry
— Memorandum of the Merchant Taylors' Company — Supplementary
statements of the Saltors' Company and of the Ironmongers' Company —
Observations of the Clothworkers' Company on the evidence of witnesses
— Memoranda from the Barbers' Company, the Coachinakers' Company,
and the Homers' Company — Concluding observations . . . 2'2(j

VICTORIA R.

IJlCtorin, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland Queen, Defender of the Faith :

5To Our right trusty and right well-beloved Cousin and Coun-
cillor, Edward Henry, Earl of Derby ; Our right trusty and right
entirely beloved Cousin, Francis Charles Hastings, Duke of Bed-
ford ; Our right trusty and well-beloved Cousin and Councillor,
Robert, Viscount Sherbrooke ; Our right trusty and well-beloved
Councillor, John Duke, Baron Coleridge, Lord Chief Justice of
the Common Pleas Division of Our High Court of Justice ; Our
right trusty and well-beloved Councillor, Sir Richard Assheton
Cross, Knight Grand Cross of Our Most Honourable Order of the
Bath ; Our trusty and well-beloved Sir Nathaniel Mayer de
Rothschild, Baronet ; Our trusty and well-beloved Sir Sydney
Hedley Waterlow, Baronet ; Our trusty and well-beloved William
James Richmond Cotton, Esquire ; Our trusty and well-beloved
Albert Pell, Esquire ; Our trusty and well-beloved Walter Henry
James, Esquire ; Our trusty and well-beloved Joseph Firth Bot-
tomley Firth, Esquire ; and Our trusty and well-beloved Thomas
Burt, Esquire, Greeting.

®2Hf)fVeag We have thought it expedient that inquiries should
be made into the several matters herein-after mentioned.

JBtob) fcnoh) J}e, that We, reposing great trust and confidence in
your zeal, discretion, and ability, have authorized and appointed,
and do by these Presents authorize and appoint you, the said
Edward Henry, Earl of Derby ; Francis Charles Hastings, Duke
of Bedford; Robert Viscount Sherbrooke; John Duke, Baron
Coleridge ; Sir Richard Assheton Cross; Sir Nathaniel Mayer de
Rothschild; Sir Sydney Hedley Waterlow; William James
Richmond Cotton ; Albert Pell ; Walter Henry James ; Joseph
Firth Bottomley Firth ; and Thomas Burt to bo our Commis-
sioners for the purposes of these Presents.

21 nil We do hereby require and command you, or any three or
more of you, to inquire into all the Companies to which these
Presents apply, and into the circumstances and dates of their
foundation, and the objects for which they were founded, and how
far those objects ai'e now being carried into effect, and into any
Acts of Parliament, charters, trust deeds, decrees of Court, or other
documents founding, regulating, or affecting the said Companies,
or any of them .

21 nil We do hereby require and command you, or any three or
more of you, to inquire into and ascertain the constitution and
powers of the governing bodies of the said Companies, and the
mode of admission of freemen, livery, and other members of the
said Companies, and the number of freemen, livery, or other per-
sons constituting the said Companies, and the gains, privileges, or
emoluments to which all or any of such persons are entitled by
reason of their being members of such Companies.

2lntl We do hereby require and command you, or any three or
more of you, to inquire into and ascertain the officers and servants

2 BOYAL COMMISSION.

of such Companies, and the salaries or oilier emoluments to which
such officers and servants are entitled, and the mode of appoint-
ment of such officers and servants, and the duties which they
perform.

.slut) Wo do hereby require and command you, or any three or
more of you, to inquire into and ascertain the property of, or held
in trust for or by, such Companies, both real and personal, and
where the same is situate, and of what it is composed, and the
capital value of the several descriptions of such property, and the
annual income of such property, and the mode in which the
property is managed and the income is expended.

&nb We do hereby require and command you, or any three or
more of you, to report to Us, under your hand and seal, what you
shall find touching or concerning the premises upon such inquiry
as aforesaid, and also to consider and report what measures (if
any) are, in the judgment of you, or any three or more of you,
expedient and necessary for improving or altering the constitu-
tion of such Companies, or the appropriation or administration of
the property or revenues thereof.

&nto We do hereby empower you to make separate reports in
relation to any matter concerning the premises at such time and
in such manner as you, or any three or more of you, may think
expedient.

&nt) We do hereby declare that the Companies to which these
Presents apply, are all the Companies named in the Second Re-
port of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into Municipal
Corporations in England and Wales.

IHttli for the better enabling you to form a sound judgment on
the premises, We do hereby authorize and empower you to call
before you, or any three or more of you, all such persons as you
may judge- most competent, by reason of their situation, know-
ledge and experience, to afford you correct information on the
subjects of the inquiry ; also to cause all persons to bring and
produce before you, or any three or more of you, all and singular
records, books, papers, and other documents touching the pre-
mises which may be in the custody or under the control of them
or any of them ; also to inquire of the premises, and every part
thereof, by all lawful ways and means whatsoever.

21 iVb We will and command that this Our Commission shall
be in full force and virtue, and that you Our Commissioners, or
any three or more of you, may from time to time proceed to the
execution thereof, although the same be not continued from time
to time by adjournment ;

&nto for your assistance in the due execution of this Our Com-
mission, We do hereby appoint our trusty and well-beloved Henry
Denny Warr, Esquire, Barrister-at-Law, to be your Secretary,
whose services and assistance We require you to use from time to
time as occasion may require.

Given at Our Court of St. James's the Twenty-ninth day
of July, One thousand eight hundred and eighty, in
the Forty-fourth year of Our Reign.
By Her Majesty's Command.

W. Y. HARCOURT.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

LONDON" CITY LIVERY COMPANIES'
VINDICATION.

CHAPTER I.

The more than questionable origin of the Royal Commission — Sir Hardinge Gifford
defines the promoters' purposes — The Companies' rights incontestably shown
and proved through early stage of the Commission sitting — The Commissioners'
acknowledgment of fairness of the Companies' returns — The Inquiry: triumphant
results to the City Companies— -Virulence of the Companies' enemies' attacks
— Proved strictly private character of the various Companies' property — •
The Companies' faithful discharge of duties in the past on a par with present
admirable business management— Governing bodies' devotion to duties of
their trusts without parallel — The late Lord Derby and Lords Eldon and
Lyndhurst would have exerted their eloquence on side of the Companies —
Expression of hope that Lord Derby and the Duke of Bedford may in dealing with
their large properties manifest like sense of duties seen in the City Com-
panies' acts — Messrs. Firth's, Scale's, and Phillips' attacks increase in
virulence — The Companies' permitting attacks to pass unchallenged adding to
their boldness — The Secretary of the Commission, instead of an unbiassed in-
strument, proves to be an active partisan — He issues an authorized private
Circular as coming from the chairman and his colleagues with object of pro-
moting active agitation — Further assigned 'purposes through wrong usage of
the Commissioners' authority — Unauthorized usage of the Lord Chancellor's
name by the Secretary — Intimation that the Lord Chancellor will not oppose
any Government measure based on the Commission's recommendations —
Metropolitan and Provincial press to be induced to agitate against the Com-
panies— The dignified silence maintained by the Companies the cause of
agitators' adoption of a course resulting in their overthrow — Secretary Warr's
conduct brought under notice of House of Commons — The Secretary of State's
explanation — Labours of the Commission an ordeal resulting in honour to the
City Companies.

NEVER has any Commission issued under England's Koyal Mandate been Great pubiic
beforehand heralded so noisily, or impressed from first to last with so interest at-
great amount of national interest and public expectation, as attached to taching to the
the Parliamentary Inquiry under the presidency of the Right Hon. the Cit7 °f Lon-
Earl of Derby, into the Properties and Rights of the Ancient Guilds of CompanieJ'
London, under title of the London City Livery Companies' Commission. Commission.
For a long series of years prior to the Commission's appointment, the
columns of the least respectable of the metropolitan newspapers had been
used by the promoters as channels for disseminating charges against the
Companies, such as by continuous repetition could hardly fail to impress
belief that there existed good grounds for at least a fair moiety of the
charges being worthy of credence. The prosecutors, though apparently
known to be rnen not of highest standing, had secured the public ear.
Of the result of the inquiry, it may with truth fearlessly be asserted there .

never was the smallest need of legislation to secure any better usage of 2ngm.. tte .
,,,,,, °. ^ . , % , ,, . ° . Commissioner

the properties controlled by the various Companies, and that the inquiry more than

was "conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity." None but parties inter- questionable
ested in a possible scramble moved in the matter, yet this really insignifi- nature,
cant but very persistent clique created in the first instance a clamour
by inventing and disseminating utterly unfounded charges against the

B 2

4 BOYAL COMMISSION.

various Companies, involving gross malversation of charitable and other
monies, tho continual repetition of which with incn-asi-d boldness and
rnvfiu lined falsity, eventuated in the public and Parliament accepting
the baseless charges as presenting sufficient grounds for a Commission of
Inquiry.

A- tho Inquiry progressed it became more and more evident that
no case existed against the Livery Companies, that the agitation was
nothing more than an openly avowed attack upon property by persons
of small standing, before whose cunning and rapacious eye dangled
a glittering prize as tho likely reward of successful agitation, and that
the general public or portion thereof really most interested in what
might be deemed a more popular expenditiire of the various Com-
panies' revenues, none came forward to back iip the allegations, and con-
sequently it was left to the conspirators themselves to establish, which
they wholly and entirely failed to do, any one of the wild charges pre-
ferred. It had been boldly declared by one of the leading revilers,
that " the conduct of the Companies has been such in their trusts ax, if
" they had been private individuals, would have subjected them to be
" treated as criminals" to whom Shakespeare's anathema,

" His only gift is in devising impossible slanders," is not without ap-
plication.

Foiled and discomfited as they were, Mr. Phillips, one of the conclave,

in reply to Lord Derby, Chairman of the Commission, did not hesitate

to declare before the Commission that his mode of dealing with the

private properties of the Liveries would be to gather the whole into

" what he termed a " hotch-potch," " Sell the Halls, every one of them,"

and hand over the proceeds to somebody not very clearly defined. Mr.

Sir Hardinge Phillips' term " hotch-potch " has been thus analogously alluded to by

Giflard defines Sir Hardinge Giffard, the late Solicitor-General, who has characteris-

the promoters' tically observed,

" They often heard about improvement, development, and sphere of
'usefulness. Those were delightful phrases. When he went home a
' gentleman might ask him for his watch, and tell him that he required it
' to develop it into a new sphere of usefulness. Whether he yielded to the
' man's pressure or not would, of course, very much depend upon whether
' he could keep the watch or not. He would rather keep it, but if the
' forces were too strong, he would give it up for a time, but then he should
' appeal to the learned judge. If A was deprived of his property, he
' would very likely think he was badly used, until B suffered the same
' fate, and so down to Z ; and if all was to be placed in hotch-potch, some
' of them would not very much object. Fortunately, they lived in a
' society which recognized that there were such things as truth, right,
' property, and law, independently of a number of voices which might
' be got to cry put in a particular clamour. There were eternal principles
'of truth and justice, and no society could exist unless they equally
' respected the rights of all."

A retrospect of what led to the Commission's appointment excites a
general expression of surprise that such an inquiry should have been
deemed necessary on such instigation as ruled in the case, the more re-
markable seeing that really national matters of vital importance are left
to work out their urgent problems unaided, the which may have been
advantageously solved through the means and large expenditure involved
in this investigation of the London City Livery Companies. The only
parties really benefiting by the inquiry are the Companies themselves,
who from first to last, under great aggravation and insult, have ob-
served more than refraining endurance and great dignity. Even the
enemy who for purpose of despoil heaped false charges on their heads the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 5

better to disguise their own ends, now realize that men who could thus
bear themselves are of a class from whom no other course should havo
been expected.

The case of one Guild was the case of its brethren ; each was forcibly The various
and honestly stated before the Commission. One and all asserted Livery Com-
that their property was private property, not the less private property panics' right
because held by a body of joint owners. The leading Companies proved ?
such to be the case, and that they have held it for centuries without adverse
claim or question. They have proved their free sale and purchase of
other property in its place whenever such was deemed by them desirable,
often from the Crown, i.e. from the Government. They have clearly
shown that the funds with which these purchases have been made have
arisen for the most part from savings of income, from contributions by
members of the respective Companies, or bequests by deceased Livery-
men. They have also made plain that a portion, though a comparatively
small one, of their property is held under special trusts, which, like all
other trusts, are under the control and supervision of the Courts of Jus-
tice ; and what is of equal moment at a time when their possessions are
threatened by a gang of would-be spoilers, they incontestibly show that
those Courts have over and over again decided that as regards the bulk
of their property the Companies are in no way whatever piiblic bodies
amenable to be recalled to their duty by the Crown. They prove them-
selves to be mere private owners, and that though originally private and
voluntary guilds formed upon an extremely ancient type of association
for common aid and comfort and for common festivities, yet their con-
tinuity is unimpaired. Some obtained from the Sovereign charters and
licences without which this continuity could not have been preserved,
and in return undertook the supervision of the particular trade to Avhich
their members belonged, and it is from these the present Companies
are proved to be descended. As a rule, hoAvever, the duties they dis-
charged are long since dead or become obsolete, as much so as the onerous
military tenures upon which such estates were formerly held.

After long and exhaustive probing of every matter the Companies' Outline of the
enemies could suggest, extending over several years of investigation, this Commission s

"nowcr^ IIH 1

High Commission has brought its sittings to an end, and a record of ^ com.
its doings filling several folio volumes, of many hundred pages each, is the missioners'
result. The Commissioners' instructions were to inquire into the " circum- public ac-
stances and dates " of the foundation of the Livery Companies of the knowledgment
City of London ; the objects " for which they were founded ; how far °n(i f^^els
those objects are now being carried into effect; and into any Acts of Of the various
Parliament, charters, trust-deeds, decrees of Court, or other documents returns of the
founding, regulating, or affecting the said Companies, or any of them." Companies
The aim of the Commission was to ascertain the constitution and powers gj,* a^nce to
of the governing bodies of the Companies ; the mode of admission of the usual
freemen, livery, and other persons constituting them ; and the gains, forms and
privileges, or emoluments to which such persons are entitled. All facts circulars sent
as regard the salaries and other emoluments ; the mode of appointment, oufc y tnem-
and the duties of officers and servants ; the real and personal value of
the property of, or held in trust by, each Company, were objects to be
inquired into by the Commission. They were also commanded to judge
as to what measures may in their opinion be necessary for improving or .
altering the constitution of the Companies, or the " appropriation or
administration of the property or revenues thereof." To enable the
Commission to form a "sound judgment upon these premises," they
were empowered to adduce the evidence of those who, " by reason of
their situation, knowledge, and experience," should be deemed competent
to give information upon the subjects of the inquiry. The circular

6 BOYAL COMMISSION.

addressed to the Companies was of the most searching and exhaustive
character, and was replied to -with more than a ready frankness — but
witli becoming protests against the jurisdiction of the Commission. In
pending to the Royal Commission the returns demanded, the Companies
p-nerally state, in the most formal and emphatic manner, that tln'ir
readiness to assist the Commission is duo to the respect which they owe,
and wish to pay, to the Crown from which the Commissioners derive
their authority, and is not to be taken, now or hereafter, as an admission
on the part of the Companies that their private affairs may be inquired
into, or their private property dealt with, otherwise than in due course
of law. As in the times of Richard II., the Commission was " armed
with ample powers of discovery ; " but now, as then, the Companies,
though ready and willing voluntarily to give every information on the
points of inquiry, yet wisely and properly dispute the jurisdiction of
the Commission. The Commissioners acknowledge frankly that returns
were received from nearly all the Companies, and generally compliment
them in regard to these returns, which they state were, " as a rule,
prepared with care, and, as it appeared to us, with candour." The
report states that " many were admirably drafted. This observation
applies not only to the returns received from the great Companies — all .
of which have made returns — but to those received from many of the
minor Companies." Every reader is struck with the more than candid
manner in which the various Companies replied to all queries of the
Commission. They have been more than willing witnesses in every-
thing concerning their affairs, and have furnished not only full and
minutely detailed circumstances under which the Companies were founded
in ancient days, but have stated in lucid manner the purposes for
which their vast properties have been acquired and so carefully husbanded ;
so also are they frank and explicit as to every penny of expenditure.
Triumphant The annals of the British Parliament contain nothing analogous to the
results of the Report of the City of London Livery Companies' Commission, whether
ontrDaralM " considered in reference to the circumstances under which the inquiry was
in any other instituted, the vast elaboration of details, the exhaustive extent of their
such tribunal, investigation and prosecution, and certainly not least in the triumphant
result it makes matter of history, i.e. a signal and complete refutation in
every point, of the legion of falsehoods and palpable inventions which had
been the creations of jealous and evil-purposed enemies through many
years, and upon whose foundations these crafty and designing men have
erected the fabric of misrepresentation through which the Commission
was called into life.

The full Commission, in the report signed by the whole body of Commis-
sioners, thus express their sense of the care evidenced in the compilation
of the various returns, and of the general candour of the Companies : —

"The Grocers' Company, the second of the 'great' Companies of the
titude ofrthoP" " Gity °f London in order of civic precedence, had, a few days before
various Com- " your Majesty's Commission was issued, appointed a Committee ' to
panics in " ' search their records and prepare a report upon the constitution and in-
denng th " ' C0me an(* exPen(^ture °f tne Company, and the general management
Commis- ° '° "' °* tno Company's business.' The report of this Committee was pre-
sume™, " sented to the Court on the 2nd of February, 1881. We shortly after
' received this report in such a shape as to be in conformity with the
"forms which we had sent to the Company. These were the first
"returns which we received from a great Company, and they were
"drafted with much ability.

"From this date we continued to receive returns from the Com-
panies, and in the result, by the commencement of 1882, we had
' received returns from nearly all the Companies. They were, as a rule,

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 7

' prepared with care, and, as it appeared to us, with candour. Many
'were admirably drafted. This observation applies not only to the
' returns received from the great Companies — all of which have made
'returns — but to those received from many of the minor Companies.
' The result has been to lessen to a material extent the difficulty of
'analyzing the contents."

One of the chief agitators against the Companies was appointed on the Virulence of
Commission, and in that capacity was in a position to press his hostile the City
views through the evidence of friends if possible more advanced than Companies'
himself, men chiefly distinguished for bitter attacks extending over years attacjj8
in the columns of certainly not the most reputable or high-toned journals.
To quote passages from the writings of Mr. Firth, Mr. Beale, Mr. Gilbert,
or Mr. J. E. Phillips, vilifying the City Companies, is to degrade this record
of their arraignment. Their attacks were often couched in such language
and with adoption of such grossly unfair conclusions as to be altogether
without the pale of ordinary criticism. Such Avere the leading prosecutors
in the indictment, and it is mainly through the aid of these men that
their friend and coadjutor, Mr. Firth, was enabled to develope their
objects before the Commission, taking some little care so to moderate their
language and epithets as to secure admissibility, though unable to coriceal
their communistic propensities.

The testimony recorded by this Commission is of the highest national The Commis-
moment, seeing that the Companies' benevolence finds channels of flow sion's conclu-
through all parts of the kingdom. It has been conclusively and without ^1V? Bt°winS
any or the least flaw proved that the properties of the City of London Companies'
Companies have all and every known mark of private property, and in properties'
their case that the one seriously objectionable feature, the power of strictly pri-
exclusive individual enjoyment, is utterly non-existent. It is beyond vate nature-
question that this entire absence of all personal power and selfishness is a
peculiar and grand feature in the holding of their possessions, though it
has doubtless brought upon them jealous and envious enemies who
prosecute with ceaseless and untiring vigour every possible means likely to
lead to seizure of their properties under the wicked plausible pretence of
their diversion and redistributive application for " more popular objects and
purposes."

The evidence and facts disclosed before the Commission bring out into The Compa-
clcar light that the governing bodies of the Companies have, through long nies' faithful
past ages, as now, been conscientiously loyal to the good men of old who discharge of
solemnly bequeathed their properties to their keeping. The records of pasties on
this Commission point to them as true exemplars of a religious and a par with
scrupulously thorough devotion to the duties devolving upon them their admira-
throughout long bygone generations, during every one of which faithful- ble business
ness to trust is proved to have been their sole aim and guide. The
perfection of business management, as their unsullied characters, is times,
grandly brought out by the various showings of their descendant repre-
sentatives, the Courts of the different City Companies. Their individual
self-sacrifice stands forth in boldest relief, as without any precedent,
defying all question, and as entirely beyond the power of the most pains-
taking researches of lawyers and historians to produce any other like
instances of devotion and faithfulness. They nursed and built up, under
circumstances of fiery trial such as would overwhelm ordinary men,
amid scenes of great political violence and public rapacity and wrong,
the properties confided to them, and which now exist as monuments of
their fidelity without parallel, and hopelessly to be sought in the histories
of any private estates.

Kings have from time to time, it is shown, laid ruthless hands on their
holdings, as have mob Parliaments in bygone ages despoiled them, but

8 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Tho goTcrn- like the untiring ant, they have returned to tlio ruins of their confided

ing bodies' trusts, and with no other motive than devotion to duty have bought back

to dut'le* of an(^ rad60016^ by proceeds of hard individual toil, their properties, or as

their" confided i° tne instance of devastation by the Great Fire of 1666, reproduced

trusts with, them in greater beauty and enhanced usefulness, so that their honour and

out any j^t dealing should be handed down in untarnished lustre to their

P*1*1'1'1- successors. History affords no other such noble example, the eloquence

of a Macaulay is vainly sought to afford any other such illustration of the

perfectitude of trust in every its highest aspect.

Tho Into Earl The chivalrous and justice-loving late Earl of Derby would have stood

of Derby and forth foremost with words of burning eloquence, of which he was so

Lords Chan- consummate a master, denunciatory of present marauders, who eagerly seek

1 their hoped-for prey and with unholy hands to clutch the properties of

hurst would these Companies of grand historic fame, the depositaries of the goodness

have proved and virtues worthy of imitation in these present days. A Lyndhurst

foremost do- would have rushed to the rescue with indisputable legal denunciation

'atHat worthy of the occasion, as would an Eldon pour out on the heads of

of City to-day's communists a vial of vituperative utterances worthy of the

Companies. occasion, and fitting the wickedness of the design such as would stir the

nation to its heart-deepest recesses. It is no question of party, it is the

cause of the faithful and just steward against the robber and ill-doer.

Once admitted and carried out, there ceases to be any or the smallest

security for any holder of property, however small, the principle involved

being of universal application.

Expression of ID connection with this Inquiry the fair- judging portion of the public
&ndthe AV^ ask> ^hat difference is there between much of the properties held by
sponsibilities " ^1C City Livery Companies and the properties controlled by his Grace
attaching to the Duke of Bedford, or the Earl of Derby, the Commission Chairman 1
ownersoflarge Are the moral obligations in either instance greater or lesser than in the
•roperties other ? Or, Have the London Livery Companies ever exhibited less sense
sdcntiorfsly11" °^ public or individual duty in becoming discharge of their responsibilities
admitted aud than has been evidenced by the eminent noblemen appointed to sit in
as faithfully judgment upon them 1 Does the Duke of Bedford handle or deal with his
*cted °^> as great property around the site of Covent Garden Market, one of the leading
those ofThe centres of the Metropolitan food distribution, with any or the smallest eye
City of Lon- to the public advantage 1 Are not all the streets and thoroiighfares
don Livery adjoining it one acknowledged chaos and traffic block, and subject of
Companies _ universal condemnation ? Is there any regard paid to the public good
wfiit^nd Dn> *n these or many thousands of other properties controlled by private
sent repre- individuals in and around England's Metropolis 1 Has not the Earl of
sentatives. Derby within the last few years received huge sums of money from the
Dock Board of Liverpool in payment for land needed for docks construc-
tion at that port ? Has any one questioned his perfect right to pocket
those money proceeds and deal with them as being positively his own 1
Pursuing these analogous cases a little further, — may it not be asked,
Has Lord Derby set aside considerable portions of the receipts from these
land sales and applied the same to the creation of charitable'or educational
trusts 1 Looking at the population everywhere surrounding the Liver-
pool Dock precincts, is the same not of a class needing every help, whether
in shape of hospitals for assuaging human suffering, or institutions for the
hoped for prevention of vice, or any of the other philanthropic forms of
our times 1 Have such duties and responsibilities been discharged ? and
how does the account compare with that of the City of London Livery
Companies 1 Without any desire or intent to call in question these
noblemen and their fellow large property owners' conscientious discharge
of the many duties and responsibilities attaching to wealth, and for which

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 9

they will on the Great Day be called to solemn account, it shall serve
present purposes to venture the hope that in their cases it may be seen to
have approached, even though distantly, the acts of the worthies of old,
founders of the City Companies, or their successors and to-day represen-
tatives whose honour and character have been so infamously traduced.
One feature is eminently and irrevocably certain. If the time has
arrived for dealing with the properties and incomes of the London City
Companies in accordance with the schemes of Messrs. Firth, Beale,
Phillips, and men of their ilk, then all may feel assured that the day is
close at hand for application of the same principle to all property, be it
whose or Avhat it may.

It is not needed to pollute pages of this volume with extracts from Messrs. Firth,
the foul stream of vilification of the London Livery Companies poured Beale, and
out continuously by one of the Livery Companies' Commission, Mr. P^J'P^ untir-
Firth, who had the grace to allow his name association on it. He and his a°facks mi^tho
coadjutors, Mr. Beale and Mr. J. A. Phillips, have been unceasing revilers governing
of the honourable men associated as Masters, Wardens, and Court of bodies of the
Assistants of these ancient Corporations. One libel from the pen of Live.ry c°m-
Mr. Phillips is a sufficing example of his venom and purpose. Who f^^hem agS"
shall say what are the hopes of these untiring zealots of Avrong and criminals,
redistribution, should the aimed-at seizure be accomplished ! He it is
who has vilified the whole body of high-minded, right-doing men, whose
lives have been devoted to such management of the City properties as
enables them to yield as bountifully as they have done in the cause of
benevolence. He has stated that —

" The conduct of the Companies has been such in their trusts as, if they
had been private individuals, would have subjected them to be treated as
criminals."

How often it happens that men, through the extreme wickedness of The long-per-
plots carried out almost to the verge of successful realization, and when sisted daring
all seemed smooth and about to yield fruit through the prize being at ^^e^b^the
grasp reach, and yet at the last moment some weak and ill-advised step Companies to
confounds the purpose of the machinations, and the evil-doing is not only go on unchal-
frustrated, but laid bare to the world. Dynamitards have hatched many lenged, gave
devilish plots, but He who rules over all has hitherto rendered their fiendish juiciness to
acts unavailing, so far as inflicting the proposed horrors. So in the case of
the conspiracy against the City of London Livery Companies, which has
for years past been working at its evil designs, and which at last through
wholesale slander and false statements made headway, so far as to secure
the appointment of a Koyal Commission of Inquiry, heralded by great
flourish of trumpets proclaiming the immediate disclosure of an amount
of wholesale plunder and wrong-doing in the past administration of those
Companies' acquired wealth that would astonish the world. So loud and
persistent was the blast, that the public had generally been brought to
believe that these time-honoured institutions were in " a bad way," and
that great malversation of funds had been the feature of their past exist-
ence, and that its perpetuation continued the characteristic of present
management.

Without imputing even in the smallest degree any wrong desire on The official
the part of any members of the Commission, save in the instance of an Secretary
avowed enemy of the Companies arraigned, the main body being com- should be im-
posed of men of the purest motives and intentions, and above all sus~ th^case oftm
picion ; yet who shall say that the fountain of justice has been free from this Commis-
contamination, looking at the fact that a bitter partisan acted as Secre- sion was a
tary and mouth-piece to the Commission, and had daily opportunities of partisan,
furthering the ends of the Companies' enemies. The official Secretary is

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Secretary
issues an ap-
parently offi-
cial circular,
on stated au-
thority of the
Chairman,
urging agita-
tion against
theCompanies

The circular
issued by the
Secretary,
purporting t 0
be an official
and authorized
document.

The damnify-
ing circular
plainly a
usage of the
Commission's
authority for
agitation.

in every such Commission the chief adviser, as ho is the instrument of ex-
pression in words, of every act of the Commission ; ho it is who frames
and records its opinions and resolves. In this peculiar instance it is,
howi-\vr, s.vn that the Secretary was far more.

The person who. acted as Secretary to the City Companies' Livery
Commission turns out to have been no mere friend and coadjutor of the
attempting spoilers, but the head and front of the agitation. After the
evidence before the Commission is completed, the decision recorded and
signed by its members, and its books closed and sealed, this self-same
man is found affixing, as is stated without authority, the names of the
chairman and certain of his colleagues to a circular of an infamous
character, associating them with the most virulent enemies of the Com-
panies in an unlawful conspiracy, and of which he makes them the
leaders. N"o other construction can be put on the following document
bearing the signature of the Secretary in his official capacity, apparently
issued from the judgment-seat and clothed in all the panoply of Lord
Derby's dignity and grace. Audacity could by no possibility go further ;
it, however, has one merit — that of damnifying every recommendation of
the Commission in so far as any hostile intent is enunciated. Such is
the mildest reading of the following circular, which, happily for British
Parliamentary history, is destitute of any other such outrageous example.
The words in italics are as in the original.

[PRIVATE. — Not for publication.]

City of London Livery Companies' Commission,
2, Victoria Street, Westminster, S.W.,

Sept. 22nd, 1884.

DEAR SIR, — A copy of the first volume of the report of this Commission
is posted to you herewith.

I am directed by Lord Derby and his colleagues, who sign the principal
report, respectfully to draw your attention to it, and to request that you
will do them the favour of commenting on it in an article or articles in
your very valuable paper.

The subject is one with which the Government intend to deal in the
parliamentary session of 1885, and nothing is consequently more neces-
sary than to educate the opinions of the Liberal electors of the provinces,
who have little acquaintance with London matters. The recommendations
are explained on pp. 42 — 44.

An interesting feature of the case is the attitude of the Lord Chan-
cellor [see pp. 42-64, G9-71, 189-190], who is a distinguished member
of the Mercers' Company ; but it is not supposed that he would oppose
the Government measure, which is to be based on the recommendations.

The recommendations are themselves based on the legislation with
respect to Oxford and Cambridge, and are thus strictly in accordance
with precedent.

I shall be very glad to receive a copy, if you will be so kind as
to send one, of your article or articles.

Lord Derby and his colleagues will be greatly obliged to you for
giving them your valuable assistance.

I am, dear sir, very faithfully yours,

(Signed) H. D. WARR, Secretary.

To the Editor of the

This circular 'is plainly an announcement from the chairman of
the Commission, Lord Derby, that a Government measure hostile
to the Companies is at once to be submitted to Parliament, backed

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 11

by the authority of the Commission, and that its members will lend their
authority and influence thereto, and Lord Derby is made to exhort an
agitation to promote its passing into law. Worse than all, the name and
high office of the Lord Chancellor of England is sought to be dragged
into the conspiracy, and brought forward and degraded into an ally of
the nefarious conspirators as a party presumed not to oppose the Govern-
ment measure, which is to be based on the recommendations of the Com-
mission.

It is stated that newspaper articles have been prepared and submitted Further
for adoption to more than one chief controller of Metropolitan and assigned
leading organs of important Provincial centres, through which the R"1^0^8
scheme disclosed in outline by Mr. Warr, the Official Secretary of the Wronf usago
City of London Livery Companies' Commission, in his extraordinary Of the Com-
and unprecedented "private and not for public circulation " circular, is mission's
" more fully developed." authority.

Mr. Secretary "Ware's entreaty "to educate the opinions of the Liberal
electors of the Provinces, who have little acquaintance with London
matters," was to bear fruit in " a new flood of light." The colourable
though utterly unauthorized announcement of the crafty, and as it would
appear unauthorized document (an apparently forged usage of the
names and authority of high personages who by Eoyal Command
were constituted a solemnly Impartial Court of Inquiry) was to be
the instrument giving weight to all inspirations of the wire-pullers
it was designed to shelter, and under shadow of whose wings it was to
work its designs.

The unmistakable assurance that " An interesting feature of the case Unauthorized
is the attitude of the Lord Chancellor, who is a distinguished member of usa?er°/ the
the Mercers' Company ; but it is not supposed that he would oppose the °j][or>s

Government measure, ivhich is to be based on the recommendations," was to and perversion
be relied on to open the road, so that nothing could stand in the way of of his evi-
an entire success of the long-worked-for overthrow and spoliation of dence.
London's great City Companies, whose deeds of benevolence, public
hospitality, and wisely and honestly discharged duties and trusts are the
admiration and envy of the whole world.

The " Metropolitan and leading Provincial Centre Organs " were to Metropolitan
announce that the leading feature in the Government New Bill was to be and Provincial
the appointment of Commissioners who were to take in hand the pro- failed <£ ^
perties so that they should be dealt Avith under semblance of allocation, excite public
or in official language, that " the Companies shall be compelled by such opinion in
Commission to allocate their incomes to the support of objects of public favour of
utility." These Commissioners were to effect an entire change in the 8po
management of the City Companies' properties and to " relieve the
Courts and Liveries from the labours known to attach to properties and
charities the accumulation of ages, now grown into a magnitude only
to be dealt with under a ivell-devised system of centralization and manage-
ment in conformity with the spirit of the age, and commensurate with the
vastness of the possessions requiring to be dealt ivith,"

Who so eminently suited to bo the Commissioners for this purpose of Probably
relief as the agitators through whose skill and misrepresentation its hopod- hoped-for

for realization had been brought about 1 Towering over all 'other can- °

didates, they would of necessity be the men of all others best adapted to
fill the doubtless well-endowed offices. Their presumed versedness in
all the details and alleged mysteries of the various Companies' concerns
acquired through the Commission Inquiry, would in a marked manner
designate them for the duties, and they would possibly not have
reckoned vainly in a hope of seeing themselves installed as Dispensators
of the revenues towards which their eager eyes and longing hearts have

BOTAL COMMISSION.

The silence
and dignified
bearing of the
Members of
Courts of the
Companies,
stimulants to
the agitators,
and leading
to their over-
throw.

Is brought
under notice
of the House
of Commons.

Tho Secretary
of State's
explanation
of the cir-
cular being
entirely
unauthorized
and issued
without the
Commission's
knowledge.

so long yearned. What more fitting or better-earned reward for their dis-
interested, patriotic labours in a cause yielding a very Danaic shower of
gold amongst hungry malcontent followers, utterly antipodian as channels
to those into which these boundless gifts of benevolence and mercy were
intended to be poured?

It would almost seem that the silent dignity with which the Courts of
the City Companies have comported themselves during the long years
through which the clique of would-be spoilers have been prosecuting their
machinations, was an indication of their entire conviction that " God
would defend the right." Enough of rope only was needed for committal
of complete self-vengeance, and a suicide bringing with it the entire
demolition of the agitators' fabric of falsity and wrong. The hand of the
spoiler was too eager for the prey. The gang selected an unwise
instrument. The cloven foot has been too plainly disclosed. The daring
usage of the names of the Lord Chancellor and Lord Derby, and" wrongly
putting them forward in the unrighteous cause, is almost beyond credence,
and but for the matter having already engaged the attention of Parliament,
few would believe it. Never before has there been such an abuse of
authority, the more serious looking at its great issues.

The matter was brought under notice in the House of Commons
by Sir S. Northcote, who asked Sir W. Harcourt, the Secretary of State for
the Home Department, whether he would have any objection to lay upon
the table a copy of a letter written by Mr. H. D. Warr, Secretary to
the City of London Livery Companies' Commission, by the direction
of the Commissioners, and addressed to the editors of certain Liberal
newspapers, with a view to " educate the opinions of the Liberal
electors of the provinces " upon the recommendations of the Com-
missioners in their report.

Sir W. HARCOUUT said that since the right hon. gentleman had put
that question on the paper he had communicated with Mr. Warr
V Secretary to the Commission), and also with its chairman. On seeing
the Secretary, that gentleman frankly admitted to him that substantially
what was stated in the question was true ; but he also stated that he had
no authority from the chairman of the Commission, or from any one
upon it, to write such a letter. He had also communicated with the
chairman, who wrote that he never directed Mr. WTarr to Avrite letters
to the newspapers, or to call attention in any way to the subject of
the report of the Commissioners ; nor did he know that Mr. Warr had
done so ; and Mr. Warr certainly had no right to use the name of the
Commission in connection with any correspondence of that kind. He
himself had told Mr. Warr that it was a most indiscreet and improper
proceeding on the part of the Secretary of a Commission, who ought
to be absolutely impartial in the matter, and ought to obey
their directions in what he wrote and did. Mr. Warr, he thought,
recognized that that statement on his part was well founded. He
thought, therefore, that the right hon. gentleman would see that it was
impossible to lay any papers on the table. He had not seen the letter
in question, but Mr. Warr admitted that lie wrote it without any
authority from the Commission or the Chairman. Consequently, it
would not be an official document at all ; and it was written after the
Commission was functiis qfficio, and its report had been made. Mr.
Warr could only allege a slight communication from one of the
Commissioners at all relating to communications with the newspapers.

The circular bearing Mr. Warr's name is about as great an outrage on
the fairness which is presumed to be the unvarying characteristic of a
tribunal bearing the high-sounding title of " Royal Commission," as
can be imagined, and although when brought under the notice of the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 13

Secretary of State lie remarked upon it beirig " most indiscreet and
improper," yet a much graver character attaches to it when viewed in
connection with the fact of the Commission having been mainly called
into existence through the instrumentality of the few individuals who
share with Mr. Warr whatever hostility to the Companies was developed
during its sittings. All who have followed the whole course of the
agitation, will detect in these circulars a repetition of tactics which have
been employed throughout. The unauthorized use of the names of Lord
Derby and his colleagues, the unwarranted statement as to the intentions
of the Government, the appeal to provincial opinion upon the civic affairs
of London, and the assumption that the Lord Chancellor would belie
his strongly expressed opinions rather than oppose a Government
measure, are exactly in accord with the sptem of misrepresentation
which the small bxit noisy band of club delegates, who act with Mr.
Firth, have pursued throughout. It is much to be regretted that Sir
Sydney AVaterlow's name should have been introduced, and it is suspected
to be more with an object of securing any support it may be presumed to
carry than from any other motives. It is impossible to believe that he
can have sanctioned it any more than did Lord Derby. These circulars
must have the effect of sickening all decent men with the whole affair.
The Commission was divided in its recommendations, and the Government
will do well to wash its hands of an ex parte and unfair matter, whose
whole existence has proved from beginning to end an unwarranted inter-
ference with private property, and in every way a trouble and a snare.
The Government may be congratulated that the Commission Secretary
gave such a finishing touch to the picture, as utterly to preclude any
further handling.

Now that this High Commission has brought its labours to an end, The labours
the endless bills of indictment prosecuted to the utmost, and the books °{.tT3 C°m"
closed, it is fitting to dissect and examine the information transmitted, or(jeal which
and the several conclusions arrived at and recorded. As to the Com- has conferred
panics themselves, they come out of the ordeal not only unscathed, but honour and
with dignity and proven integrity, worthy of their class as prominent Prov.es ln-
citizens of the greatest city of the greatest mercantile country of the globe, companies'
They are shown to have exercised more prudence in the every-day life Courts of
of their Companies through long series of ages than any other institu- managem2nt.
tions of the land. We see how they comported themselves in early days
of past history under endurance of State spoliation — in sufferings through
fire devastation — under levies of forced contributions towards unlawful
objects— in careful and painstaking building up their properties under
trying poverty — discretion in dealing with most trivial as with greatest
and most important concerns — arid withal an ever-boundless benevolence
showered not only on the objects specially designated by their founders
and benefactors, but bestowed broadly and nobly free from sectarian
spirit wherever proper objects have been presented.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

CHAPTER II.

Various dis-
honourable
charges
brought
against the
Livery Com-
panies through
Mr. Firth.

Dishonourable charges of Mr. Firth against the Livery Companies — The charge of
bank-notes being placed beneath plates at alleged weekly dinners generally —
Firth, when called upon to prove such as general practice, applies same to
Cutlers' Company only — Mr. Beaumont and Mr. Graves, of Cutlers' Company,
utterly deny the truth of the charges — Correspondence of Sir Frederick
Bramwell and Mr. Prideaux, of Goldsmiths' Company, on the subject ; in which
Mr. Firth adduces a pretended case said to have been furnished him by a
Quaker long since dead— A second circular with object of exciting further
agitation against Companies through the means of the newspaper press — The
second circular avails of the name of Sir Sydney Waterlow, recommending
him as a candidate for mayoralty under the hoped-for new municipality
of London — The Companies' chief assailant's antecedents — The worthless
character of Mr. Beale's and his associates' evidence before the Commission —
General properties of the respective Livery Companies proved to be private —
Firth's misrepresentation as to salaries pretended as paid to the members
of the Livery Courts — Facts as to the large numbers of University ex-
hibitions held by the Goldsmiths' Company — Firth's misrepresentation as to
allowances pretended to be made to decayed Goldsmiths — The banquets
given by the various Livery Companies made the bill of indictment against
the Companies — Persistent repetition of falsehoods as to such — Any presence
of the would-be spoilers at the Companies' dinners an abomination to right-
minded men — Britain's naval and military heroes from time immemorial
chief guests at such entertainments — Gross exaggerations as to cost of such
entertainments — Tricksters and slanderers no fitting partakers of such feasts —
The entertaining illustrious men honourable to the Companies and the nation —
The occasions in past days a leading means of Jewish emancipation through
Jews' presence at the feasts.

AMONG the many prominent and barefaced falsehoods continuously
disseminated during many years past through every available channel,
and relied on as proving more than plausible instances of dishonourable
application and usage of the various Companies' incomes, has been a
statement that salaries have been paid, that same have been in addition
to fees for attendance duties on Committees, to members of the Courts
of the Companies — that weekly feasts have been held, and it has been
openly asserted that in addition to these salaries and attendance fees,
that monies were on occasions of such feasts placed underneath the
plates of the dining members in further pandering to the alleged plunder
usage of the trust monies,
charge.

So palpable was the action of these men in regard to these many

fabrications that although the majority of the Commission refrain from

an expression of their convictions regarding the same, yet the minority

of the Commissioners speak boldly thereon. Thus, in their report (3) : —

" It is only right that we should state that if the inquiry in which we

' have been engaged is to be regarded as a proceeding between our

' colleague, the honourable and learned Member for Chelsea, acting as

' a Government prosecutor, and the Companies of the City of London,

' the prosecution has failed, and the Companies have been successful.

' They easily defeated Mr. Firth as regards every part of the case set up

' by him in his work called ' Municipal London,' and a motion by Mr.

' Firth in favour of disestablishment and disendowing the Companies

' was rejected in our deliberations by a majority of ten to two. The

This is no exaggerated statement of the foul

LONDON CITY LIVE BY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 15

gentlemen who appeared before the Commission to support Mr. Firth's
views were, in our opinion, examined by us ultra vires, as they could
not be ' judged ' — we say it with respect — to be competent by reason
of their situation, knowledge, and experience, to afford correct in-
formation on the subjects of the inquiry, within the meaning of the
" terms of your Majesty's Commission."

Mr. Firth, the member of the Commission apparently ever-untiring in Mr. Firth
directing the usage of its powers to the various Companies' detriment, thus makes direct
openly prefers the charges in his book entitled " Municipal London :" — charges

" The responsibility of a seat in- the Court carries with it a salary ; the "Municipal
meetings of the Committees are duly paid for ; some Companies have London."
dinners of some kind as often as once a week, and lucky are the Committee-
men of such Companies, for, in addition to their salaries, they sometimes
find a bank-note delicately secreted under their plates."

Mr. Firth's charge that members of the Courts receive a salary, and this
in addition to fees paid them for meetings attendance, is of general
application and doubtless intended so by him. The allegation has been
demonstrated before the Commission to be entirely and utterly untrue.

Who has not heard of these " under-plate bank-notes " 1 It has been a The under-
proverb with certain sneerers to refer to a member of any Court as an Plate bank-
" under-plate bank-note man," and it has been currently believed that not<
some such, or even worse practices have been the rule with the Com-
panies. In the dissemination of such atrocious slanders the motive was
designing enough, as was a City Livery Companies' Commission the
natural outgrowth. The Courts of the respective Companies patiently,
and with a dignity consistent and worthy of honest discharge of duty,
submitted to these and other such outrages on their character and honour.
Conscious of right, they waited their time. An instrument of retributive
justice turns up in no other than Mr. Secretary Warr, who in panting
zeal to deal, as he believed, a final blow, unintentionally unearths the
whole plot.

Such a statement when broadly applied was too outrageous to be Mr. Firth
credited by those who knew and appreciated the character of the men ^ire^. froiP
implicated, and accordingly Mr. Firth was driven to name instances. He Kenerai
unluckily fixed on the Cutlers' Company as one of the " under-plate application,
bank-note *men" delinquents, and on the eighteenth day of the Com- applies it to
mission sitting, Mr. Graves, a prominent member of the Court of the *he Cufclera>
Cutlers' Company, and also Mr. Beaumont, the Clerk of the Company,
attended the Commission.

The Chairman (Lord Derby), addressing Mr. Beaumont, said, —
"I understand that you wish to make some explanation with regard
to this passage" (quoting the same, which is the under-plate bank-
note declaration), "which appears in Mr. Firth's book, 'Municipal
London.' "

To which Mr. Beaumont replied, —

" I only wish to do so If that statement can be treated as referring, as
I understand Mr. Firth has done, to the Cutlers' Company."
Lord Derby observed, —

" Do you wish to state that, so far as you can state it, you are a stranger
to anything of the kind ? "

Mr. Beaumont, with becoming dignity and unmistakable force, replied, —
" I should wish to state, as representing the Company, that I have been
concerned for the Company as assistant-clerk and clerk for very nearly
twenty years, and my father was clerk before me for thirty-five years.
During the period that I have been assistant-clerk and clerk the whole of
the affairs of the Company have been before me, and I am prepared most
positively to contradict the statement. '

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Beau.
numt's
(Clerk of tbo
Cutlers'
Company) and
Mr. Graves' (a
member of
the Court of
the Cutlers'
Company)
denial of the
statement
having any
truth.

llr. Graves
continues
the denial.

Sir Sydney "\Vatcrlo\v asked, —

" What statement ] "

To -which Mr. Beaumont thus replied, —

" The statement that my Company has at any time placed bank-notes
under the plates of the Court, or given them any sums of money beyond
the fees, which were formerly two guineas, and which are now three
guineas. Mr. Firth seems to have confined his statement to a period
within the last twenty or twenty-five years. Accordingly I have gone
through the accounts of the Company carefully for the last 50 years.
I find they have always been kept with strict accuracy ; that the
fees paid to the various Members of the Court are entered in detail,
and that there is no trace of any payment made to any Member
of the Court beyond the fees sanctioned by the Court for the time
being."

The Chairman (Lord Derby) hero inquired, —

" What are the fees for 1 "

Mr. Beaumont answered, —

" The fees are for attendance at the monthly meetings. The Court of
my Company meets monthly, and the fee which was formerly paid to a
Member of the Court was two guineas; but it has been increased within
the last 25 years to three guineas."

The Chairman (Lord Derby) here inquired, —

" How was it usual to be paid — in what form ?"

Mr. Beaumont answered, —

" I ventured to suggest, in a letter to Mr. Warr, that if there was any
foundation for this statement, it might arise from him. The practice of
my Company is to place the fees in small sealed envelopes, which are
placed beside the Members of the Court or on a tray, where they can
take them immediately after the Court business is over.

The Chairman (Lord Derby) here observed, —

" Xot on the dinner-table ? "

Replied to by Mr. Beaumont, —

" Not on the dinner-table, but in the Court room."

Mr. Graves, one of the oldest and most honoured Members of the
Cutlers' Company, was on the same day examined in regard to this
alleged " bank-note under plate " practice. His reply to Lord Derby's
interrogation was such as would naturally and truthfully come from any
and every Member of any or either of the Livery Companies of London
to whom Mr. Firth dare to apply the infamous charge.

" I have been on the Court for 20 years, and never met with a case of
the kind suggested ; and my wife's father and grandfather have been
connected with the Court for the last 100 years, and they have never
heard of such a thing existing in the Cutlers' Company ; certainly during
the nearly 50 years that I have known it such a thing has never
occurred."

When driven into a corner as to the "bank-note under plate" business,
Mr. Firth, in a letter to Sir Frederick Bramwell, stated, " I have been
informed of at least half a dozen such cases, and as to some of them by
persons quite as reliable as those who profess their disbelief in the
existence of such a custom." Being further pressed, this veracious oppo-
nent of the Companies was unable to name any one positive instance, and
the " half a dozen persons " had dwindled down to one poor inoffensive
Quaker, and he now having lain in his grave many years was not pro-
ducible in confirmation of this further instance of Mr. Firth's eminent
powers of invention.

Mr. Firth's evasiveness and shifting of ground in regard to his serious

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 17

charges is best seen through his correspondence on the subject with Sir gir Frederick
Frederick Bramwell. Bramwell's

March 8th, 1883. ?*P°8U!;?of

~ -r . i , . i the truth as

SIR, — In the course of one of your answers yesterday you expressed a to prefcen(3ea

wish to know of any Company where the practice of putting money gifts of Bank
under plates has obtained ; I have been informed of at least half a of England
dozen such cases, and as to some of them by persons quite as reliable notes,
as those who profess their belief as to the non-existence of such a custom.
But members of Courts of Assistants do not readily consent to become
public sponsors of what they nevertheless avow to be true, and that for
obvious reasons. Looking round the various cases, however, perhaps I
may trouble you to investigate the matter for yourself, as I have no
doubt you will now after your expression of vigorous opinion ; I there-
fore suggest to you in the first instance that you carefully inquire
into it as to the Cutlers' Company. If you come to the absolute con-
clusion that such statement is untrue as to that Company, say within
the last twenty or twenty-five years, I will give you the name of the
member of the^Court of Assistants who vouched for it.

It is scarcely wise to base statements of wide belief except upon wide
knowledge ; what I stated as to the value of a seat on the Court of As-
sistants is more than proved by the 87651. paid in the Mercers, and there
are other Companies where the proportion to income is far greater. You
will, I have no doubt, find the statement as to the minor matter of money
also true, as are all my statements of fact. If and when you find it
true, I shall rely on your taking such a course with respect to your
statement yesterday as your own good feeling may dictate.

Yours &c.,
(Signed) J. F, B. FIRTH.

SIR FREDERICK BRAMWELL.

March VUh, 1883.

SIR, — I beg leave to acknowledge the receipt on Saturday of your
letter of the 8th inst. That which Mr. Prideaux and myself have
stated on your remark in your work " Municipal London," " That
" members of the Livery Companies sometimes find a bank-note deli-
" cately secreted under their plates " is as follows : —

" So far as regards the Goldsmiths' Company, this is untrue, and we
" do not believe there is any foundation for it as regards any other
" Company."

This positive statement as regards the Goldsmiths' Company, and
our belief as regards any other Company, is perfectly true. When I was
examined on Wednesday, and you put a question to me relative to
this answer, I reiterated the statement, and I certainly said that I con-
sidered it a most improper remark. What I meant was that it was a
most improper remark to have made, unless you were quite certain of the
fact. If it be the fact that this practice prevails in the Cutlers' Company,
you would have been justified in so stating ; but your charge goes be-
yond this, and is a very general allegation ; in fact the words which you
have used convey the idea that it is a present common custom with
several Companies.

I must demur to your assertion that all your statements of facts (BO
called by you) are true. But are they all facts? For instance, is it a
fact that " it is a matter of common repute that the Estates of Companies
" are often leased out to members at absurd rentals, enabling the lucky
" lessee to make an excellent profit in re-letting them ;" and is your
statement as to the effect of the decision in the case of Alderman Plumbe
a fact?

18 ROYAL COMMISSION.

I do not know that I am acquainted with any member of the Cutlers'
Company ; I certainly do not think that I am called upon to go to the
Cutlers' Company, or any other Company, to make inquiry as to what
took place twenty or tAventy-five years ago.

I am, Sir, your obedient Servant,

FREDERICK BRAMWELL.

J. F. B. FIRTH, Esq., M.P.,
House of Commons.

March 13th, 1883.

SIR, — I am obliged for your letter. I regret to note that you do not
propose to investigate the case I submitted to you (which is one of
the cases I heard of since the book was written). Notwithstanding this
challenge, I also note with regret that you still entertain the belief of
which you spoke. I will see that the Commission have adequate in-
formation on the point.

The other two matters to which you allude I will say a word or two
about. First, as to leases : This statement rested on specific cases, and
one a very glaring one. Second, as to Phunbe's case : I intend to have
this case fully in evidence. When the book was written I saw the only
copy of the case available which was in the Guildhall Library, and prob-
ably you will be interested in knowing that this was presented to the
Library by Mr. Beal. I have had the case since inquired into, and find,
as I expected, that it fully supports my contention. Of that, however,
the Commission can judge.

Yours obediently,

J. F. B. FIRTH.

SIR FREDERICK BRAMWELL.

March 13th, 1883.

SIR, — Since I wrote you yesterday I find that Mr. Prideaux, without
my knowledge, wrote to the Clerk of the Cutlers' Company, informing
him of the communication which I had received from you, and asking
whether the statement which was made to you by a member of the Court
of Assistants of that Company is true, or whether there is any foundation
for it.

Mr. Prideaux has received a letter in reply, of which I enclose you a
copy.

Perhaps you will now deem it right to make the Clerk of the Cutlers'
Company acquainted with the name of the person who has misled you,
and has calumniated the Company, of the Court of which you state he is
a member.

I am, Sir, your obedient Servant,

FREDERICK BRAMWELL.

J. F. B. FIRTH, Esq., M.P.,
House of Commons.

23, Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, W.C.,

March 12th, 1883.

DEAR SIR, — I am obliged by your letter of this day, in which you
state that Mr. Firth has written to- Sir Frederick Bramwell, stating that
within the last twenty or twenty-five years the Court of the Cutlers'
Company, in addition to their salaries, sometimes found a bank-note
delicately secreted under their plates. This statement is absolutely un-
true, and there is not the slightest foundation for alleging that any such
custom ever prevailed with my Company. I have been appointed the

LONDON CITY LI VERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 19

delegate to represent my Company, should it appear necessary, or desir-
able, to give any oral evidence before the Commissioners.

You are at liberty to use this letter in any way you may think proper.
I am, dear Sir, yours faithfully,

W. C. BEAUMONT,
Clerk, Cutlers' Company.
WALTER PRIDEAUX, Esq.,
Goldsmiths' Hall.

Here then we have the last of Mr. Firth on this false charge so un-
hesitatingly in the first instance applied to the Companies generally.
Under date 14th March, 1883, he wrote Mr. Prideaux, of the Gold-
smiths' Company: —

SIR, — The authority for the statement that bank-notes were placed under
plates in the Company of which he was a member was John Pryor, late
of Bedford Square, a prominent member of Lloyds. He was also a
member of the Society of Friends. That Company was, I believe, the
Cutlers, and if he was on the Court of Assistants of the Cutlers there is
not the slightest doubt of its absolute truth.

It is not material in any way but as a fact. I think I stated before
that the allegations in " Municipal London " did not rest on this instance.

Yours obediently,

WALTER PRIDEAUX, Esq., J. F. B. FIRTH.

Goldsmiths' Hall.

March I5th, 1883.

SIR, — I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's
date.

The case of the Cutlers' Company, which you have quoted to me in
corroboration of your statement as to bank-notes placed under the plates
of members of Courts of Assistants of Livery Companies, appears to me
to be, for you, a singularly unfortunate one ; for, as I understand your
letter, you now appeal to a dead man as your witness that he made a
statement to you, the truth of which the Clerk of the Company absolutely
denies.

I am, Sir, your obedient Servant,

FREDERICK BRAMWELL.
F. J. B. FIRTH, Esq., M.P.,
House of Commons.

P.S. — If I have misunderstood your letter, and Mr. Pryor is alive, you
will no doubt ask him to attend the Commission. — F. B.

Thus fell to the ground, as did every other of Mr. Firth's charges so reck-
lessly made, and under such evident designs, the concoction of the " five-
pound note under plate" declaration, and for which there seems never to
have existed one particle of foundation or truth. Not a little remarkable
in connection with the story, and the ridiculous instance of the poor dead
Quaker who alone could be named to utter it, is the remarkable fact
that, although Mr. Firth's letter, so damning as it is, was duly forwarded
to the Secretary of the Commission, in order that it should bo printed
among the other documents, it has not yet appeared.

It would appear that the course of wrong-doing did not end with the Another Cir-
circular issued under the believed wrongly asserted authority of Lord cular with
Derby, Chairman of the Commission, and such of his colleagues as had Oi^~ fitte
signed the majority Eeport. Possibly finding the response tardier than agitation
was expected, and that no immediate action was the result, the second against the

missive, more cautious in its terms, may have been decided upon. No Livery Com-

pames.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

name was appended to it ; the parties to whom sent seem to have been
left to infer that it was a part and parcel of number one, and few appear
to have been issued. To the honour of the English Press, its usual
fairness was evidenced in the fact that not one newspaper was caught in
the trap Public writers had read for themselves and realized that the
Commission Inquiry had proved a mountain in labour and with the fable
result. All the public writers appealed to were of accord. There was
" nothing in it," and not even the circular apparently issued under the
direct order of Lord Derby, the Chairman, availed in the least to set
an editorial pen in motion. The " I am directed by Lord Derby and his
colleagues," coupled with honeyed phrases, failed of their mark, and
recoiled on the author as such a daring attempt should do. The second
note, marked " confidential" was begotten in haste and impatience.
There is little reason to doubt its having emanated from the same
source, although destitute of place of issue as of signature. If emanating
from the same source, it would seem that desperation at no imme-
diate response was telling on the authors, who were probably getting
alarmed lest the unauthorized usage of Lord Derby's and his colleagues'
names should be discovered. Be this as it may, the following came into
more than one hand, though with no better result to its authors than
marked the birth of number one : —

" (Confidential and Immediate.)

" It is much to be desired that comments on the Commission Result
" should be directed to the fact of Sir Sydney Waterlow having signed
" the Majority Eeport, thus signally marking his fitness for election
"as first head of the new Municipality."

" The City Liveries Companies' gross abuse of powers over property held
back from Charity Objects under pretence that such possessions are
private, affords another feature for special remark. It is essential,however,
that no question as to the properties or trusteeships of Freemasons or
other Friendly Societies be introduced into the discussion, as interfer-
ence with the holdings of Freemasons might aid in staying the hand of
legislation from the desired immediate action. Whatever apparent
union exists between the Liveries Companies and the Freemasons under
" certain aspects need not be made subject of discussion."

" A chief aim is the demonstrating that the Liveries Companies'
"gross perversions and abuses of trusts justify such Parliamentary action
" as is immediately demanded by the finding of the Commission."

" The jealousies existing between the various Companies are known to
" be so great as to render them powerless for defence."

This second circular, though shorn of the avowed authority of " Lord
The second " Derby and his colleagues," is nevertheless in some respects a more re-
confidential niarkable document than the one bearing Mr. "Warr's official signature,
with* the name inasmucn ^ tne parties would seem to have fraternized and taken Sir
of Sir Sydney Sydney Waterlow into their confidence. Whether the Honourable Baronet
Waterlow. will thank them for the demonstration of affection is a question to be
settled between the parties, though few will believe he can intentionally
have fallen into such company. Sir Sydney Waterlow deservedly enjoys
the respect of his fellow-citizens ; and although it may be difficult to
divine how he was induced to sign the majority report, yet through any
alliance with Beale and his party he would assuredly alienate from him-
self the support of all high-minded men, should the occasion ever arise
for him to seek a position such as the document referred to so flatteringly
holds out to him.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 21

The witnesses against the Livery Companies in general may be said to The Corn-
have really been only three persons, viz. : — Mr. Beale, Mr. Phillips, and paces' assail-
Mr. Gilbert. Mr. Beale was certainly the chief assailant. He speaks J^^*606"
with the greatest confidence and assurance, appeals very glibly to Magna writers
Charta, and brings against the Companies charges of malversation of the through
grossest kind. All three of the witnesses appear to have been writers various
in the public papers, or in periodical publications, through which they *** n°®Ia m
have endeavoured, and doubtless not without a certain amount of success the^ivery
to create an opinion prejudicial to the Livery Companies. Companies.

Mr. Beale is the admitted writer of articles signed " Nemesis," in
the Weekly Dispatch, and "Father Jean," in the Echo. Mr. Phillips
admits having written articles which have appeared in various
periodicals upon questions which in this Commission are being con-
sidered, and that he is the author of letters signed " Censor." These
various attacks upon the Companies are one and all couched in the spirit of
extreme antagonism, and the statements made are generally, so far as
truth is concerned, without any. Never, perhaps, have any public bodies
been assailed with greater virulence and with such absence of veracity
in the charges. Mr. Gilbert states that he was consulted by some of the
guardians of one of the poorer parishes in the City, and asked by them
to write a pamphlet upon this subject ; and after he had complied with
this disinterested request, he wrote some articles in the Contemporary
Review, The Fortnightly, and The Nineteenth Century, and a couple of
books upon the question.

"With regard to Mr. Beale, looking at his every action and proven un- The worth,
founded assertions and charges agaiust the Companies, can any impartial lessness of
person say that he is trustworthy? Compare any of his statements with Mr. Scale's and
the returns which have been made by the several Companies, and it can be e^[(je8SOCiatea'
readily ascertained whether any one of them is in smallest degree correct.
The memorandum sent to the Commissioners on the part of the Merchant
Taylors' Company will show how entirely he has misrepresented the case of
Donkin's Charity ; other examples of his and his accomplices' worse than
inaccuracies are brought to light through the Commission. With regard
to his evidence on the subject of the invalidity of the charters of the
several Companies, and of their title to their general corporate properties,
it need only be observed that he has shown himself to be entirely ignorant
of the law; and with regard to Mr. Phillips' opinion thereon, con-
sidering that he is a barrister, attention need only to be directed to his
misrepresentation of the effect of the speech made by Lord Selborne
in the House of Lords in 1877, and to the correction which he received
from the Lord Chancellor in his Lordship's evidence before the Coni-
inissioners on the 21st of June, 1882, and it will clearly be seen that
correctness is not a strong point with him.

The Commissioners are asked by these witnesses to recommend the General pro-
appropriation by the State, or the transfer to some person or persons (it perty of the
does not appear clearly to whom), of the general corporate property of ComP*niea
the Company. This demand is made on the assumption that the general prf^te, and
corporate property of the Livery Companies, is impressed with a trust, not impressed
This is an entirely unfounded assumption. There is no shadow of with trust
ground for it whatever ; in proof of which there is recorded the opinion conditions,
of the Lord Chancellor, and the legal decisions which have been delivered
from time to time on the subject. The assumption upon which the
demand has been made being utterly unfounded, the demand itself falls
to the ground, and it is manifest that the property of the Companies
cannot be dealt with, or the revenues thereof appropriated, except by an
act of confiscation.

It may be broadly stated that none of the Companies received any of

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Companies'
properties
genera lly
created by
subscription
of members,
from gifts, or
purchase
from the
Crown.

Mr. Firth's
misrepresenta-
tion as to pre-
tended salaries
to Courts of
the City
Companies.

Facts as to
the large
number of
University
Exhibitions
of the
Goldsmiths'
Company.

their properties by way of endowment from the Crown, or from any
person or persons outside the Corporation itself. Their properties were
originally created by subscriptions and contributions from amongst the
members themselves, and from gifts and devises made to them by
members of their own bodies. From the funds so acquired a very con-
siderable portion of their properties was purchased from the Crown,
after having become vested in the Crown by the statute of the 1st of
Edward VI., and there is no more ground for interfering with such than
there would be for the State to dispossess those landowners whose
ancestors, after the abbey lands became forfeited, received grants of
them from the Crown. If there really be any question as to the
right of Companies to deal as they please with their general corporate
property, the Companies rightly and becomingly claim that the question
be decided by a Court of Law in the due administration of justice, and
not by the advice and urging of Messrs. Beale, Gilbert, and Phillips, or
other scramble-mongers.

Mr. Firth in his " Municipal London" speaks of the advantages which a
member of the court of a City Company obtains. He remarks upon " the
" salary " as if it was one of very large amount. Now, a member of the
court, say, for instance, that of the Goldsmiths' Company, if he be neither
a warden nor a member of the Committee, were he to attend every
court in a year, would receive under 50Z.

Mr. Firth omitted to add that few of the hosts of Directors of Eailways
— say the London and North-Western, the Midland, the Great Eastern,
and the Great Western, or any others such, or Banks — or the great In-
surance Companies of London or Liverpool, are content with any such
niggard money acknowledgments for their services. What would a
Director of the London Joint Stock Bank, or the London and West-
minster, or London and County, or the Liverpool Eoyal Insurance
Company, say to a paltry 40Z. per annum even for a monthly attendance,
apart from often weekly attendances ?

The writer then says, " in addition to their salaries they sometimes
" find a bank-note delicately secreted under their plates." This slander
was shown to be utterly destitute of truth, as will be seen from facts
already proved and related, the correspondence regarding which Mr.
Warr's memory failed to publish in the official record of the Com-
mission Inquiry.

Mr. Firth further says " that relations may be educated in the Com-
"pany's schools and then accommodated with exhibitions in the University
"free of expense."

Many of the Livery Companies are holders of exhibitions at the
Universities, and their patronage has never been questioned. The Gold-
smiths'Company have established a truly regal number of such exhibitions
at the Universities, which are given by competition, and not by favour,
and it is stated on the authority of Mr. Prideaux of that Company that
he has never known any one who was related to, or connected with, a
member of the Court of the Goldsmiths' Company who held one of
these exhibitions. What are the facts in regard to these nobly generous
seventy-five exhibitions at the Universities presented by the Goldsmiths'
Company 1 If the Royal Commission had been brought into existence
with no other result than the having elicited from Mr. Prideaux the
unprecedented statement drawn from that gentleman in reference to
these more than munificent benefactions, it would have done real and
sufficient public service. It turns out that these University exhi-
bitions are divided equally between Oxford and Cambridge. The
manner of election to these is, if possible, nobler than the gifts them-
selves, and is eminently worthy of the generous Company, which, in its

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 23

desire to do real good, has possessed itself of such worthy channels of
means. Students elected to enjoy the benefits of these exhibitions suc-
ceed only by their own merits ; favouritism is unknown. Students
apply, and after the applications are received, and a day is fixed, closing
the time when they are to apply, a list is sent to Oxford and Cambridge,
to two examiners at each University, who hold an examination, and
send a report to the Goldsmiths' Company, which is at once acted
upon. A student who desires to become a candidate for one of these
exhibitions must have been in actual residence at his college
one term ; and, if at Oxford, must have passed the responsions
before the time appointed for the return of the petition ; and his
income arising from preferment at college or elsewhere must not
amount to more than 70/. per annum, exclusive of the Goldsmiths'
Exhibition. Merit developed in examination forms the main element
to success in attaining these blessed awards, unrivalled gifts, bestowed
in a manner worthy of the beneficent donors. They are tenable for
sixteen terms at Oxford and twelve terms at Cambridge, and are awarded
solely by competition, modified by a consideration of the necessities of
the student and his parents or friends, such as must have taxed the
thoughtful minds even of the good Goldsmiths to hedge aroMnd their
acts of grace and mercy. In explanation, if A. B. stand above C. D.
in the examiners' report, and his father have an income of, say 800Z. a
year, C. D. being dependent upon a father in straitened circumstances,
C. I), would be preferred to A. B. Moreover, these exhibitions are
open to the whole University, and entirely irrespective of any religious
denomination. The most friendless stand more than on a par with the
son even of the person presumably possessing greatest influence, and
if any proof be needed of the disinterested motives of the donors, it is
brought out in the remarkable statement of Mr. Prideaux, when under
the Commissioners' examination, that a student related to any member
of the Company has no preference whatever, and in the long period of
his filling his office he did not remember any exhibitioner who was
related in any manner to any member of the Company.

If further proof be needed of the more than fairness exercised in deal-
ing with this galaxy of patronage, it may be stated as a fact that,
taking the last six years' result, more than one-half the number of
the Goldsmiths' exhibitioners have graduated in honours. And yet until
the sitting of this Royal Commission no one knew of these good works,
done as it were almost in secret, at any rate never paraded before the
world's eye. The general public believed that here and there an indi-
vidual Company may have indulged in the luxury of an occasional Univer-
sity exhibition, but rarely anything beyond. Sense of justice. demands a
grateful tribute to Mr. Firth for having been innocently and unintention-
ally the cause of these and other works of national benefit on the part of
the London Livery Companies being dragged into light.

At page 73 of "Municipal London," Mr. Firth makes the unblushing state- Mr. Firth's
ment regarding the Goldsmiths' Company : — " It is commonly reported, misrepresen-
" with what truth we know not, the pension of a decayed goldsmith is in t*tiou *
" some cases as much as 300/. a year." Now Mr. Prideaux, of the Gold- pretended to
smiths' Company, is a man Avhose word, unlike Mr. Firth, is beyond be made to
question, and he denies this statement, which he designates as " utterly decayed mem-
" unfounded." It did not, however, need such official denial. The returns Q6^0^^ •
submitted by the Goldsmiths' Company to the Commission prove it to be Company,
merely one of Mr. Firth's many slanders.

Many of these deceptive statements are repeated in Mr. Gilbert's book,
entitled "The City," published in 1877. This writer, moreover, quotes a
letter from the Weekly Dispatch, signed " Nemesis," and written by his

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The banquets
of the various
Livery Com-
panies rt-lietl
upon as the
main bill of
indictment
against the
Companies.

Persistent
repetition of
falsehoods as
to such.

l'rirml I'.t'uli', in whirh the writer says of the Goldsmiths' Company that
" it has a total assumed income of over 150,000/. per annum. It hardly
i !••••, I be stated that this is an utter fabrication.

Tho matter of entertainments or banquets, or what is popularly known
as good dinners of the Courts and Liveries, had been relied upon as the
main bill of indictment, as it formed a chief feature in the enemy's
attack. For years they had been inventing and circulating every
possible misrepresentation as to the alleged costliness and extravagance
of these receptions. No inventions regarding such were too outrageous
for publicity through the columns of papers of the class open to their
purposes. Gross falsehoods as to stated frequency of the dinners, and a
constant repetition of the base calumny of these hospitalities being paid
for out of funds that should have been devoted to charitable purposes,
were added to the wildest stories as to the amount so expended. The
outside public was almost led to believe in a rivalry of the Sybarite
doings imputed in the old song, —

' ' The wealthy of Rome at their banquets of old,
When to those whom they honoured they quaffed,
Threw pearls of great price in their goblets of gold,
More costly to render their draught."

Persistent repetitions caused the prevalence among very many that
the Liveries' incomes were in a large degree squandered in feastings, and
the Companies were credited generally with feasting at least a dozen
times for each one such actual entertainment. The ground assumed by
the writers, prominent instructors of the Koyal Commission, and the
sole persons who could be pressed into the service, and who in this
instance turned out to be not only prosecutors, but actual witnesses in
the case, represented dinner entertainments as being the great points in
their existence as of their money expenditure. As proof of these false-
hoods, it need only be repeated that Mr Firth, the head and front of
the attacking force, and grand marshal of the Commission's miserable
array of interested witnesses, writes thus in his "Municipal London,"
speaking of these Liveries : " It is said that the Goldsmiths expend
more than 30,000/. per annum in dining," and immediately intimates
that the other Companies do likewise. It has been shown that Mr.
Phillips in like manner never hesitated to make similar declarations ;
that, to use his own words, their " votes of money to charitable purposes
are neither more nor less than conscience-money."

One of the journals in which these writers has conspicuously figured
with attacks on the London Liveries, thus speaks : —

"When a Koyal Commission shall have gripped the neck of these
Companies, it will bring to light an amount of wrong-doing for which
no equal can be found. Large charities have vanished altogether, or,
rather, have been eaten and drunk up by their Liveries and friends."

A further elegant extract : —

" It will be no more than their rich deserving if the members of the
Court of Assistants of more than one of these Companies get a ride to
the Old Bailey in the Corporation state van, there to partake of City
free banquets."

Loyalty to the government of the day marks these Companies' enter-
tainments throughout their existence of long ages. The Clothworkers'
Company, for example, is able to show that in 1659 it expended no
less than 200?. in a " dinner to General Monk, his friends and officers."
The hospitality of to-day is nothing more than a continuance of good
habits. The costliness of the dinners, relatively with income, is greatly
less in the present times.

Who would presume on the presence at any of these banquets of

LONDON CITY L1VEUY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 25

characters such as would be, the spoilers of these ancient guilds 1 Any presence
The repudiation of men of their ilk is no more marked now than °f the .Y°uld"
it would have been in days of yore, when to pass the loving-cup to the^omp^tvy's
the lip of the traducer and wrong-doer would have been an unen- dinner an
durable abomination. None such have ever wriggled themselves into abomination
the positions of Prime Warden or Court Assistant; occasionally a to.n^ht"
shady character may by deception and misrepresentation get foothold ra
on the threshold, but ultimate ejection was a certainty. There have
always been large properties to nurse and protect, noble educational and
such-like institutions to foster, the poor and helpless to think for, and with
men honestly devoting their lives to the furthering such objects, the
modem " redistributor " and " allocator " should find no part. The ex-
penditure in the thirteenth century of 21Z. 8s. 9c?. upon a single enter-
tainment, the value of money and the amount of the then property,
say for instance of the Goldsmiths' Company, which publishes the fact
of that amount having been its outlay on one feast in 1307, being taken
into consideration, is an outlay which may compare with the costliest
entertainment of modern times, and to the honour of most of the great
City of London Livery Companies there has from that time down to the
present day been a like application of a part of their incomes, in a large
degree bequeathed to them for the purpose, and therefore an enjoined
duty so to outlay. Their hospitality has been habitual and continuous so
as to have become proverbial throughout the civilized world, and is the
proper pride of every right-minded Englishman, seeing they have enrolled
amongst their members a long array of the most eminent men of all
the professions. These and such-like are frequently entertained with
distinguished foreigners at their halls, and it cannot be denied that these Britain's naval
entertainments afford an opportunity of exercising an influence upon the and military
community at large. The heroes to whom under Divine providence it was |\eroe.s from
given to overthrow the Spanish Armada, the renowned Marlborough, moriai chief
our immortal Nelson, and Wellington our hero and national deliverer at guests at such
Waterloo, have each made their triumphal entries of the City as mighty con- entertain-
querors to sit at the tables of these grand old Companies, there to meet and ments-
know London's citizens face to face. Statesmen of every age, and with-
out distinction of party, have been welcomed to their hospitalities, and
it would be difficult to name a class worthy of any great honour at the
hands of their fellow-countrymen who have not through the instrumen-
tality of these Companies been made at home in some one or other of
the noble halls that Mr. Firth and his associates desire to wipe out of
existence, and, in their classic language, melt down into " hotch-potch."

Upon the subject of the prominently wealthy Companies' entertain- The various
ments there has been the grossest exaggeration ; specially is this seen in statements in
the publications of the assailants of tbe Companies which preceded the regard to the
appointment of the Commission, and which were full of erroneous and the^riou?
prejudicial fabrications. As an instance, one of Mr. Firth's mendacious Liveries' en -
statements, already mentioned, made in " Municipal London " : " It is tertainments
said that the Goldsmiths expend more than 30,000?. per annum in gr088 ex
dining, and the Fishmongers, Ironmongers, Clothworkers, Skinners, n
and Grocers are not far in the background." An examination of the
returns of these several named Companies shows that the expendi-
ture on entertainments, including wines, has on an average of ten years
been only a small fraction of such amount. Like all and every other
statement of the conspirators, it too has burst up and brought obloquy on
the inventor. The real facts are very simple. The original intentions of
the founders of most of the Companies are clearly shown by the detailed
historical returns they have through the Commission made public. The
protection of their trade or mystery was one of them ; but there can

26 ROYAL COMMISSION.

be no doubt that there were other objects of a charitable and social

character. As existing in the earlier days, they were what the lan-

guage of their time called " a fraternity." Tricksters and slanderers

Tricksters and there were none amongst them ; they were guilds of loving brethren,

slanderers no having the fear of God before their eyes ; and social enjoyment,

fitting par- together with hospitality in its truest sense, existed among their other

takers of such obect^ if a distinuished dweller in distant reions found his

way to the great city, he was sure to be summoned to feast in the halls
of the guilds, where he would mingle socially with our greatest naval
and military heroes, the most prominent merchants, and the most
eminent in science and art called together to greet him. He could not
fail to return home becomingly impressed with the country's greatness,
but equally so with the good heart governing and inspiring both business
and sociality. Now it is a notorious fact that through these City Livery
Companies of London there has been, by an unbroken chain of practice,
extending through at least five centuries, not only an indefinite and
arbitrary, but a very substantial portion of these Companies' incomes
applied to hospitality and entertainments. It was always large and
generous, as was the original design of the " fraternities," who knew not
meanness in either their charities or hospitalities. Entertainments such
as those of the Livery Companies not only afford enjoyment to the
members of the Companies themselves, but they do real good in bringing
together people of different classes and of different opinions. They are
truly English institutions, and the difference between the effect produced
amongst Englishmen by differences of opinion, on matters of politics
especially, from that which exists in the nations of the Continent, may
be traced in a great extent to the habit which Englishmen have of
meeting together for the purposes of fellowship and conviviality. How
eloquently and forcibly at these dinners of the great City Companies
have Peel, Brougham, Lyndhurst, Palmerston, Beaconsfield, and Glad-
stone, in our own day, pointed out the great national good achieved by
these Companies through their deeds of hospitality !

The entertain- Who shall say that the bringing together at the hospitable boards of
ing illustrious London Civic Companies the many eminent foreigners who continually
men honour- grace them has not helped to accomplish for nations, as a society, Avhat
individual instances and experiences with so many of Britain's illustrious
and the sons wno through long generations as now have been welcomed to the regal

nation. entertainments, evidence as their outcome to our own country 1 May not

such cordial greetings have educated great peoples, who in antecedent
times have been mutual enemies, to feel for and with each other ? May
not these feasts have produced in snch cases the flower and fruit of that
slow-growing plant, international sympathy, benevolence, and benefac-
tion ? The occasions that touch the hearts of nations to these finer issues
have a mission of true moral sublimity, and rank among the foremost
influences which the universal Father of mankind has provided for their
moral culture and happiness. One of the first and most distinctive fruits
of Christianity was the production of this international sympathy. To
melt through the icy boundaries of national selfhood, to perforate them
here and there, through individuals, with a duct of kindly sentiment
between peoples divided through all their history by multifarious
antipathies, and specially as in the case of our Indian fellow-subjects of
India's Empress, our ever beloved Sovereign, Victoria ; to lift upon grim
bulwarks of caste, prejudice, and international alienation that great
central doctrine of the Christian faith — the universal Fatherhood of God
and the universal brotherhood of men. Truly has it been worthy of
London's grand old fraternities and Guilds of love and charity to have
inspired in the hearts of men of different race and tongue this feeling of

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 27

oneness, rearing it up into a capacity and habit of disinterested and broad
benevolence, extending and working beyond limits which the lean
charities of pagan civilization never crossed. Does not every God-
loving man realize that the bidding prominent men of the Jewish faith
to the feasts of the Livery Companies was the one first and chiefest
means through which the relief of our Hebrew fellow-countrymen was These occa-
attained ? The great Apostle to the Gentiles took delight into his big eions in paat
heart with the thought of spreading with Gentile contributions the tables da78 a fading
of the famished Jewish zealots who reproved Peter for eating bread with j^j^'eman-
one of Caesar's converted captains ! The Jews ate of this manna of cipation
foreign sympathy from Macedonia and other Grecian districts gladly and through their
thankfully, and as they ate the scales of hereditary prejudice fell from presence at
their eyes. Monarchs and high potentates may make magnificent presents tneir 'ea8ts-
to each other, but these are mere exchanges of courtesy, ofttimes
scrupulously equal, and, it is to be feared, frequently nothing beyond
mere expressions of selfishness instead of benevolence. The having
been entertained in the grand halls of our great City Livery Companies
has to many of our Indian distinguished fellow- subjects, as to like
classes of our brethren in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the
many other British dependencies, ofttimes been the first tokens of good-
will that any community of common men of one country can give, as
in the case of India, to men of another and different race, though
subjects of the same sovereign's rule, or to the illustrious guests dwelling in
our own colonies, or to the representatives of other nations and sovereigns.
Such germs of international sympathy and benevolence may seem slow
in their process of foliation and flowerage, but who shall say what fruits
they may not have borne in the extension of England's commerce?
Taking even this last-named mean and selfish view of the effects of our
great Civic Companies' feasts, who can measure the amount of their
contribution to the country's mercantile greatness ?

It is felt derogatory to this volume, as to its readers, to reprint any of
the many vile slanders of its enemies applied to the various Livery
Companies. However much they defile these pages, duty calls for the
reproduction of a few. One extract thus refers to the banquets : —

" Nothing can be more disgusting than the condition of the Companies'
halls after these their weekly orgies."

It was reserved, however, for Mr. Firth to deliver himself of the
following gratuitously insulting remark, made before the Commission
itself. Apart from its utter untruthf ulness, daring impertinence could
go no further. He is made to say to Lord Derby, Chairman of the
Commission, —

" A dinner at Goldsmiths' Hall is not a very elevating sight, and I
think that the emptying of the halls is a still less elevating sight."

Any of the thousands of the distinguished men of almost every country
and clime in the known world who have been honoured in presence at
dinners of London Livery Companies, know full well that these entertain-
ments are in every aspect and feature worthy of the hosts, and are one
and all conducted with as much decorum as any dinner of any true
gentleman in the world. Long lines of English sovereigns have honoured
the Liveries with their august presence, so also have emperors and
sovereigns of every European State. It is Mr. Firth's province and
worse than questionable taste to heap insult on the entertainers as well as
on their illustrious guests.

Shakespeare has recorded,—

"His only gift is in devising impossible slanders."

EOYAL COMMISSION.

CHAPTER III

Greatnesa of the prize offered the freebooters in spoliating the Companies — Free-
masons' Societies marked as next objects for attack— Too faithful discharge of
duties reason of attack on Livery Companies with view to plunder — Lord Chan-
cellor Selborne testifies before the Commission — His Lordship declines to
entertain any question of redistribution of the City Companies' funds —
The several Companies' adhesion to the cause of supporting Technical Educa-
tion voluntary — The Lord Chancellor replies emphatically and decisively to
crucial question as to the various Livery Companies' properties being strictly
private ownership — His Lordship repeats declaration that the Companies'
control of their properties is absolute — The Lord Chancellor's assurance that
the Courts of Assistants' attendance and conduct of business eminently
thorough, and that the fees received are in noway gifts or dividends — His Lord-
ship asserts that no sums of money are ever divided among the Courts of
Assistants except for business attendance — Emphatic declaration of the Lord
Chancellor that no General Charitable Trust exists upon the charters of the
Mercers' Company — Firth's discomfiture and utter breakdown — The Grocers'
Company's Laxton (Oundle School) case ; Lord Langdale's decision thereon —
— The Kneseworth case of the Fishmongers' Company — Herbert's case from
his work on the twelve great Companies.

The greatness
of the prize
offered to the
freebooters'
eye. None
but the
conspirators
could be in-
duced to tes-
tify against
the Liveries.

IT must not be _lost sight of that if the second private and con-
fidential circular, bearing the frontlet mark of the same would-be
spoliators as assisted in the birth of number one, and which without
any authority used for designing purposes Lord Derby's, certain of the
Commissioners', and the Lord Chancellor Selborne's names emanated
and was issued from the same source at a moment of perplexity and with
a view to goad the seemingly tardy editorial help, it points to the
Freemasons' confraternities as early objects for like dealing as is proposed
for their brethren of the ancient Guilds. Surely the Livery Com-
panies were enough for even the most rapacious ? Intended purposes of
these kinds are never openly avowed at first inception. There needs
to be the usual preliminary gentle dalliance. The conspirators against
the London Liveries dared not in early dawn of their intent deal other
than tenderly with so great a matter. Many millions were at stake. It
was the grandest prize possible of revelation to the eye of modern free-
booters. The thing was unique. None but the very ablest men should
have embarked in the errand of aiming at its possession. It
needed great ability and such an absence of truth in the composition of
the individual as is rarely found. None but adepts could possibly be
squeezed through the very narrow apertures of the class of society re-
quisite to set the machinery in motion. All seemed to work with
tolerable smoothness up to the point of witnesses before the Commission,
and here an utter breakdown manifested itself. Not a single person
could be induced to testify against the Companies save the promoters of

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 29

the agitation themselves, and two or three individuals, who to air paltry
grievances of their own had been driven to the front. Having arrived so
far, it became needful to seek outside for help, and in doing this calamity
fell on the heels of the spoilers. In their dilemma of appealing for news-
paper sympathy, a designed plot against the Freemasons is confidentially
disclosed in mere outline. Nobody is to know of it, but everybody
may be well assured it is none the less crafty or determined, and the
various bodies of Freemasons nce'd to mount extra guards on their
citadels, for the enemy, they may rest assured, is at hand.

Examination into the Freemasons' past discloses the fact that there Freemasons'
were bonds of more than sympathy between the Freemasons' societies and Societies de-
the several fraternities of the London City Guilds in the olden days. 81Knatf<i as the
All were loving societies recognizing human brotherhood as their great °^tack Bond's
bond of union, and this sacred tie has been perpetuated until now. To Of sympathy
assist the brethren in time of affliction, when their little business worlds between the
may cease to yield the rewards of success, was their chief aim, each London Live-
recognizing the hand of the Almighty in these dispensations, and for this Freemasons6
sanctified purpose all who could, contributed liberally of their substance
to found fraternities corresponding in more features than one with the
City Liveries of England's Metropolis. And with what dignity does
not history relate them as bearing themselves in all times of trial and
persecution ! We can only trust that the solidity evidenced in Masonic
life through long-past ages may continue as the buildings they are
known to have reared. From Solomon's Temple in remote ages, and in
the cathedrals, palaces, abbeys, and halls of the middle ages, their
signet-mark is easily to be found on special stones well and truly laid,
and whose whereabouts can be traced by the good mason who knows the
secret of where to seek it. In common with our own ancient Guilds,
they have ceased to have exclusive connection with masons' work of
building ; but like them, they are now societies of benevolence and
charity. Their provincial lodges all contribute to the Grand Lodge,
which on its part organizes and distributes the charities. Working
masons who hold on to their connection with the society are relieved
from the Masonic funds should the world in its business aspects frown
upon them. How close then is the resemblance between the Free-
masons and the City Liveries, not only in the fact that neither can be
said generally to follow the crafts of their days of origin, yet both in-
herit moneys transmitted through their respective founders, and each
continue their functions of brotherly love and charity, and prosecute the
same in our present day with real devotion and singleness of heart.
The spoiler of one would, we may be assured, be the willing distributor
from the coffers of the other. Each has the same enemy to keep at
bay, for has he not secretly made known his desires when prosecuting
his efforts to seize the treasure-house of the first hoped-for victim 1 The
Freemasons generally will be on the alert. The cause of their brethren
of the London Liveries is too just and too strong to need more than
their sympathy ; this the Freemasons will heartily extend to them, the
ancient Guilds, their associates through long ages past, and with whom
there must be tie and bond such as cannot exist with any of new-born
histories. Looking into the properties and incomes of the Freemasons'
societies, it will be seen that the Freemasons are holders of no small
possessions, and that their charities are noble. The three English
Masonic charitable institutions, which are supported by the voluntary
contributions of lodges, chapters, and individuals, together with contri-
butions from Grand Lodge, Grand Chapter, and other Masonic bodies,
received up to the time the office doors closed on the 31st of

EOTAL COMMISSION.

Too faithful
discharge of
duties the
reason of the
Livery Com-
panies being
objects for
attack and
plunder.

December last, show the total sum of 48,747Z. 5s. Id. for the year
1884. Of this amount the Benevolent Institution, which grants
annuities to aged Masons and Masons' widows, received 19,824Z. 15s. 2d.;
the girls' school, 14,928?. 19*; and the boys' school, 13,993?. 10s. lid.
During the last nine years the Benevolent Institution has headed
the list six times, and, with the exception of last year, when the
boys' school, by an extraordinary and special effort on its behalf, re-
ceived over 25,000?., has succeeded this year in obtaining the largest
amount ever received in one year by any of the three institutions.
In the same year the Board of Benevolence, which meets once a month,
voted 9252?. to indigent Masons of all nationalities, and the widows and
orphans of deceased Masons ; but in doing so they exceeded the income
of the fund of benevolence by about 2000?., for which sum they had to
draw on the capital of the fund. " Charity Universal " is inscribed on
the banner of the City of London Liveries' Guilds ; a glance at the
benefactions of the Fishmongers' Company, printed in this volume as
fairest and best exemplification of the deeds generally of the various
Companies, shows how faithfully it is carried out. Each proportionally
with their means disperses abroad, not only to their brethren of the
Guild, but without stint wherever they deem help to be most
needed.

Englishmen are not altogether unfair in their judgings, and will ask
the question why should the properties of the London Liveries be
exposed to the envious eye of a class of men easting about for possible
prey, such as in this instance is inquired into with admitted intent of
exceptional action ? Undoubtedly, the prize is one so great as to be almost
beyond the hoped-for clutch of the least conscientious, but it should in
all honesty have none the less national protection. Every honest man will
demand to know why it is that property which is proved to give such
hearty pleasure and admitted practical advantage to so many thousands
of persons should, in spite of the seeming protection of the law, be so
much more in danger than property such as that owned, for instance,
by his Grace of Bedford, one of the Commission who appends his
sign-manual to a mode of dealing with the Liveries' possessions he would
repudiate as utterly unwarrantable in self-application? It is not im-
possible or even improbable, that in his case the property administered by
the noble owner yields but moderate satisfaction to him as the solitary
possessor. There is but one reply to the cogent question, and it is forcibly
impressive. The Companies that have passed through the ordeal with
so high credit to themselves as faithful executors of noble trusts have
placed themselves in jeopardy, not by using their great possessions ill,
but by a too faithful discharge of solemn duties; by exercising pru-
dently and beneficially the right of use ; by neglecting that which alas !
is too commonly the case, the right and means of abuse. This, and this
only, is the real charge truthfully appertaining to their case. It is false
to assert that the persons composing these public bodies are the chief
beneficiares. The only considerable benefits any of them derive from
their presumed wealth are indirect and contingent. ., The utmost that
Messrs. Firth and Beale, at whose instigation their rights have been
questioned, have been able to prove, is that if one of them fell into mis-
fortune without fault of his own or through mismanagement of his
worldly affairs — not seriously blamable, he is provided for by his Com-
pany. Do not the Foresters and Oddfellows aim to approach them in
this noble feature of human fraternity ? The Livery Companies are
living channels and instruments of handing down for our example the
loving protectiveness of bygone days, when men were less selfish than

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 31

now, when the heaping up of riches for individual gratification and
supposed enjoyment was less practised than in our time. Millionaires
were few in those days, now they are plentiful as blackberries. Well
will it be if these realize that great riches have proportionate duties and
responsibilities ; at any rate, let us not busy ourselves in dispersing that
which they for loving charity bequeathed, and which faithful stewards,
in an unbroken line to our own generation, have with such earnest
zeal and uprightness watched over and protected.

The Lord Chancellor was brought under examination on the tenth The Lord
day of the Commission receiving oral testimony. The first portion of Chancellor of
his lordship's evidence was given in his capacity as representative of li i ap «' i
the City Guilds' Technical Institute, owing its origin and maintenance borne under
to the City Companies. After having, in conjunction with Sir Frederick examination
Bramwell, F.R.S., his lordship's colleague in the Technical Institute of the City
management, fully explained its origin and maintenance as arising with Livery^Com-
the City of London Livery Companies, the Lord Chancellor was Jnjssfon.
addressed by the Earl of Derby, as Chairman of the Commission : —

" I suppose we may take it that the object of this deputation is two-
fold, that in the first place you wish to bear witness to what has already
been done by the Companies and by the Corporation in aid of technical
education, and in the next place that you wish to indicate a purpose to
which the funds of the City Companies might be more largely applied,
in the event of there being any interference with their distribution by
the State ? "

It was evident that the Commissioners, in their programme of interro-
gatories, were desirous of setting off at a pace somewhat too fast for the
learned Chief of the Bealm's law. The Lord Chancellor replied, " I do
not think that I can say yes to that question. I do not think our views
have extended in the least degree whatever to that second object. We,
of course, are totally ignorant of what the Commission may think it
their duty to do or to recommend, but we have had no object in coming
here to-day, except to inform the Commission of what has been done,
in compliance, as we understood, with the wish of the Commissioners."

This reply did not seem as encouraging as certain members of the
Commission had hoped ; accordingly the Earl of Derby, who, as Chairman
of Quarter Sessions in Lancashire, has had many years' experience in
examination of witnesses, gently opened a somewhat indirect approach
to the Lord Chancellor's citadel in his query, " Then I will put my
question in another way. I presume that one of your objects in coming
here is to show what has been done for technical education, and to
guard against the possibility of less being done in the event of any
redistribution of the City Companies' funds?"

The answer to this question is just what his lordship and every other
man of sound sense must have known would be given by England's
Chancellor, or any other great law authority. Lord Selbome, with some
little warmth, replied, —

" / decline to contemplate anything which may be done in the way of His Lordship
Redistribution of the City Companies' funds. It is not at all for me to declines to
anticipate any opinion or judgment which may be formed on that eilte^am any
subject. If I am permitted to say so, I see that a gentleman who has Redistribution
appeared before this Commission has referred to a speech which I made of tne City
in the House of Lords about the Inns of Court, as if it were to be Companies'
inferred from that that I thought that Inns of Courts and the City funds'
Companies were in part conditione. I do not think so at all. TJie
reasons that lead me to think the Inns of Court a public institution have
no application whatever to any Company, or, at all events, to the only

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The several
Companies'
adhesion to
the cause of
supporting
Technical
Education
shown by the
Lord Chan-
cellor to have
beeu volun-
tary on their
parts.

The Lord
Chancellor
replies em-
phatically and
decisively to
the crucial
question as
to the various
Livery Com-
panies' pro-
perties being
strictlyprivate
ownership.

Company I know, that is, the Mercers' Company, not the slightest. There-
fore I decline to enter into any question of redistribution at all"

Lord Derby, evidently desirous of impressing the strictest impartiality,
in an assuring manner stated, " The Commission, I may say, have not
expressed any opinion upon that subject ? " a remark met with a dry,
but not less significant, " Oh ! no ! "

Lord Derby then said, " I think we may take it, from what you have
said, that when the movement among the Companies for technical
education was begun, it was a purely voluntary one on their part, and
absolutely unconnected with any apprehension of interference from
outside ? " To which the Lord Chancellor replied, —

" I think the dates I have given will show that that is so. Nobody
can possibly speak as to other people's minds ; but the fact that the
Clothworkers' Company began this movement (ori their part, at all
events) in the year 1873 will show, I think, that it was begun at a
time when no propositions were before the public affecting the status
of the City Companies. It is impossible for me to say that that was so
at the time that the Institute was formed, because, in point of fact, a
motion was made in the House of Commons at that time, or about that
time, upon the subject. My own judgment was not influenced in the
least degree whatever by that circumstance. / have always thought that
the City Companies, assuming them to be (as I believe them to be in
law) absolute and perfect masters of their own property, as absolute and
perfect masters of their own property, as distinct from that which they
held on trust, could do nothing better with their property than promote
objects which were in the public interest, and my judgment, in co-
operating with this undertaking, was entirely uninfluenced by anything
which was suggested in the way of interference."

At this point the Chairman of the Commission put the crucial
question, " Are we to take it from you that the City Companies are entitled
to their property in the same manner and as fully as a private owner would
be?"

Met in a manner, and with a distinctness worthy of the great lawyer.
" In point of law they are, in my opinion, absolutely entitled to it, and
under no trust whatever. It will, of course, be understood that I do
not speak of estates which have been given to them on any special
trusts. Morally, I do not think that I, as a member of a City Company,
should choose to be a party to using it in exactly the same way as I
should use what was my own as an individual."

Lord Derby next put an equally vital question to the distinguished
witness, thus, " You acknowledge a greater moral responsibility to the
public than in the case of private property, but not any greater legal
right?"

" That is my impression," replied the Lord Chancellor, emphatically
continuing, "I do not know that I can express it much better. They
are ancient institutions; the funds, which I call their own property, ivere
derived, as far as my knowledge extends, from their own subscriptions,
and gifts by their own members and others, intended to be for their abso-
lute use ; and, although I do not think the present generation ought to
put those gifts into their pockets, yet, on the other hand, I cannot
admit for a moment that they are upon the footing of public trusts."

Lord Chief Justice Coleridge here came in with the very pertinent
question, " I should like to ask the Lord Chancellor whether he draws
any distinction between an ordinary natural person and a person like a
corporation created by law ? "

The Head of the Law met the Lord Chief Justice's important query
with the decisive answer : " There is that distinction undoubtedly, and

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 33

it is not very easy to measure precisely the influence it might have
upon one's judgment ; but I assume that Lord Coleridge would not be
of opinion that if a club, for example, were incorporated, its nature
would be substantially changed ; or I should think that a joint stock
company is to be regarded as public, because it is incorporated."

Mr. Pell, another of the Commission, here made an important interro-
gation, thus, " I think you said that, with respect to the Corporation pro-
perty it was not subject to any trust, and that the control of each Company
over that property was absolute ; is that so ? "

The Lord Chancellor again boldly asserts his conviction, —
" I know no legal limit to it, or equitable limit, in the legal sense of the The Lord
word equitable ; but they have never, to my knowledge, used it, except for Chancellor

their hospitalities or for their own management expenses, and for the ^ePfats J"8
•... ijLi. t ii, • i £ • I-.L-II declaration

relief of the wants of their poorer members, and for various charitable that tjie Com-

and useful public purposes. What I mean is this, that I have never panics' control
heard of a dividend being made of the property of the Company ; it of their pro-
may be so in some cases, for anything I know, but I never have heard of P^rtie B 1S
it, and certainly it is not so in the only Company with which I am well
acquainted."

" Judging from what I myself have seen in the Court of Assistants of His Lordship's
the Mercers' Company, I am bound to say that the gentlemen there attend f^s^anc? tbf fc
in the way of business, do the business, are attentive to the business, under- Assistants'
stand it, and take an active part, both in promoting good objects, and, attendance
if there is a difference of opinion, in checking those which they do not and conduct
approve of } so that it is not by any means, according to my experience of Business is
there, a case of nominal attendance and payments for them. It is real p^ctical^and
attendance, and real attention to the business." thorough;

Mr. Pell, pushing for further light on this point of attendance fees also that the
to such members of the general courts who attend the general courts, and *"ees ar.® *n no
to all the members of the Courts of Assistants, which are numerous, ajviafnds.0
elicited from the Lord Chancellor the following important reply as to
the consideration for which the fee payments are made.

" It is upon the footing of attendance fees, and not upon the footing of
dividend."

Pressing this matter of fees received, Mr. Pell demanded to know
whether the sum granted is commensurate with the services rendered ?

The Lord Chancellor's reply was, " That is a matter of opinion.
If they are at liberty to use their money by doing anything they please
with it, giving it away in any manner they like, the allowance of at-
tendance fees (which do not certainly exceed those allowed to Directors of
a great number of Companies) does not seem to me to be a thing with which
they are to be reproached."

Mr. Firth here interposed with what he hoped to be a posing question ;
the reply he met is overwhelm ing.

" I never heard," said the Lord Chancellor, "of sums of money being His Lordship
divided in any other manner than as attendance fees for actual attendance asserts that
to those u'ho are present, and take part in the meetings and in the j^g™^
business; and I do not believe that one shilling of it was ever otherwise ever divided
used" among Court a

Again Mr. Firth comes to the point with what he doubtless intended of Assistants
as an exhibition of his legal acumen, but with a result showing his utter ^®' °.r UB1"

. *-* IK SS *IL-

ignorance of English law. tendances.

" I should like," said the spoiler, " to ask you this question, if I might.
The charters of the earlier Companies confer powers of holding land in
mortmain ; many of them express that the incomes of those lands are for
the purposes of sustaining the poor ; would you say that those lands are
not now impressed with the charitable trust J

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Lord
Chancellor
declares that
no general
charitable
trust exists
upon the
charters of
the Mercers'
Company.

Firth's dis-
comfiture
and utter
break-down.

Here was the gist of the whole matter so far as seeking to place these
properties on the ground of public charities held only in trust, and
shrewdly enough was it put to the distinguished witness.

What was the Lord Chancellor's answer?

" I really should not like to answer a question of law as to a matter
with respect to which I do not know the facts. The charters of the
Mercers' Company, which I have seen, show that the Company was
formed for the purpose of mutual benefit, and, no doubt, for the pur-
pose (which I believe they have always carefully attended to) of assist-
ing their poorer members when they fall into necessitous circumstances,
but any general trust upon those charters for charitable purposes I am
quite satisfied does not exist. I cannot speak of other Companies of
which I know nothing."

Here then occurred the complete break-down of the Firth, Beale, Gilbert,
and Phillips case. To draw an admission from the highest legal authority
in the realni that the charters granted to the Companies, conferring powers
of holding land iri mortmain, and in certain instances expressing that the
incomes of those lands are for the purpose of sustaining the poor, and
were "impressed" (mark the smooth, cunningly-devised term of mere
impression) with a charitable trust, would have been the insertion of a
wedge of the highest importance ; but to be met with the Lord Chan-
cellor's declaration —

"Any General Trust upon those Charters for charitable purposes I am
quite satisfied does not exist"

brought the whole communistic structure to the ground, not, however,
without a final effort, distinctly enough put, but as firmly and emphati-
cally repudiated and denied by the great authority.

With his mind and appetite whetted to a possible early clutching a
golden prize, such probably as the Mercers' Company's properties, Mr.
Firth, under his discomfiture, hazarded a positive case, and was so
injudicious as to introduce and submit the vital instance of the charter
granted to the Mercers' Company by Richard II.

Falteringly Mr. Firth brought forth his last arrow from the quiver of
missiles provided and stored up for discharge against the City Com-
panies. The bow-string was tremblingly bent, though the question was
tolerably free from dissimulation. Turning to the Lord Chancellor
whose dignified presence and clear answers had brought so much grief on
the unhallowed redistribution cause, Mr. Firth thus brought his interro-
gations to an end.

" Would not you say, with regard to the charter of the Mercers' Com-
pany, 17 th, Richard II., that that was an incorporation for charitable
purposes ? "

" No, I should not."

The enemies of the City Companies clearly recognized in these four
words a reply fatal to all their hopes.

It is no part of duty in this endeavoured vindication of the Companies
to fill its pages with citations of law cases. It is a remarkable feature
in the histories of the Companies' lives and acts, extending through many
past centuries, that they seem generally to have kept out of law. Most
right-intending, good-pursuing people do. There were Solons in the
days of these foundations, and their successors of the time of the
immortal Bard of Stratford appear to have realized what Dick the Butcher
says to Jack Cade, —

«' The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

2 Henry VI., Act iv. Sc. 2.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 35

The legal points in the Companies are as strong as law, right, and Legal cases
justice can render them, and it may be said that the case for confiscators advanced by
is as weak as any could possibly be. They come forward with an openly- ^e pom'
avowed purpose of stealing and making into "hotch-potch." Sir as^v 8risht'
Ilardinge Giffard's — the late Solicitor- General — statement of their case has and justice
not a particle of exaggeration. It is simply the garottcr, minus the can render
throat part, though it is by no means certain that even this part of the samo-
the performance would be left out if needed to be resorted to in a quiet
corner. The hotch-potchers make no distinction between property held
for corporate purposes and that held upon trust for external objects.
Neither do they make any allowance for the variety of the Companies'
original objects, nor for the fact that they spend substantial amounts on
external objects of public utility. They do not take into any account
in advancing claims for Mr. Firth's clubbist, communistic constituency,
that such claims are as weak as water as against the Irish lands .
of the Companies, and not a whit stronger against English lands not in
London. And yet these very lands form a large item in the possession
part of the case. Mr. Phillips professes to be a barrister ; it is to be
hoped, for his clients' sake, his briefs do not relate to cases bearing on
such points. He ought to know that as regards corporate property the
Companies direct the mode in which it shall be applied without any
legal control ; and that the same is on any view of the Companies' obliga-
tions applicable to their various purposes of application, without specific
appropriations of any portion of it to any one purpose.

Instead of holding out to the metropolitan electors what a wondrous
avalanche of possessions he purposes wringing from the City Com-
panies and showering among his supporters, Mr. Firth, if he were a
truthful man, would say to them, It is a hopeless task our further trying
to plunder the City ; the Companies have rights of which we can never
dispossess them. He should explain to them the Laxton case, which
may be thus simply put : In the year 1556, one William Laxton, a
good, honest, God-fearing member of the fraternity of Grocers, who
had been knighted by his sovereign, probably being minded that the
youth of the future should enjoy better and more lore than was his,
was minded to erect a school in his native little town of Oundle,
from whence he, Whittington like, had in boyhood trudged to London.
He also wished to found an almshouse for such of the weary and faint ones
as had fallen out in the march, remembering that all may not get his good
luck in the race, and that others may have been denied that most blessed of
privileges, the care of parents or near relatives, so also some would be
found who had become footsore and necessitous laggards. To make sure of The Grocers>
this school and almshouse being founded, he devised lands to the Grocers' Company's
Company. In his will he stated that he had agreed with the Company, and Laxton
had set out to them certain lands for the payment of the stipends of the ^^lecage .
schoolmaster, usher, and poor men, and for the repairs of the buildings. L°rd L;ang_ '
His directions to his brother Grocers were, that they should obtain an Bale's decision
ol guild-homo at Oundle, and employ it as a school and almshouse ; thereon,
that they should provide a schoolmaster and an usher ; that they should
pay the schoolmaster 18?., and the usher Ql. 13s. 4d ; that they should pay
to seven almsmen Is. 6d. weekly a-piece, and II. 4s. yearly for the
maintenance of the house. At Grocer Laxton's death the rental of his
lands was 50J. a year ; the payments specified in his will amounted to
38^. a year; consequently there was at the time of his death a then existing
surplus of 12/. per annum, of which he said nothing. Why need he?
He, good man, knew full well he was in the hands of his loving brethren
of the Grocers. The Firth and Beale " hotch-potchers " were then not on

D 2

UOYAL COMMISSION.

TheKnese-
worth case
of the

Fishmongers'
Company.

prowl. The question raised in the important suit in 1843 was whether,
when the property had enormously increased in value, the Company were
bound to apply the increase, or a portion of it, to the charitable uses. It
was held that they took the surplus as their corporate property, and
were not bound to make more than the specified payments in support of
the school and almshouse. Now it is shown before this Commission
that the gross rental of the Laxton property amounts to over
4000/. per annum. But in strict law they are only bound to make the
specified payments amount to 38Z. Lord Langdale in deciding the
Laxton case, said that on the construction the will ought to receive,
the income " belongs as private property to the Company."

The confiscation-mongers when addressing their clubs, or rather their
one-sided audiences, tell them of these disparities between receipts and
expenditures, omitting to mention that the Grocers are honourable, God-
fearing men, and that, though sticking to their rights, yet they are doing
what would astonish their old brother Laxton, were he alive, as it does
themselves. They have established schools at Oundle and other, places
worthy of the manner in which the Almighty has blessed the increase,
and that, as elsewhere named in this volume, they are intending far
greater things in the future.

It may help the hearts and create a conscience in the Gabber Club tribe
of freebooters, to make a pilgrimage to the quiet old town of Oundle and
see what the slandered Grocers are doing there. It is the good habit for
members of the Court now and again to visit the schools and see for
themselves that all is going on as brother Laxton would desire were he
in the flesh. He does not repose in the peaceful churchyard there, so
that the agitators, if minded to take a look at the new schools close
alongside, need have no fear of the good old knight's ghost appearing in
troubled spirit at their visitation, though probably the prescient rooks
tenanting the trees would be cawing witnesses of doubtful company being
on hand. It may not be amiss in them to break through their re-
distributor's rule as to doles by a remembrance to the old almsmen ; these
look forward to " Court visits," — a loving coin of gold being ofttimes a
refresher, marking the occasions as red-letter days in the calendar of the
aged ones.

Firth and his comrades are good at pandering to the tastes of a compa-
ratively few noisy " three tailors of Tooley Street," who constituted them-
selves into being " the people of England." The allocators and spoliators,
forgetting that law and justice are not yet extinct among us, omit to tell
their friends of the judgment in what is known to lawyers as the Knese-
worth case. Kneseworth had devised lands to the Fishmonger's Company
in the year 1513 for the purpose of obits, anniversaries, masses, and beads
men and aid to prisoners. In the year 1550 the City Companies purchased
from the Crown all the property which in their hands was affected with
what was known as " superstitious uses " and was on that account
forfeited to the Crown. The Attorney-General claimed Kneseworth's
lands for the charitable uses of his will, but Lord Langdale ruled that,
with the exception of a trifling rent-charge for aiding prisoners which
had always been paid, the whole property had passed to the Crown, and
so back to the Company, free of those uses. The broad result of these
and other decisions in cases that have been submitted to the courts, is
that apart from statutes, both civil and ecclesiastical corporations were
free to deal with their property uncontrolled by law ; that in one case the
members of a guild, with no public objects and no objects defined by
charter or public rule, were held entitled to take the money of the guild ;
and that in many cases it has been decided that particular lands given

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 37

to City Companies are a part of their general corporate estate, and not
charged with the specific charitable trusts mentioned in the instruments
of gift.

As already named, the writer of this attempted vindication of the
Companies from the attacks and purposes of the spoiler is no lawyer,
yet as a law-abiding citizen he endeavours to look the matter fairly in
the face. Herbert, in his work on the twelve great Companies, sets out instance re-
a document entitled, " A Particular Note of such Charitable Good Uses ferred to by
" as are performed by the Twelve Great Companies of London out of Herbert in hia
" such rents as they purchased of King Edward VI." Here is one of YOT^ on tk
the accounts set out by the Grocers : — Companies?

£ s. d.

Purchased of the King in Kent . . 86 8 0

Sold tenements to buy same . . . 65 2 4

£151 10 4

Payments yearly out of the rents purchased :

In pensions to four decayed brethren 30 0 0

In exhibitions to scholars . . . 15 6 8

Towards maintenance of a school . . 10 0 0

In alms to poor . . . . . 50 0 0

£105 6 8

And Herbert quotes a passage from Strype, who, speaking of these re-
purchases, says, " Which possessions, when they had claimed them again,
they employed to good uses, according to the first intent of them, abating
the superstition. Those lands were re-conveyed to the Companies by
letters patent in the year 1550. Some doubts being afterwards raised as
to the completeness of their conveyance, it was found worth while
to procure an Act of Parliament in the year 1607. This Act recites
that the Companies had enjoyed the lands and " employed them to the
comfort of many good subjects and great relief of the poor and other
good and charitable uses."

ROYAL COMMISSION.

CHAPTEE IV.

Mr. Firth's indictment against the Livery Companies summarized into nine pro-
positions— The entire nine disproved and refuted — General beneficence and
management the highest evidence of the Companies' observance of trust
responsibilities — Goldsmiths' Company's, as the other Companies', test of their
charities expenditure having grown more thau proportionably with their
increasing wealth — The' Goldsmiths' Company's holding of seventy-six ex-
hibitions at the Universities — Firth's misstatement as to craftsmen's associa-
tions with the Companies — His false assertion as to the properties of the
Companies being leased to members for purposes of individual gain — Mr.
Prideaux, of the Goldsmiths' Company, disproves this charge of Firth — Mr. J.
R. Phillips' antecedents as a writer opposing the Companies — His proposal
to realize the Companies' entire properties and convert into " hotch-potch " —
Notwithstanding every effort, witnesses against the Companies unobtainable
— Such as appeared were examples interested through prior disputes — The
Mercers' Company's regal expenditure on St. Paul's School — Its founder,
Dean Colet, a wise believer in the Mercers as his executors — Mr. J. H. Warner
and Mr. W. Ruck, of the Grocers' Company, before the Commission — Mr.
"Warner's evidence — Mr. Firth has a keen eye to cash balances — Froude's de-
finition of the City Guilds — Modern London and provincial clubs in no respect
analogous with the old City Companies

Mr. Firth's

indictment

against the

Companies

summarized

into nine

propositions.

IN his work " Municipal London," Mr. Firth sums up his case against
the Livery Companies in nine propositions, all of which are either
partially or entirely unfounded, except so far as they contain matter of
opinion.

The first proposition is that the " Livery Companies are an integral
" part of the Corporation."

This is directly contrary to the decision of the Judges delivered in
a Judgment in Error in 1775, which reversed the disfranchisement of
Mr. Alderman Plumbe upon a prosecution of the Common Serjeant in
the Lord Mayor's Court, for refusing to summon the Livery of the Gold-
smiths' Company, of which he had been at the time Prime Warden,
to attend at Guildhall to hear his Majesty's answer to the humble
address and remonstrance of the Corporation of London, in the Mayoralty
of Mr. Alderman Beckford ; on which occasion' Lord Chief Justice De
Grey is reported to have said : — " Thus far we know that the constitu-
" tioii of the City of London does not contain these Companies. I mean
" originally and from their charters and all prescriptive rights ; it is by
" subsequent action that they came now to bear the relation they do to
" these Companies as Livery. The Livery are not formed out of their
"Corporate Body, some of them are supposed to have existed imrne-
" morially. They are not created by the King, but if it was a grant
" from the King they are not essential to the constitution, but might
" exist independently of it ; therefore, whatever their constituent parts,
"their obligations, duties, powers, customs, and rights are, either as
" all together or as individuals, they are no part of the City Customs, but

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 39

' a subordinate, detached, and independent body — I mean independent

' with regard to their original institutions." And in another part of his
; udgment the Lord Chief Justice says : — " Much less have we judicial

' knowledge of the particular subordinate rights of Fraternities, Com-

' panics, and Guilds which make a part of the City, though not a part

'of the Corporation of the City originally, nor of their subordinate

' power, duties, and offices."

Will it be believed that Mr. Beale in his evidence before the Com- The whole
missioners has actually represented that the judgment was in favour of nine disproved
the Corporation instead of the Goldsmiths' Company ] and refuted.

Never has effrontery been carried further.

When before the Commissions, he was asked by Mr. Firth, " Have
"you read the decision in the case of the Refractory Companies in 1775,
" when between the Corporation and the Goldsmiths' Company the
"question was contested?" To which he answered, "Yes." He was
then asked, "What was the effect of that decision 1 " To which he replied,
" The Companies were found to be in the wrong, and that they were an
" integral part of the Corporation, and it is fully set out in ' Municipal
" London.' " Eeferring to " Municipal London," p. 43, in a note it is
stated that in the case of the trial of the Refractory Companies in 1775,
"the Warden of the Goldsmiths' Company was successfully prosecuted
" in the Mayor's Court for inattention to a summons to Common Hall on
" other than election business."

The truth of the matter is that an information of disfranchisement
was filed against Mr. Alderman Plumbe in the Mayor's Court, and a
verdict given for the plaintiff. The defendant obtained a writ of
error, and the judgment was reversed by a Court of Error on the
occasion above referred to. It is manifest that if Mr. Beale's evidence,
and the statement in " Municipal London," had passed unnoticed and
uncorrected, the Commissioners might have been entirely misled.

Before the year 1835 no person could be admitted to the freedom of
the City who did not belong to one of the Trade Companies, but by a
resolution of the Court of Common Council of the 17th of March, 1835,
this condition was repealed, and it is no longer necessary that a freeman
should be a liveryman, or a member of one of the City Companies.

The first proposition of the author therefore is proved to be entirely
unfounded, and is directly contrary to a legal decision cited by him in
support of it.

The second proposition is, that " The property is public trust property,
" and much of it is available for municipal purposes."

This is abundantly shown to be unfounded.

The third is, "The Companies are Trustees of vast Estates of which
" London Tradesmen and Artisans ought to be the beneficiaries, but such
" trusts are disregarded."

This is untrue, for all the trusts reposed in the Companies have been
faithfully fulfilled, and the Companies' enemies have failed in every
attempt to show to the contrary.

The fourth proposition is, "The Companies are also Trustees of
" Estates applicable to charitable uses. They fail to apply to such uses
" the funds fairly applicable to them."

This, again, is untrue, provedly so by the report of Mr. Hare, one of
the Charity Commissioners, fully endorsing the Companies' general and
fair dealings with their various charities brought under the notice of the
Charity Commissioners.

The fifth proposition is, " The Companies were incorporated to benefit
" trades, to restrain artisans, and to repress bad workmanship. They
" perform none of these functions."

40 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Many of the Companies, notably the Goldsmiths and Fishmongers
and others, perform all these functions at the present time. They are
entrusted by statute with the supervision of the trade, and they help to
train artisans by offering prizes for excellence in the design and execu-
tion of works in the precious metals. The Fishmongers did a great work
at the Fisheries Exhibition held at South Kensington in 1883.

The sixth proposition is, that " The Companies are by charter to be
" composed of members of a given trade in many cases, and are legally
" compellable to admit members of it. They admit members irrespec-
" tive of trade, and impose restrictions on those who are admissible."
What is the fact? There is no law which would compel the Com-
pany to admit any person a member of it, unless he were entitled to
become a freeman by servitude or patrimony; and that they have
admitted members, irrespective of trade, from time immemorial, is
notorious.

The seventh proposition is, that " The Companies are subject to the
" control of the Corporation ; but as the members of that body are
" members of the Companies also, and are promoted in the latter con-
" currently with their advancement in the former, such control is never
" enforced." That some sort of control was exercised by the Corporation
in ancient times there is no doubt. It has long ceased to be exercised.
The Municipal Corporation Commissioners, in their Report of the year
1837, say unreservedly, " The Corporation possesses a very slight, indeed
hardly " more than a nominal, control over the Companies."

The eighth proposition is, that " The Companies are subject to the
" control of the Crown, and their lands and monopolous privileges were
" only granted on condition that they performed certain duties. They
" have ceased to perform the duties, but they continue to hold the
" lands."

This also is untrue. The Companies are not subject to the control of
the Crown. Most of the Companies have in a most forcible and unanswer-
able manner stated in their returns that it is an established principle of
law that the Crown cannot derogate from its own grant, and that when a
charter has once been granted, the Crown cannot afterwards interfere
with the operation of its provisions, or with the privileges, rights, and
liabilities incident to a Corporation. This is a true representation of the
law ; and, with regard to the assertion that the Companies continue to
hold the lands granted to them on condition that they performed certain
duties, there is nothing to show that any lands were granted to the
Companies by the Crown, excepting those for which they paid, and that
the lands that are held by the Companies, and which constitute their
general corporate property, were, for the most part, given to them by
members of their own body either upon trusts which have been duly
performed, or without any trust for their general corporate purposes, and
many of these gifts and devises were made at times when most of the
Companies had ceased to perform any duties whatever.

The ninth and last proposition is, that " The continuance of a large
" amount of land in the heart of the City and in the North of Ireland in
" the hands of corporate and unproductive bodies is a hindrance to com-
" merce and a loss to the public revenue." The answer to this is simple
enough. There is nothing to prevent a Corporation from changing the
investments of their property. If they were prevented from alienating
their real property there might be some ground for the opinion ; but they
can sell in the same manner as any private proprietor.

This ninth proposition having been stated, the writer concludes with the
remark that " if these propositions are established by the report of such a
" Commission there will not be much doubt as to what ought to be done

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 41

" with the Livery Companies ;" and so he dismisses the case, apparently
with perfect confidence as to the result. Alas, however, for Mr. Firth !
there was much " reckoning without a host " in his hoped-for result.
Instead of the propositions being established before the Commission he
had been so instrumental in calling into life, the whole nine propositions
have disappeared in a fiasco. He and his coadjutors were unable to
prove even the least important of them, and all the testimony they
adduced failed of its mark.

There is no need to point specially to the acts of any one of the great ^he general
City Companies as exhibiting greater beneficence or better management beneficence
or truer evidence of highest and best observances of trust responsibilities a°d manage-
in any degree than its fellows. Such appear the rules with most of the m®nfc * *Sh®sfc
Companies ; but as Mr. Gilbert, in an article avowedly written by him, ^e Com-°
has publicly said of the Goldsmiths' Company, " It would be the panics' ob-
easiest thing in the world to multiply instances which show a dereliction servance of
of duty and a meanness which is truly despicable," — how stands the trust responsi-
truth in regard to the Goldsmiths' Company, specially selected for most
envenomed attack 1

At the commencement of this century the income of the Company Goldsmiths'
was very small. By good management from that time to this it has Company's, as

4-Vi 4-lt

gradually increased, and the charities of the Company and their expen- I otnef ,
diture upon objects of public utility, have, during the whole of that tesTof^he '
period, been commensurate with the increase of their income. As to Company's
education, it appears, as with the majority of the Companies, to have charities ex-
been always a favourite object of the Company. The voluntary expen-
diture upon its various schools, the establishment of no less than seventy-
six exhibitions at the Universities, the aid given to the Society for the proportion-
Promotion of the Higher Education of Women, and the prizes for the ally with
encouragement of technical education in the design and execution of *heir in<jreas-
works in the precious metals, established by the Company twelve years ing w
since, are evidences of this. The history of the Company's exhibitions
furnishes a striking illustration of the assertion that the expenditure of
the Company in charity has grown with its gradually increasing wealth.
The first exhibitions were instituted in the year 1822, when three of 2QL The Gold-
each were established at each University. In 1828 the number was smiths' Corn-
increased to five, and the amount to 25Z. per annum. In 1829 the pony's Univer-
number was increased to six at each University. In 1834 it was hfwtlons'no
resolved that a gratuity of 20/. be given to every exhibitioner who shall iess than
have graduated in honours. In 1837 three additional exhibitions were seventy-six in
established at each University, and the amount was increased to 30/. a number,
year. In 1839 two more were established at each University. In 1846
one more attach University. In 1849 five more were established at
each University. In 1855 an exhibition of 501. was established for a
Scholar of the City of London School. In 1860 an exhibition was
placed at the disposal of Mr. Chase, the Principal of St. Mary Hall, for
the encouragement of Students at that Hall. In 1865 the exhibitions
were increased to 50Z. a year. In 1871 ten more exhibitions were esta-
blished at each University. And in 1876 the like number; so that at
the present time there are thirty-seven at Oxford and thirty-seven at
Cambridge, besides an exhibition at St. Mary Hall, and one for a Scholar
of the City of London School.

Again, Mr. Firth, in his " Municipal London," says at page 68, that Firth's mis-
"the Charters of all the Incorporated Companies expressly state them to statement as
" be composed of working members of the different trades or mysteries to craftsmen's
... , „ rm • • !_• i A i. ii. i- association m

" which they represent. This, again, is entirely incorrect. At the time tne Com.

when the later Charters were granted, a great number of the members of panics.

42 ROYAL COMMISSION.

the fraternities were notoriously persons who did not belong to the trades
whose names the Companies bear, and at the date of the letters patent of
James I., of the 24th July, 1619, by which the king confirmed to the Gold-
smiths' Company the possession of all the property which they then
possessed, specifying the houses and tenements in a particular manner,
neither the members of the Corporation nor of the governing body were
exclusively members of the trade. Indeed, there is every probability that
the majority of the members were not connected therewith.

At page 56 of Mr. Firth's work, " Municipal London," occurs this
statement, — " It is a matter of common repute that the estates of Com-
" panics are often leased to members at absurd rentals, enabling the lucky
" lessees to make an excellent profit in reletting them."

Firth's false Any careful reader of the oral testimony given before the Commission
assertion as to must be struck with the remarkable facts disclosed by the interrogatories
the properties of the Chairman and other members to the witnesses representing Com-
,ho Com- panieS) requesting an account of their properties, and of the leases under
leased txfindi- which held, with the name of the lessee or occupier ; putting the further
vidual mem- question as to whether he was a member. The quoted passage explains
bers for pur- this. The Commissioners, in common with the public generally, had
been so long accustomed to a reiteration of the wicked accusation, they
naturally took it for granted that much of the various Companies' pro-
perties was leased to or occupied by members of the Companies, and
that the so doing was an universal practice, rather than rare and excep-
tional. What can be more natural than that in London and its neigh-
bourhood, where dwell the greater number of the members of the
various Companies, there should exist property specially adapted to their
home or business wants, and, as a consequence, very many members of
each Company would be found as lessees or occupiers under their respec-
tive fraternities ? No reasonable man would expect otherwise, or that a
preference would not be given them as against outsiders. There can-
not be any, or the smallest objection to a lease being granted to a
member at the market value of the day. The Beale slander makes it
appear not only that occupations and leases are generally matters of
favouritism to members " at absurd rentals," but that the same are actually
matters of traffic " affording an excellent profit in reletting them." No
fouler slander was ever penned, and, as in the case of every charge
of the conspirators, it has been proved before the Commission to be
destitute of even a particle of truth. Instead of the properties being let
generally to members, as a rule, it has been shown conclusively that the
very contrary is the fact, and to an extent almost beyond credibility.
Mr. Prideanx What was the testimony of Mr. Prideaux, of the Goldsmiths' Company,
denies and dis- than whom there does not exist in the City of London a name mere
proves Firth's deservedly honoured and respected ? This gentleman declared before
charge. ^ commission that in his long experience he did not Icnow of any case

in which any portion of their property had been leased to a member.
The gentlemen representing other Companies could each of them have
given the lie to the charge, if not to the extraordinary extent such as
Mr. Prideaux was enabled to do, yet with the same honest purpose, as all
the business revelations of the respective Companies, so cheerfully placed
before their fellow-countrymen through this Commission, abundantly
evidence. The falsehood had, with the many others, been daringly
enough hazarded ; the denial was distinct as man could give it ; the
Commissioners needed no further proof of its utter untruthfulness.

The name of J. K. Phillips is worthy of mention as one of the
stirring agitators against the Livery Companies, and as having apparently
held a sort of roving commission to employ himself in any channel

LONDON CITY LIVEBY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 43

open to receive his libellous contributions attacking the London Mr: J- B»
Liveries. This gentleman, in common with his brethren of the small ^J^8' ante"
clique forming about the only attacking parties, was brought under exa- ^iter oppos-
mination of the Commission, and in reply to the Chairman, Lord Derby, ing the Corn-
stated that he was the writer of articles in various publications (though panies.
unnamed), meaning, it may be presumed, of a class of which he was not
very proud ; also articles antagonistic to the Companies in the British
Quarterly, The New Quarterly, and Fratser's Magazine. Naturally this
gentleman plumed himself on the admission of his lucubrations into
these latter-named respectable periodicals. Lord Derby asked this ex-
cellent person : " Have you formed any idea as to the use to which
you desire to put these very large funds if they are no longer to be
applied as at present, but treated as public trusts ? "

" Yes ! " replied the worthy patriotic author. " My idea is this, that Phillips' pro-
the whole charitable educational endowments of the metropolis, inchiding P°sal torealize
all property which Parliament should take cognizance over, such as j^® ^arkras
the corporate property of these City Guilds, should be brought into Companies'
hotch-potch or into one mass, selling all the real estate and converting Halls and all,

it into funds, and that when so brought together into a mass, Parliament ?nt^ ™e*fc 8ame
should devise some scheme for its application and administration suitable Int°n»i0tl
to the wants and exigencies of the time we now live in, and that all
the mischievous charities — that is, charities which have really a bad
influence upon the recipients — should be absolutely suppressed, such as
doles of bread and doles in kind, and that the objects to which Par-
liament should apply the revenue, should be mainly educational, and that
in this, technical education should be liberally provided for, that
elementary education should be subsidized, so as to decrease the
school-board rates, and intermediate and university education provided
for the metropolis." And when questioned by the Chairman as to what
he could do with the Halls, replied, " I would sell the Halls, every one
of them ! I do not think they are wanted at all ! "

Certainly Mr. Phillips has the merit of most perfect candour ; he desires
to sell the properties of the Guilds, " to bring it into hotch-potch or into one
mass." There is no mistake about him, half-measures are no part of his
creed ; not even Commissioners to dispense the products of the auction sales
were in his view necessary.

A very remarkable and telling fact in favour of the Livery Companies, Notwitb-
showing a general appreciation by the outside public as well as by their standnjg every
own Liveries, is seen in that nobody could be induced to come forward ducemen""
to give testimony against them before the Commission. There was no witnesses'
lack of invitation. Everything was done that could be devised to pro- against the
duce witnessess, and bases of complaint were ready at hand on which to Companies
form charges. Notwithstanding all inducements, nobody turned up. No
other such instance of numerous great public bodies' universal apprecia-
tion and freedom from enmity is known. There was positively no
enemy to stand in the gate save the interested, well-drilled few who
pursued their calling with such virulence,

" Whose gall coins slander like a mint."

Troilus and Cressida, Act i. Sc. 3.

In ordinary cases it only need be made public that any other company,
say a railway for instance, was pilloried, and a general invitation given
for attack, when shoals of assumed sufferers would instantly tender
rehearsal of their woes, and there would be produced for airing no end
of grievances. In the case under consideration there were absolutely
none, inasmuch as the one solitary witness against the Goldsmiths'

EOYAL COMMISSION.

against the

Goldsmiths

and Fish.

mongers

ludicrous

examples.

School.

*JIf **if« 8es Company, and an equally lone and sorry fishmonger against the
Fishmongers' Company, both evidently having undergone severe train-
ing under the agitators, can hardly be regarded as witnesses in the
sense usually applied. In the Goldsmiths' case the complaint was
nothing more than a natural outcome of a long strife assumedly
based on alleged trade obstructions, but when closely scanned appeared
to result more probably from disappointed hope of elevation to office
in the Company. In the case of the refractory fishmonger the main
trouble was complaint of inefficiency on part of the officer appointed
by the Fishmongers' Company to seize and condemn unwholesome fish.
Whether the official pounced on the complaining witness's fish more fre-
quently than he should have done, or whether a treaty of amity may not
have been readily secured by possible elevation to Court dignity, was
not made clear in the case. The only established result — and this was
the same in each case — was that the Courts of neither Company coveted
the honour of closer acquaintance with the parties, however anxious they
may have been to advantage them by their presence. Taking, therefore,
a perfectly fair view, it can be truthfully said that outside the gang of
pursuers not a man could be found to testify against the Companies.
The Mercers' The example set by the Mercers' Company in its expenditure during
Company and a few years of no less a sum than two hundred and forty thousand pounds
re£?.1 on St. Paul's School is no mean proof of the earnestness of the Livery

onP Paul's Courts of to-day in their duty in the cause of sound education. Are
not all the wealthier Livery Companies gradually pushing forward in
the same direction and evidencing far more than willingness to develop
public schools of a class to meet the need and feeling of modern
times 1 There is not one of them of whom it can be said that it is in-
different to the cause of education. Their substance nobly expended in
this direction during recent past years shows even more zeal and deter-
mination to widen this desirable path in their future labours for good.
They know and feel that the great law of imitation inculcated by St. Paul
in his remarkable words, " Conformed to the image of His Son," is an im-
portant element in the government of society. A boy imitates the ways
of his master. The Saviour came into the world to be a sacrifice for
sin and " an example of godly life." He dwelt on earth in order to found,
as it were, this great law of imitation. Most of the charities administered
so conscientiously by the great London Liveries may be said to have had
their birth during times of great controversy in the religious world.
They seem, as it were, to have descended from above as protests and
proofs of what true religion really meant, and how conforming to the
religion of the Almighty is the seeking out and nurturing the friendless
ones who were more miserable than themselves. Yes, let it not be lost
sight of that these grand societies are not only ancient, but have ever
been religious institutions. In conforming as they have done in their
charitable deeds to the image of the Saviour they have exercised practical
work, and shown " an example of godly life." No club-house brawlers,
no slanderers of good men are or ever have been leaders in their fra-
ternities, inasmuch as the religion of mercy and love and truth has
entered into their daily lives. It can never be forgotten that the Mercers'
Company through St. Paul's School has done its work in a manner worthy
of all imitation. It is approaching blasphemy to name it in connection
with the traducers heading the conspiracy against these ancient guilds.
St. Paul's School stands out prominent as an example of what its founder,
Dean Colet, thought on such points. Although a Churchman, and the
head of a religious body, and the master and ruler over a great Cathedral,
he did not leave the government of the school which he founded to

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 45

Churchmen. He wisely felt that it might be swayed by that most
dangerous of all parties — the religious party. He therefore left the Dean
government of this school in the hands of the Mercers' Company, a body and the
of business men who had been unaffected by religious controversial strife. Mercers'
Dean Colet acted wisely, provedly so in the integrity, zeal, and ability ComPany-
Avith which the Company have devoted themselves to develop the
school and the entire success attending their administration. From
days antecedent to Dean Colet as now, the Mercers' Company has been
governed by men of unblemished character, whose sole aim has been a
thorough, faithful discharge of great duties, These have been well and
truly done, so that with the Duke of Milan in Shakespeare's " Two
Gentlemen of Verona," they can honestly retort on Mr. Beale and his
compatriots with, —

" Where your good word cannot advantage
Your slander never can endamage."

Erasmus in a letter to Justus Jonas, thus quotes Dean Colet's reasons j)ean
for entrusting the management of St. Paul's School to the Mercers' Com- wisdom in
pany. He says, " After he had finished all, he left the perpetual care making the
and oversight of the estate, and government of it, not to the Clergy, not to Mercers' Com -
the Bishop, not to the Chapter, nor to any great minister at Court, but
amongst married laymen, to the Company of Mercers, men of probity
and reputation. And when he was asked the reason of so committing
this trust, he answered to this effect : that there was no absolute certainty
in human affairs ; but for his part, he found less corruption in such a
body of citizens than in any other order or degree of mankind."

Who shall say but that the good, prescient Dean may have had in his
mind restless thoughts of future Firths and Beales wandering about,
with wolfish paw of desired meddling with his property ! The resorting
to the executors he did, is clear evidence that he had such faith in the
ancient Guild of Mercers as to endow them preferentially with his worldly
goods even over his own clerical order, although high selection among
this must have been in his power.

The Grocers' Company was represented before the Commission by rpj,e Grocers'
Mr. J. H. Warner, a member of the Court, and Mr. W. Ruck, Clerk to Company
the Company. Mr. Warner's evidence is second to none presented before the
before the Commission in its importance in respect to the main Cl
points held in common by the various Livery Companies in regard j^H^Warner^
to charters, rights, and honest dealings with their estates and funds of the Court, '
throughout the past as in the present. Not even the Lord Chan- and Mr. W.
cellor's evidence was more to the point than was Mr. Warner's. Able, p,uc^' t^ie
clear, and given with evident sense of the dignity which should er'"
characterize upright men under the assail of libellous would-be disposses-
sors, Mr. Warner rose becomingly to the occasion. Mr. Warner created
somewhat of a sensation, and the Commission could not avoid expressing,
through Lord Derby, the idea that eminent counsel had drawn the Report
of the Grocers, formally presented to the Commission, and subject of re-
ference by Lord Derby. Unassumingly and with evident shrinking from
any desire to take credit to himself, the able witness divided all such
among his brethren of the Court and their able clerk, Mr. W. Ruck.

MR. J. H. WARNER, member of the Court, was thus interrogated by
Lord Derby : —

If I understand rightly, your view is that except as regards a very Evidence of
small proportion of the property of the Company they are under no Mr. J.H.
legal obligation to dispose of it in any particular way ? icr^of

Yes ; I should say that is the case. Of course, I should admit a Company,
moral obligation.

KOYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. J. H.
Warner, of
the Grocers'
Company.

Yes ; but we are all under moral obligations.

Wo are.

But you would not admit, if I understand you rightly, that there is
more moral obligation on the part of the Company than on the part of
any large possessor of income to dispose of it in any particular way ?

I think a little more than that. I think we must look to the original
constitution of the Company, which was that of a benevolent, religious,
and social fraternity. The objects of that constitution still remain, and,
1 imagine, still have to be observed in the disposition of the property.

When you say that, do you mean that the Company could be com-
pelled to observe them, or that, merely as a matter of good feeling, they
would observe them ?

That is a difficult question to answer. It is possible, I think, that the
members of the Company might have some sort of right to enforce them,
but I do not think there can be any other right except as between
members of the Company.

You say that there is no external obligation ?

No external obligation.

I daresay I have misunderstood it, but speaking broadly the revenue
of the Company is about 40,OOOZ. a year, is that so ?

About that.

And the extent to which you consider there is any legal obligation is
about 500ZJ

Yes ; about 500Z. ; I do not think quite so much, if we exclude the
fixed payments of 315?. a year mentioned in the statement.

I put it roughly. I only speak in round numbers.

Quite so.

You are aware, I daresay, or I will ask you whether you are aware
that that is a claim that is very much in excess of that made by any
other particular Company ?

I believe we stand quite alone in that respect. Of course the Com-
mission is aware that the Company has got rid of very many of their
trusts by the middle class school scheme under the Endowed Schools
Act.

As I understood, your view is that the Company received land
originally with some trusts attached to it ?

In some cases ; in others it was an absolute devise and gift to the
Company with no trust at all.

But at all events in some cases with a trust attached to it ?

I should rather say with conditions to be performed.

That then that property, or large portions of it at all events, was
parted with and regained by the Company without the conditions ; — is
not that your view ?

That would apply to the particular portion of the Company's property
which was regained by the Company, and the re-acquirement confirmed
by the Act of James I.

I mean your view is that portions of the property of the Company are
held by them free from any conditions at all from the beginning ?

Yes.

And that considerable portions, though saddled originally with condi-
tions, have now become, by the events that have taken place, free from
those conditions in the hands of the Company ? The conditions that
have been got rid of in that way were connected with trusts which have
been appropriated by the middle class schools scheme or else with super-
stitious uses ?

I think there are no others.

Do not I understand from the paper you have handed in that there was

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 47

a getting back of some considerable portion of the property from, I think, Mr J. H.
Edward VI. 1 Warner, of ^

That applied to so much of the Company's property as was devised for lhe Grocer8'

,. .,, .... J f J Company,

or in connection with superstitious uses.

That was parted with, and then got back from Edward VI. free from
those uses ; is that so 1

I think it was not parted with. It became the property of the Crown
under an Act of Henry VIII., and was afterwards regained by the
Company.

Parted with, I mean by that lost to the Company ?

Lost to the Company.

And that it was then re-annexed to the Company free from the uses
that had theretofore attached to it ?

On payment to the Crown.

And on that ground you say it is the private property of the
Company 1

Yes.

I understand you also to say that the Company, and I suppose you
would say other companies too, but I confine you to your own, has
nothing to do with the Corporation of London, and is no part of the
Corportioan of London ?

Certainly it is no part of the Corporation of London. That was decided
by Lord Chief Justice De Grey in Plume's case.

That is your view ?

Yes.

The members and Livery of the Companies as such form part, do they
not, of the Corporation ?

I should say not. The Livery form part of a particular branch of
the Corporation, the Common Hall, but only for very limited and special
purposes.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW questioning Mr. Warner, asked : Can you tell
me whether it is the practice of your Company to grant leases of all
their property at rack rents, or is it sometimes the practice to grant at
lower rents taking a premium ?

We never take a premium.

Do you always grant at rack rents ?

Or on building leases at the best rent that can be obtained by tender.

Since you have had a knowledge of the Company, have the Company
parted with any portion of their real estate ?

They sold their Irish estate .

But beyond that ?

Mr. Buck tells me there have been small cases either of sale or
exchange.

When property has been sold have the proceeds been treated as part
of the corpus of the Company, or have they passed into the revenue
account 1

The proceeds are treated as capital.

That, I presume, you consider is the proper way of dealing with
them?

I should say so, but on the other hand I see no difficulty in taking
part of the capital for charitable purposes if required, as in the case of the
London Hospital.

I presume you would not see any difficulty at all in taking any part of
it, because you consider that the Company holds it just as any private
individual would hold property 1

I think we should be very unwilling to diminish the general amount of
the Company's property; for iristance, in the case of a large gift, such as

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. J. H.
Warner, of
the Grocers'
Company.

the gift to the London Hospital of 25,0007., the amount probably would
be made up by savings in other years.

Mr. Pell asked Mr. Warner, Did you prepare this statement ?
(Referring to that originally presented to the Committee in obedience to
its command.)

To which Mr. Warner replied :

I had a great deal to do with it.

It was a joint production was it ? Replied to by Mr. Warner thus :

A small Committee of the Court superintended it, but I make myself
responsible for the whole statement.

Was anybody associated with that small Committee of the Court in
the production of this document ? Replied to by Mr. Warner :

Two or three persons, officers of the Company, assisted ; the senior
warden, a member of the Committee, gave very valuable aid.

I will put the direct question at once. It appears to me that this
has been prepared by a professional man, by a lawyer. Is not that the
case?

Well, I am a professional man, though not in practice at the bar ; it
was prepared by myself as a member of the court simply, not profes-
sionally at all.

What do you understand to be the origin of your Company 1 Lord
Sherbrook observed. Will you state what called it into existence ?

That is mentioned very fully in the statement.

Yes, it is, but it is rather obscure there, I think. You seem to trace
your origin, do you not, to a body which did not exist very long, called
the Pepperers 1

They existed certainly as long back as the year 1180.

Yes, 1180, undoubtedly; but it was not of very long duration as a
body, was it ?

No, the bankruptcy of the Italian merchants in 1345 seems to mark
the date, after which we hear nothing more of the Pepperers.

You do not assume that you came into being by spontaneous genera-
tion?

No ; the records of the Company exist, and the actual names of the
founders.

Then you connect yourself, do you not, with the Pepperers through a
link which was a religious fraternity, that of St. Anthony ; then the
religious fraternity of St. Anthony are transformed ultimately into the
Grocers' Company as we have it now ?

Yes.

How do you think that this recital of the Pepperers and the religious
fraternity of St. Anthony strengthens the case of the Grocers' Company
as against the reformers of the day ?

It possibly is more a question of antiquarian interest than anything
else.

You are no more, I suppose, like the Pepperers than a frog is like a
tadpole ?

I imagine the Pepperers were traders ; the fraternity of St. Anthony
was a religious and social guild.

But the Pepperers undertook other business, or connected themselves
with other business, than that of spice and trade, did not they ? they
were canvas makers, and also had to do with the adjustment of weights,
had they not ?

It appears so.

But you do not think your case rests strongly upon your connection
with the Pepperers ?

No, the reference to the Pepperers was inserted to explain why the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 49

original founders of the Company in 1345 are so called ; they are men- Mr. J. n.
tioned there as Pepperers. Warner,

You did not insert that part of your statement relating to the religious °f tho ,
fraternity in order to attempt to show that the Grocers had no craft, did company.
you 1

No, it was not inserted with that intention. The description of the
foundation of the Company, which we have in the records, undoubtedly
shows to my mind that there was no craft originally.

What is, roughly speaking, the annual income of your property ; the
corporate and the charitable property 1

About 40,000/. a year.

And there is only a very small portion of that, I think you say, that is
charitable property 1

Yes, it may be regarded, as I have said, as being about 5001. a year,
but, of course, we are concerned, if I may say so, with schools and other
institutions which involve a very large outlay, and which must be kept
up.

That, I think you have said, was of your own good will *?

Yes, but there are the institutions, and they must be maintained.

Then is it your contention with regard to this very large property that
the Grocers' Company have just the same rights as persons owning
private property 1

I should say so, subject to the undoubted moral obligation which has
always governed our Company.

Moral obligation is not always very strong with private persons 1

It has lasted for 500 years with us as a Company.

You mean the way in which you deal with this property is a moral
question, and to be referred to moral law and not to anything
else?

I should say there is no legal obligation.

You say that the Grocers' Company has a conscience ?

I hope so.

Which it obeys 1

Which it obeys.

And which governs it in its dealing with this property 1

Undoubtedly.

Then you say, I suppose, that you are not fettered with any special
conditions as to the use you make of this property, and that you are not
answerable to any external authority "?

No.

And, so far, your case is very like the case of a private owner ; do you
say that you have no advantages conferred upon you by the law, by the
State, or by the charters, that private persons have not got with respect
to this property ?

Of course we could not hold land at all without a licence in mort-
main.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON asked Mr. Warner, —

When a man joins a company and takes up his livery, he lives in
hope hereafter of becoming a member of the Court by the accustomed
mode of election, does he not 1

Mr. Warner's able reply is an answer to the impertinent slanderers
•who insinuate that members of such Courts have little to do- other than
pocket the nominal fees allowed for attendance. The witness thus
met the question : —

The work of the Court of the Grocers' Company is so heavy, and there
are so many charities to be attended to that we have to select men
carefully to administer them. It is a very doubtful point whether it

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Air. J. H.
Warner,
of the
Grocers'
Company.

i> an advantage to a man to be on the Court or not ; it is doubtful
whether it is any social advantage to a man; it is certainly no
pecuniary advantage.

Mr. Alderman Cotton questioned thus :

Is it a fact that the court fees of the Grocers' Company amounted in
1879 to only 7621., out of an income of 37,2001. 1

Yes, I believe that is correct.

The Grocers' Company have given away to charitable objects more
than 200,000/. out of their corporate income in the last ten years, have
they not 1

Yes, we give upwards of 22,OOOZ. a year to charitable and educational
purposes.

That would be about 200, 0001. 1

Rather more.

Yes, it is rather more. Two chief objects of your charity have been
your school at Hackney, an excellent middle class school, and the London
Hospital ?

Yes, and Oundle School.

Any other ?

There is the first grade school at Oundle, and the middle class school
at Hackney ; schools at Witney and Colwall, the London Hospital, and
the great London hospitals and charities generally.

Then it has been judicially decided that the Company is not a part of
the Corporation of London, has it not ]

That is so ; Lord Chief Justice De Grey decided that in Plumbe's case,
I think.

Some few years ago you were very wide apart from the Corporation of
London ; I think there was quite an ill-feeling between the guilds and
the Corporation, was there not 1

Ever since I have been a member of a City Company I have considered
that there was no kind of relation between the two.

Then " after the great fire the Company became extremely poor, owing
" to the destruction of their hall, almshouses, and house property. They
" mortgaged their whole estate in order to provide for the support
" of their charities. The then members also subscribed a very largo
" sum for this purpose out of their own pockets. This transaction
"amounted, in the judgment of the Company, to a second foundation.
" Their present estate represents the subscription raised after the fire ;
*' and, for this reason, in addition to that of the law being on their side,
"the Company contend that they have a moral claim to treat their
" whole estate as private property " ?

Yes, I consider that that is a fair representation.

That is using your own word " moral " ?

Yes.

" It has been judicially decided that the Company have a right
" to sell and divide ; not that they really wish to do this, or would
"think it right. This has been done in the case of innumerable
" provincial guilds." Is it a fact that " there are several towns in
"England where there are rich guilds, e.g., Bristol, where the Mer-
" chant Adventurers own all Clifton, and have 20,0001. a year ; Shef-
" field, with its Cutlers' Company, which has a hall and considerable
" revenue " ?

I am not well acquainted with this : I believe the Cutlers' Company
of Sheffield has a hall and a revenue.

You object to London being dealt with separately ?

Certainly.

Your own opinion is most positive as to the fact that the property you

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 51

are enjoying, with the exception of the 500J. a year, is your own private Mr. J. H.
property 1 Warner,

Yes. of the

By MR. JAMES : You stated in the statement which is before the Company.
Commission that your Company entirely endorsed the letter which was
sent to the Commission by the clerk to the Mercers' Company on the
14th of December, 1882 ?

I think the expression is that we "adhere to the views expressed
generally in this letter."

Exactly, do you adhere to that ?

I do.

I believe it is the case that at the time of the appointment of this
Commission, or shortly before, there was every wish expressed by the
members of your Court that the fullest information should be given to
such inquiries as the Commission might think proper to address to them ?

Yes, we were always willing and thought it right to give any informa-
tion in our power.

The fullest information in your power ?

Yes.

"Was it not the case that at certain periods the Corporation made
demands upon some of the companies for pecuniary subventions for the
purposes of the Corporation 1

I am not aware of that in the case of the Grocers' Company, or,
indeed, at all. I believe the Corporation on some occasions collected
money for the Crown by demand upon various companies.

Is it not the case that it sometimes collected money for the Corpora-
tion 1

Not that I am aware of, but of course in a history of 500 years it is
very difficult to say.

I suppose towards the end of the 17th century, that the companies
were in a very destitute and shattered condition ?

That is so ; bankrupt in fact.

And that the great wealth of the companies has been acquired chiefly
by the great development that has taken place in the value of metro-
politan property in comparatively recent times ?

Yes, but it was the money subscribed by members of the Court of the
Grocers' Company which restored the Company to its position.

You do not consider it a trading community ; you say that it was
a social community originally, and that that social community afterwards
became connected with the Corporation ?

Yes, so far as it ever became connected with the Corporation.

And then at a subsequent period that connection seems to have become
gradually less 1

For the last 200 years there has been no connection at all that I am
aware of, except only that the Livery might attend in Common Hall for
the election of Lord Mayor and, I believe, one or two other officers.

In reply to SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Those figures only refer to the
corporate estate, and have nothing to do with the trust estate I

The trust estate is, for this purpose, practically of little importance ; it
is only about 500Z. a year. But the expenses of management include
mangements of trusts.

MR. BURT : With regard to the school at Ouudle to. which you pay so
much, it is a middle-school, is it not, entirely 1

No, it is a first-grade school. It is a good classical and mathematical
school, but the future of the school is under consideration at the present
time, and possibly it may be made more of a commercial school,but that
is uncertain.

E 2

52 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. J. H. How is access obtained to the school ?

Warner, Just like any other public school.

°f the , Is there any sectarian test at all ?

viJTOCGrS -XT i j

Company. Kone whatever.

It is open to dissenters or nonconformists, or anybody, I suppose 1
Yes, as far as I am aware. That is really left to the head master, and
the Company do not interfere about it.

You state on page 22 of your statement that you pay large sums for
technical education ; may I ask how much you expend ?

We are giving 2000/. a year. Of course you will understand it is an
annual gift ; we do not bind ourselves to give it, but it has been given
the last two years.

Through what channel is that given, may I ask ?
The City and Guilds' Institute.
Has it been given for long 1
For two years.

Mr. Firth Mr. Firth, Avith a keen eye on the ready cash, and possibly with

h("T8 * keen memory recurring, to the long-past occasion of Marshal Blucher making

cash balances. a triumphal entry into the City of London, just after the battle of

Waterloo, when riding by the side of the Duke of Wellington, passing

through Cheapside, and gazing on the evidently vast wealth everywhere

around, the material-minded German could not resist the exclamation,

" Oh ! What loot ! What loot ! ! " So Mr. Firth, becomingly impressed

with a sense of the useful purposes to which he and his friends would

apply " the balances " of the City Livery Companies in general should

a day of "allocation" and "redistribution" arrive — with a furtive

glance, gently breathed to Mr. Warner his earnest desire to learn whether

the balances continue cumulative, or whether " divided."

Mr. Firth's final question was thus put, —

"With respect to the Company's balances, I should like to ask you a
question. I find that their very large balances are thus carried forward
from year to year. They are on page 39 of your first report, ' a return
of the balance of monies, 11,969Z., 8272?.,' and so on. Are they carried
forward or divided amongst the members, or what is done with them 1
I cannot trace out what is done with them from these accounts. It
says, whether they can be considered as unappropriated is at least
doubtful, but the balance remains to meet the demands upon the
Company ? "

How great was the relief afforded by Mr. Warner's reply, —
" They are simply carried forward to the income of the following
year."

Mr. Firth and his friends would appear to have no present pressing case
of looking to some of the Companies' balances, as in the case of the Cloth-
workers, there is rarely much in hand to " the good." As fast as money
comes in it goes out. Mr. Owen Koberts assures us that any increment
is swiftly expended in suitable objects.

Fronde's defi- In investigating the matter of these City Guilds' duties and responsi-
nition of the bilities, it is of high importance to bear in mind what the societies are
City Guilds. an^ ever nave "been. That able modern historian, Froude, has faithfully
worded for us their true definition, so far as their social status is
concerned. He says, " They were in the nature of benefit societies, from
" which the workman in return for the contributions which he had made
" when in health and vigour to the common stock of the guild might be
" relieved in sickness or when disabled by the infirmities of age. This
" character speedily attracted donations for other charitable purposes
" from benevolent persons, who could not find any better trustees than
" the ruling members of these communities, and hence arose the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 53

" numerous charitable gifts and foundations now entrusted to their care.
" They also possessed the character of modern clubs. They were institu-
" tions in which individuals of the same class and families assembled in
" social intercourse."

It is impossible for language to convey in better cr more truthful Modern Lon-
conciseness the character of these fraternities, as to their past course don and Pro-
of existence, than do these few sentences of Mr. Froude. It was vincial Clubs
through the possession of realized admirable qualities that Dean Colet in no rasP6^
confided his all to the good Mercers. There exists identity with that of ^thfhe old
the Freemasons and other old guilds existing elsewhere in the kingdom, city Com-
though with, perhaps, less protective claims. They are void of all the panies.
selfishness of ordinary clubs, and their strict aim is to do good to the
needy of their own fraternities. Even for the Reform Club, Mr. Glad-
stone would fearlessly claim, as also for his special protec/6 the National
Liberal Club, should it ever be blessed with large private properties, to be
protected. These he and his friends would becomingly stand by and defend
with the tenacity of Britons. Any attempt to interfere with the com-
paratively meagre rights of the Reform and other clubs, or the Carlton
in Pall Mall, or the new National Liberal Club on the Thames Embank-
ment, or indeed any of the Liberal or Tory clubs in the City, or their
prototypes, the clubs springing up in the great cities of Liverpool, Bir-
mingham, Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Bristol, and other large
centres, what a hubbub would be raised. There is no real analogy
between the respective cases, seeing that accumulated wealth is denied to
these. Should the day arrive for good men to hand over their properties
to the keeping of the National League Club to " make it comfortable,"
as in the case of Mr. Thwaites, who bequeathed his twenty thousand
pounds to the good brethren of Clothworkers, and which the allocators,
seeing that he has been in his grave only some fifty years, already
propose to redistribute ; the analogy would still be a weak one, as such
would be without any of the special Charter rights of the ancient guilds
of London. Fifty years is coming pretty close, rather nearer indeed
than suits the barefaced City Companies' marauding band. Antiquity
is for the moment their hunting-ground. People are hardly yet accus-
tomed to the movement, so the ghoul grubs up moss-grown graves, but
courage will grow apace, and we shall get accustomed for an early
exhumation and re-arrangement than even Mr. Thwaites' instance
displays. Shorn of all dissimulation the purposed spoliation of the City
Liveries is a very self-evident matter. Who believes that but for the
Companies' well-filled coffers Messrs. Firth and Beale would ever have
troubled their heads about them 1 If Mr. Phillips's " hotch-potch " and
general melt-down could not be realized, there would at least be chances
of commissionerships to see to the direction of the incomes into channels
different from their existing flow. But for these seeming prizes the
agitation never Avould have been born.

54 KOYAL COMMISSION.

CHAPTER V,

The various Liveries' vigorous efforts in promoting the cause of education — Their
aptitude in selecting for scholarships instanced in the case of Sir George
Airy, presented by the Fishmongers — Sir George's public acknowledgment of
the service — The Liveries' energetic action in organizing necessary arrange-
ments for Technical Education — Their movements shown to be among the
earliest — Mr. Owen Eoberts of the Cloth workers a pioneer in the cause —
Alderman Whitehead's reference to good work done by the Civic Companies
— Sir Frederick Bramwell's great service in cause of Technical Education —
The Lord Chancellor Selborne — Sir Frederick Bramwell, F.R.S. — Mr. Watney
of the Mercers — Mr. Sawyer of the Drapers, and Mr. Owen Eoberts, F.S.A.,
of the Clothworkers, attend the Commission as representatives of the City
and Guilds Technical Institute — The Lord Chancellor states his membership
in the Mercers' Company as extending through three generations — His Lord-
ship explains that City and Guilds Technical Institute originated with the
Clothworkers' Company — Mr. Gladstone in 1875 urging the Companies to
aid Science and Art Education — His Lordship continues his history and objects
of the Technical Institute, and refers especially to Professor Huxley's views
thereon — The site at South Kensington — Incorporation of the Institute —
Nomination of Governors, &c. — Laying foundation-stone of Central Institute
by the Prince of Wales in 1881 — Building's costs and contributions thereto —
Annual subscriptions to the Institute — Students in various schools — Sir
Frederick Bramwell explains nature of governing body— Lord Chancellor
and Sir Frederick Bramwell's statements as to application of funds — Other
details as to the Technical Guilds — Great services rendered by Mr. Dalton of
the Drapers' Company, who boldly denounced the Firth and Beale agitators —
The bounteous charities of the Drapers' Company stated — The Salters'
Company, and tributes to Mr. Alderman Fowler, M.P.

IF evidence were needed of the earnest desire of the City Liveries to
devote their energies and means in aiding the cause of higher-class educa-
tion in London and its neighbourhood, it is abundantly produced through
this Royal Commission of inquiry into their actions and possessions.
Until called upon by Parliament to lay before the country their incomes
available for such purposes, they were content noiselessly to continue
in their unobtrusive performance of duty conscientiously carried on, and
which, although it afforded opportunity for enemies to misrepresent them,
has nevertheless been none the less real. It has already been shown in
this volume how vigorously the weathier Companies have applied them-
selves to the extension and improvement of their numerous and h;rgc
educational foundations, some of which may be said almost to rival the
most favoured public schools in the kingdom. It would be invidious
to name these ; one and all have for years past been urged forward in the
van of increasing excellence, they are one and all of them at this present
moment under the pressure of the Courts of the various Companies with
design for steady, continuous development. Various plans arc under
consideration with these objects in view, and which but for the proba-
bility that their enemies would have used any declarations of future
intentions as confession of weakness in their case before the Commission,
and that such promises in this respect would be stigmatized as offers for
condoning past wrongs, would have been detailed. Having to deal with
the Commission's Secretary, who has proved himself a strong partisan
by the issue of a circular urging extreme agitation of most unprin-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 55

ciplccl nature against them, would naturally beget reserve ; but for this
there would no doubt have been greater candour on their part in refer-
ence to the designed future of their schools. As an instance of what is
intended, reference may be made to the Grocers' Company's schools at
Oundle under its Laxton foundation. Buildings rivalling the foremost
public schools have been erected there, combined with a modern school
offering special study of modern languages. The great success of the
Oundle School, which has within the last few years carried off more open
scholarships at the Universities than any other school in the kingdom,
proportionably with the number of pupils under education, is a fair
example of what the several Livery Companies are doing in middle-class
education. All realize that the Board Schools provide primary education,
and that it should be the aim of the Companies to supply education
of a higher class, institutions into which the more promising may be
drafted through means of the several Companies' munificent gifts of
scholarship presentations. JSTo grander feature in this respect can be
conceived than may result through these higher-class schools of the
Companies. "What nobler purpose than the presenting friendless boys,
who greatly distinguish themselves in the metropolitan schools, to free
scholarships in the Grocers' Oundle or other schools ? and yet this
venerable Company uttered not a word exaltingly of their school
intentions.

As an instance of great men being helped forward by the Livery
Companies, and there have been many such, reference may be made to
the case of Sir George Airy, K.C.B., D.C.L.,LL.D., who, in acknowledg-
ing the presentation to him of the honorary Freedom of the City of
London, by Benjamin Scott, Esq., F.S.A., the Chamberlain, some years
since, thus referred to his own case : —

" In the step taken to-day I may well interpret, both from the nature
" of the case and from the statement of the Chamberlain, the general
" view of the Corporation that they are desirous of expressing at this
" time their sense of the value of science, and the claims it imposes
" upon them. This subject, or at least the subject of liberal education
" leading immediately to the pursuit of science, was not overlooked in
" times now distant by the Corporation and the Companies of this City.
" I would mention, if you will not think me egotistical, a little matter
" concerning myself, of which I have spoken before at some meetings of
" the Corporation or its guilds. When I was a young man, a student at
" Cambridge, and rather poor than otherwise, I did receive a small
" exhibition from one of the London Companies. It came to me through
" the hands of persons whom I did not know, but it was forwarded to
" me in some way at Trinity College. It was the first money I ever
" possessed of my own, but that money gave me independence at the
" time. How much it may have contributed to what some persons may
" consider my success in life, I cannot say ; but that it did contribute
" much I have no doubt." Sir George Airy's graceful allusion is men-
tioned in the Chamberlain's (Benjamin Scott's) admirable work,
" London's EoU of Fame," page 307.

The Fishmongers' Company has the honour of having extended the
helping hand to Airy, though with the high gentlemanly bearing of the
brethren, they have never vaunted or even named the act of grace, or
claimed the true honour such conferment brings upon the bestowers.

During some years past the various Livery Companies have thrown
their energies largely into the matter of Technical Education. Although
there has been delicacy, through possibility of their acts being mis-
represented by designing enemies, who would have misconstrued their
motives. Technical Education is a main feature with all the Companies.

56 ROYAL COMMISSION.

All are willing to help it on to the utmost of their means ; already
the richer Companies have generously drawn their purse-strings, as have
also many of what are designated "the minor Companies" contri-
buted very nobly, as is their usual wont ; to name the gifts of either
would be invidious. The Clothworkers' Company was the earliest in
setting the good work in motion, though Mr. Owen Roberts, Clerk of
that Company, a distinguished Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries,
lias always refrained from anything which savoured of taking other
than the most equal share of credit with each] of the Companies who
have joined in finding monies for the early start. On a recent public
occasion, Mr. Owen Roberts, alluding to the great services rendered
by the London Liveries, forcibly remarked on " the gratification it
"had been to the old Guilds of London to support, as they had
" done, the modern Technical Schools." Alluding to Mr. Firth's un-
warranted sneer that " the City Companies were repenting rather late,
" and had only just woke up to a consciousness of their responsibility,"
Mr. Owen Roberts, on a recent public occasion said unhesitatingly that
" the Guilds did not do their duty more in 1884 than in 1864. During
" the last twenty years leases granted at the commencement of the century
" were falling in. The properties which belong to the Guilds were under
" leases to other parties, and although their properties were valuable, they
"were not valuable to the City Companies; they were valuable to the
" lessees, who were taking the increments upon them. As an illustration
" of this fact, he mentioned that whereas now the Clothworkers' Company
" had an income of about 50,000/. a year, when he joined the Company,
" nineteen years ago, the income was not half as much. That was true
" of nearly every Livery Company. The reason why the Companies did
"not do in 1864 what they did in 1884 was because they had not got
" the money to do it with. They had only enough to fulfil their primary
1 obligations, and render such assistance as was needed by their poorer
' brethren, which they gave without ever trampling on their feelings of
'delicacy. That was the first duty of a City Guild, 'and when that was
' done there remained but very little for external objects of charity and
'education, but, as the increment came to the Companies, they were
' swift to give the balance towards objects of private utility, and as the
' income grew the gifts in aid of charity and education would increase.
' They did not need the spur of any Government, Conservative or
' Radical, to make them liberal."

Mr. Alderman and Sheriff Whitehead, on his taking office as sheriff,
had thus referred to the Civic Companies' work : — " Some persons asked
what the Livery Companies of the City of London were doing. He
would venture to say they had done and were doing a great deal
for the public welfare. Any one who read the records of the City
would become acquainted with the fact that they were doing a great
deal in the promotion of technical education, not only in the City of
London, but in the metropolis generally. Many of the Livery Companies
were spending a very large amount indeed in the promotion of good
objects, and more particularly in the promotion of the higher classes of
education. If they would look around the City and the metropolis, and
even into the country districts, they would find the handiwork of the
Guilds almost everywhere. Let them look at the City and Guilds
Technical Institute at South Kensington. A great many people who
lived in London had no idea of what had been clone there, and he had
the authority and assurance of Professor Huxley, who took the very
warmest interest in that institution, for saying that it was doing a great
amount of good, and that it would be exceedingly valuable in promoting
technical education, and so assisting in the prosperity of the country.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 57

Then, if they came out of the City they would find that all the educa-
tional establishments which were worthy of support were being very
heartily assisted by the City Guilds. Take, for instance, the City of
London College ; see what a vast amount of good that college was doing.
He did not know whether they were aware of the fact, but not only
in that college, but also in the Birkbeck Institution, they had what
were practically universities, Avhich were teaching the higher branches of
instruction with as great an amount of ability as either Oxford or Cam-
bridge. It was a remarkable fact, of which he was not aware until pre-
siding at the Birkbeck Institution, as the locum tenens of the Lord Mayor,
that at that institution the number of pupils exceeded those of Oxford
and Cambridge combined, and there was no single branch of learning at
Oxford and Cambridge which might not be acquired at the Birkbeck.
They could begin with say, Latin and Greek, and go on in the modern
languages, until they reached Sanscrit and Hindustani. All branches of
mathematics also were taught, and technical education of every description
was dealt with, and this, let them remember, within the City of London.
These opportunities for study were of the greatest value to the young
men and young women engaged in business in the City, and they could go to
the institutions he had named and acquire the various branches of educa-
tion. These were the institutions such as the Guilds of London chiefly
supported. Dr. Birkbeck, the president of the Birkbeck Institution,
said they needed funds. The erection of their new buildings had left
them considerably in debt, and Dr. Birkbeck had said that they had
looked around on every side, and the only institutions they could go
to for help were the City Guilds, and he had no hesitation in saying
that they might confidently look for help to them. During the last
few years the Guilds had shown a vast amount of vitality, and were
endeavouring to make up for any wants of the days gone by. He had
hope of the possible establishment in the City of a really good school
of art. He held that there was a good opportunity for creating such
a school of art, which should become as popular and as useful as the
Guildhall School of Music, which was recognized as being one of the
best schools for teaching music of all kinds, not only in London, but
in the world. There were a great many young men and young women
who would be only too glad to study art if they had the opportunity
of doing so within easy reach of their homes or their places of business
in the City. If they took such suburbs as Blackheath, Highgate,
Holloway, Hampstead, and so on, it was far more easy to get from
these into the heart of the City than it was to get to South Kensington,
where art was being taught in the very best manner ; but it was almost
a day's journey to get there and back again. If schools of art were
established in the City they would have a number of pupils far larger
than those attending at South Kensington. It was an institution such
as that he would like the Guilds and Corporation to bring into being,
and he ventured to say it would be a success far exceeding their expecta-
tions, and one which would redound vastly to the glory and honour of
the City, which they all loved and respected."

In connection with this important matter of the founding of the
City and Guilds Technical Institute, it has been of inestimable value
to have secured Sir Frederick J. Bramwell to take the important posi-
tion he has assumed as its chief guide. No man in England is
better suited to direct its early steps in a right path, seeing that
his practical mind has followed the subject from its earliest start,
and given it all the care needed to avoid misdirection of power, and in
keeping the Guilds' mind steadily to channels most likely to yield
success. Sir Frederick J. Bramwell's recently delivered address before

58 ROYAL COMMISSION.

the Institute of Civil Engineers, on his assuming the chair for the first
time since his election to the high office of President of that Society, is
one of the most remarkable papers ever delivered to that society, noted,
as it is, for gifted thoughts of the greatest men. Sir Frederick J.
Bram well's address on that occasion proved the wisdom of the Institute
of Civil Engineers in so unanimously calling on him to be their president,
as also the honour conferred on the Institute by his election to the
high office.

This matter of the City and Guilds Technical Institute was brought under
consideration of the Commission on the tenth day of inquiry, when
the Lord Chancellor and Sir F. Bramwell, F.R.S. ; Mr. Watney,
Cleric of the Mercers1 Company • Mr. Sawyer, Clerk of the Drapers'
Company ; and Mr. Owen Roberts, F.S.A., Cleric of the Cloth-
workers' Company ; Honorary Secretaries to the Institute, attended
before the Commission as a deputation representing the City and
Guilds Technical Institute.

Deputation The Chairman, LORD DERBY, addressing the Lord Chancellor : said
from City and we understand that you and the gentlemen who come with you have
Guilds Tech- done us the honour of appearing here with a view to making a repre-
nical Institute. sentation on behalf of the City and Guilds Technical Institute ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR : Yes, that is so.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY : Then probably it will be convenient
if you will kindly make the statement you wish to put before us in the
f onn that you prefer 1

The LORD CHANCELLOR : I may first mention that the Eoyal Society
is one of the different bodies who are represented on the government
of this Institution, and that Mr. Spottiswoode, the President of that
Society, who has been associated with us, has unfortunately been pre-
vented from being present here to-day. It was thought possible that the
Commissioners might wish to have some skilled opinion as to the work
which is being undertaken, and the results likely to flow from it when
seen from a scientific point of view, and we trusted to him to give the
Commissioners that information; and perhaps, if you should think it
desirable, you would receive it from him on a future day on which he
might be able to attend.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY : We shall be very happy to do so.
The Lord The LORD CHANCELLOR : Then with respect to those of us who are

Chancellor present, Sir Frederick Bramwell and myself, I propose, with the permis-
Selbome Si0n of the Commissioners, to make a general statement upon such

states his matters as I presume you would wish to be particularly informed about ;
inthe Mercers' and Sir Frederick Bramwell, who is more conversant than I am with the
Company as working of the Institution in detail, will be prepared to supply further
acquired matter. Perhaps I may be allowed at starting just to say how it is that
through here- j mySelf have the connection which I happen to have with this Institute.
His^ordfhip's * am a member of the Mercers' Company by hereditary right. My great-
great-grand- grandfather (who was the younger son of a Leicestershire gentleman)
fatherand all having come to London to go into business at the beginning of the last
his male century, and then having been apprenticed, I rather think, to a member

having been of a collateral branch of the same family, who was a mercer, the effect of
freemen of the that was to give all his male descendants a right at the age of twenty-one
Mercers' to take up the freedom of the Company, which I believe they have none

Company. of tjiem faiied to do. I did it in my turn, and was in the course of time
put upon the Court of Assistants of the Company, though practically I was
never able to attend there during the time of my professional practice.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 59

When I ceased to be Lord Chancellor after my former term of office, the The Lord
Company was so good as to pay me the compliment of asking me to Chancellor
become their master, and free as I then was from public engagements, I Solborne ex-
willingly accepted that offer and served during the year when this scheme an^Guilds ^
of technical instruction first became matured in its present form. That Technical
was the cause of my being honoured with the position I now hold of one Institute as
of its governing body. The beginning of the scheme may be carried back originating
to the beginning of the year 1873, when the Clothworkers' Company — who, ctothworkers1
perhaps, of all those deserving praise in this matter, deserve the most — Company in
initiated a practical movement and began to incur very considerable cost 1873, and fur-
for the promotion of it. They founded at that time, in the year 1873, a *hcr details
school for the promotion of textile industries on scientific principles in J;.8 ®arv
connection with the Yorkshire College at Leeds, and their expenditure
and engagements on that undertaking, and in connection with the
Institute from that time to this, I am told is not much short of 90,OOOJ.
I think it is due to the Clothworkers' Company to state this at the out-
set, not only because they were the beginners in the work, but also
because of their most liberal contributions to it. The next thing which
I notice without any knowledge of the degree of influence which it may
have had upon other people's minds (I mention it because it had certainly
some influence upon mine) was an invitation which the present Prime
Minister, Mr. Gladstone, held out to the Companies to undertake a work Mr. Gladstone
of this description, in his address upon education, when he presented j? ^ ** urged
prizes to the science and art students at Greenwich in 1875. I have here f ,. 01-,q "

nil • i • i i TT • i * • ellll bUlcilLO

an extract of what he said in that speech. He said it was especially and art educa-
desirable that efforts should be made to give instruction in science so as tion.
to improve the knowledge of the British artist and workman, and enable
him to hold his position in the markets of the world. That result, he
added, could only be attained in the main through the agency of the
individual mind and will, and then he said this : " All that others can
" do is to offer assistance, and who should offer that assistance ? I
" confess that I should like to see a great deal of this work done by the
" London Companies. I have not been consulted by the London Com-
' panics, but if so, I would have besought and entreated them to
' consider whether it was not in their power to make themselves that
' which they certainly are not now, illustrious in the country by endea-
' vouring resolutely and boldly to fulfil the purposes for which they were
' founded." And he went on to say that he understood the Companies
to have been founded generally for the purpose of developing the crafts,
trades, or mysteries, so-called, in the country. As I have said, I rather
speak of my own attention having been directed by that speech to the
matter, and I do not know at all to what extent, or in how many cases,
the minds of other men may have been moved in the same direction by
that invitation. However, in the next year, through the agency of the Cloth-
workers' Company, and I think the Drapers' Company also (in the year
1877 it was that it came to maturity), those Companies proposed to the
other Companies to combine for this purpose, and an executive committee
was accordingly formed. That, I think, was done in January, 1877.
The first step that was taken after the executive committee was formed
was to endeavour to obtain the best scientific and practical advice possible,
with reference to what was wanted, and what could be done ; and they
sent a circular paper (which I hold in my hand) to five gentlemen, of
whom three eventually gave them reports, and two others were kind
enough to take the places of those whose engagements prevented them
from doing so. The gentlemen in the first instance consulted were Mr.
Lyon Playfair, Mr. Lowthian Bell, Captain Douglas Galton, Major
Donnelly (the Director of the Science Department at South Kensington),

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Tho Lord
Chancellor
Selborne
continues his
history and
objects of the
City Guilds
and Technical
Insti tutc.

His Lordship's
reference to
Professor
Huxley's
indication of
the special
theoretical
and practical
knowledge to
be supplied.

and Mr. Wood, the Assistant- Secretary at the Society of Arts. I will not
trouble the Commissioners by reading tlie detail of this, but it is right to
mention that it was placed before those gentlemen in such a manner as to
]ru\v their judgment entirely unfettered by any foregone conclusions as to
the subjects on which they were consulted on the part of the executive
committee. Two of those gentlemen, Mr. Lyon Playfair and Mr.
Lowthian Bell, I think, were unable to give the assistance that was
desired ; but instead of them we obtained the assistance of Professor
Huxley and Sir William Armstrong, and they gave their reports to the
executive committee in the autumn and winter of 1877 ; that is, the same
year. We have been favoured with a communication of the evidence, or
some evidence already given before the Commission ; and I observe that
two of the witnesses who have been examined here seem to imagine that
the scheme has been started upon an unsound basis, and that in particular
Professor Huxley's judgment was not in the direction which the scheme
has taken. I saw that with surprise. I am sure I do not know upon
Avhat ground any one could have formed that opinion ; but I have here
Professor. Huxley's report, and I venture to mention some passages (not
troubling the Commissioners with extracts from any other) in which he
both speaks most strongly of the want, and indicates those modes of
supplying it, which it has been endeavoured to adopt. He says that a
complete system of technical education should be directed towards these
objects : " First, the diffusion among artisans and others occupied in
" trades and manufactures, of sound instruction in those kinds of
" theoretical and practical knowledge which bear upon the different
" branches of industry, whether manufactures or arts. Secondly,
" adequate provision for the training and supply of teachers qualified to
" give such instruction, and for the establishment of schools or isolated
" classes to which the industrial population may have ready access, and
" further for a proper system of examinations, whereby the work done in
' the schools and classes may be tested." Well, I could not in so few
words have better summed up the work which has actually been under-
taken, and which is now going on. Later on, at page 9, he speaks
strongly of the importance of the system of instruction and examination
which had been already begun in the Science and Art Department, with
which he is himself familiar. He says : " That system has already
' effected an immense amount of good year by year ; it is steadily
' widening the sphere of its operations, and I conceive that the Livery
' Companies could not employ a portion of their funds better than in
' aiding the extension and perfection of the system independently of, but
' in harmony with, the action of the Science and Art Department."
And then, at page 11, he speaks of the great importance of the establish-
ment of a central institution for the training and supply of teacher, and
for the advanced instruction of students of exceptional capacity. " The
" withdrawal of such persons from the centres of industry will not affect
" the supply of labour, and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to
" find a sufficient number of instructors of a higher order to equip train-
" ing colleges in every considerable manufacturing district. The more
" closely the matter is examined the more clearly it will appear that the
" question of technical education turns mainly on the supply of teachers
" good enough, but not too good, for the purpose. And I am of opinion
" that the greatest service which at the present time could be rendered
" to the cause of technical education in this country would be the estab-
" lishment in London of a training college for technical teachers, fitted
" with the requisite laboratories, lecture-rooms, and other appliances,
" and provided with a proper staff of professors and other instructors."
Then he goes on to say in what branches of knowledge instruction should

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 61

be given there, and that the building ought not to be too ambitious in

its architecture, but should be constructed for practical objects ; and he

thinks, at page 15, that the current expense of such a college as he has

suggested would probably amount to from 5000/. to 6000/. a year

in salaries, wages, and material. " The number of students," he says,

" would not make much difference, except in the greater or less demand

"for assistant teachers," and so on. I need not read more, but I think

the Commissioners who are acquainted with what has been done will be

of opinion that it is not at least to any want of an honest endeavour to

act upon those suggestions that, if we have failed or are likely to fail

(which I do not think), the failure will be due. Having got these

reports, the executive committee set to work, and their first operations

consisted in negotiations with the Cowper Street middle-class schools in

Finsbury, for the purpose of having temporary accommodation there to

begin the work of a technical school there ; and at the same time they

negotiated with the Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851 for a site

for the central institution. I see that doubt has been thrown upon

the prudence of the selection of the site at South Kensington ; but the As to the site

Commissioners will understand that the class of students who are to be ^ South

trained for masters and teachers, and superior foremen, and so on, will

not be those who are carrying on handicraft industries in London at the

time, so as to make the difference between the West End and the East

End of material importance to them ; while, on the other hand, the

immediate neighbourhood of the great scientific museums and other

institutions which are in the neighbourhood of South Kensington made

that neighbourhood apparently very desirable ; in addition to which, I

do not know that anywhere else, certainly upon such terms, a site so

advantageous could possibly have been obtained. Those negotiations

proceeded, and they ended in a lease upon very beneficial terms being

obtained from the Commissioners of a very large and convenient site,

where the building can be erected, and where there may be room for

developing it, the rerit being almost nominal, the term long, and the

only stipulations such as the Commissioners most properly would make,

namely, that the buildings should be erected and maintained, and that

there should be a proper representation of certain scientific institutions

upon the governing body, That lease was settled, not, I believe, actually

granted, in August, 1880. In the meantime (on the 9th July, 1880) Incorporation

the Institute was incorporated, not by special charter, but under the °ute f no^J~

general powers given by the Companies Act, the 23rd section of which tion of Gover-

abolishes the name "limited " where it is not a commercial undertaking, nors, &c.

Perhaps I ought now to state what is the government. It might seem

at first sight that, if looked at in detail, it Avas a cumbrous system

of government. It does not work so, and I daresay those who are

acquainted with the practical working of things can easily see why.

There is a large body of governors. The actual number at the end of

last year or the beginning of the present year was 169, and they are

constituted chiefly by a proportionate representation of the contributors

to the undertaking, according to the amounts of their contributions.

The City of London and the Companies nominate governors upon this

principle, and I believe any one who subscribes 100/. cari nominate

a governor. That is a sort of general meeting of the whole undertaking.

Then under them is a council of fifty-five. They are also chosen with

some proportionate reference to the supply of the funds. Under that

council there is an executive committee of forty and that acts by four

sub-committees, one for the central institution, one for finance, one for

the Einsbury College (of which I shall presently speak), and one for tho

South Lambeth School of Art (of which I shall also speak), and for the

C2 ROYAL COMMISSION.

technological examinations. The general body meets once a year, I think,
not oftener, though it can bo called together at any time. The whole
council is summoned once a quarter, and it would be summoned at any
time, if necessary ; the practical work is of course done by the executive
committee (of which Sir Frederick Bramwell is the real working chairman),
and by the sub-committees under it. Then on all these bodies are the ex
officio governors, of whom one is the Lord Mayor, and the other four were
introduced upon the wise and valuable suggestion of the Commissioners
of the Exhibition of 1851. They are the President of the Royal Society,
the President of the Chemical Society, the President of the Institution
of Civil Engineers, and the Chairman of the Council of the Society of
Arts, whether they are or are not in any way connected with the
subscribing Companies. The Commissioners are now in possession of
the objects and the constitution of the Institute, and I will proceed to state
what has been done. The first undertaking was to establish a college
of applied science and art in the city, in immediate proximity to the
Cowper Street Middle Class Schools, where temporary accommodation
was originally given, and the first stone of that college was laid (Prince
Leopold did us the honour to come for that purpose) on the 10th of
May, 1881 (that is, last year), and I am happy to say that in the present
year it is expected to be opened for work. In the meantime, under the
accommodation which has been obtained from the middle class schools,
the classes have been temporarily going on as well as they could. The
object of that college is to provide systematic evening instruction for
those who are actually engaged in the staple industries of the district,
including cabinet-making, and the application of chemistry and physics
to special trades. The classes which have been perhaps the most popular
.and the most largely attended, are those which relate to electric lighting,
and some manufacturing operations of very great importance. That
has been going on, and before I end I will give the numerical results of
the work that has been hitheito done. The first stone of the Central
Institution was laid by the Prince of Wales (who graciously accepted
the office of President of the Institute) on the 18th of July, 1881, at
South Kensington, the Princess of Wales being also present. Contracts
have been made for that undertaking ; considerable progress has been
made in it, and the year after next we expect it to be opened. The whole
cost of those buildings is estimated at, for Finsbury College 27,0001.,
for the Central Institution (including fittings), 80,0001, making 107,000?.
altogether. Now I ought, perhaps, to mention the funds. The Corpo-
ration of the City of London has contributed, not to the building fund,
but to the fund arising from annual subscriptions, and 28 Companies
Cost of build- have done so. Towards the building fund special contributions have
ing and con- been made of 42,250/. in the whole, by four Companies giving 10,000^.
tributions to eacnj two 1QOOZ. each, and one 250/. The annual subscriptions in the

Annual sSub first vear» 1878' were 12»102/- odd 5 in *he second year, 1879, 12,862/.
scriptions to odd; in the third, 12,965L odd; and in the last year, 24,OOOZ. The
the Institute, funds for meeting the buildings are, therefore, provided to a very great
extent, by savings (of course there has been some expenditure in the
work that has been going on) out of the annual subscriptions during
those years, and by means of the funds specially contributed for build-
ings ; and it is hoped that whatever deficiency there may be will be
supplied by the liberality of the contributing Companies and others.
I stated to the Commissioners that I would give them some numerical
results of the work which has already been done, and first of all I will
give them the figures applicable to the technological examinations which
have been carried on in every year since 1879. I think they were taken
over from the Society of Arts, which before conducted them. In 1879,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 63

the number examined was 202 at 23 centres, all in the provinces,
Lancashire, Yorkshire, and so on, in seven subjects. In the next year,
1880, 816 were examined at 85 centres, and in 24 subjects. In the
third year, 1881, 1563 were examined at 115 centres, and in 28 subjects ;
and in 1882, 1961 were examined at 146 centres, and in 38 subjects.
I am surprised if the Commissioners do not think that that is evidence
that there was a real want, and that the supply meets an increasing
demand. "With regard to the students receiving instruction more Students re-
directly from the different schools and colleges of the institute, in the ceiving in-
Technical College, Finsbury, in its present provisional state, there are fu"1^0? a-fc i
now receiving instruction in the evening classes 500 students ; at the College, Fins-
South London School of Technical Art, which is intended for those bury, the
artisans who are engaged in kinds of industry which require knowledge South London
of, or aptitude for, art, there are now receiving instruction 158 students; i|ch£0^ of. .
that is in a building in the Kennington Park Eoad. Then there are an(j Horo- F '
two small numbers which I may mention in addition. In themselves logical Insti-
they are insignificant, but they may developo. In the Horological tute.
Institute, which I presume is connected with the business of clock and
watch making, there are 26 students, and in the School of Art for
wood-carving there are at present 42. That gives 726 in the institu-
tions which are under the management of the institute itself, even in its
present half-developed state. In the provinces, the number of students
in the provincial classes in connection with the institute for the purpose
of its examinations is at present 3300. I do not know that I have
myself anything that I need add in order to put the Commissioners fully
in possession of the character and objects of the scheme, and of what
has been done towards it, and what are its prospects of success. I
think the Commissioners understand that the Central Institute mainly
aims at the education of those who shall be teachers of technical know-
ledge all over the country, like the great institutions in Paris, in Zurich,
and other places, but it is not confined to those who would be teachers ;
any who are desirous, with a view to being foremen or superintendents
of works, or masters, or managers, of receiving a high technical education,
will be welcome there, and as funds increase it is hoped that exhibitions
may be founded in aid of the poorer students. I think I have now
stated to the Commissioners the facts of the case, and any detail Sir
Frederick Bramwell will now supply better than I can.

(To SIR FREDERICK BRAMWELL.) May we ask you if you have any- Sir Frederick
thing to add to the statement which we have heard with so much interest Bramwell
from your chairman? — Very little indeed. There are one or two points, nature 0fGov-
however, upon which I should like to make a few observations. The erning body.
Lord Chancellor, in telling you the nature of the governing body of the
institute, said quite correctly that the representation was to a certain
extent based upon the amount of the contributions, but the Lord
Chancellor omitted a point which I think should be made known to
you, which is, that with the object of having on the council and on the
executive committee representatives of Companies not contributing
sufficient sums of money to entitle them to nominate persons on the
council and on the executive committee, the governors elect a certain
number of their own body to be councillors, and at least a moiety of
those persons must be representatives of Companies not contributing a
sufficient sum to entitle them to nominate councillors. Similarly on the
executive committee the council elect a certain number of their own
body to the executive committee, one-fourth of whom at least must bo
representatives of Companies not contributing enoxtgh to entitle them to
nominate a representative on the executive committee, and in that way
we have been enabled to ensure that all those Avho have aided us, and

64 ROYAL COMMISSION.

who are men willing and able to work, should come upon every grade, if
I may so call it, of the government of the institute. The Lord Chancellor
further said that a certain portion of the funds reqxtired for the buildings
would come out of the savings. That is so, but I wish to put before
tlu- Commissioners how it is that these savings arise, because I know
that an impression has prevailed which has prompted the question,
" Why do you want these funds if you are not spending them, but are
" making savings 1 " The answer to that is found in the letter which
Lord Chan- was written by the Lord Chancellor, and signed by myself also, to the
cellorSelborne Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851, a letter which I. think is
F™1 1S" ^ t T w°rthy the attention of the Commission, because it so well puts forward
Bmmweli's our v^ews uP°n the matter. In that letter we were compelled to tell
explanatory the Commissioners what it was that we were prepared to do in the event
statement as of their according to us the piece of ground for which we asked. We
> the applica- jia(j therefore, in stating the objects we had in view, to say that we were
1 a' willing to undertake to spend a minimum sum upon the building, that
the building should be made reasonably in accordance with the wishes of
the Commissioners, and our willingness to undertake that when the
building was completed there should be devoted at least a certain sum
(50007. a year) to the maintenance of that building for the purposes of
the institute. That being our undertaking it obliged us to set apart
from our funds the sum of 50007. a year until the building was com-
pleted, because it was quite evident, if we appropriated that 50007. a
year, pending the completion of the building, to some other purposes, we
should not be able, when the building was completed, to withdraw it
from those purposes, and we should be left without the means of fulfilling .
our obligation ; and not only without the means of fulfilling our obliga-
tion, but without the means of utilizing the building we had constructed.
It is in that manner that the savings of income accrue. The Lord
Chancellor also did not say, that which it may interest the Commission
to know, that among the students in the applied art schools there are
a very considerable number of female students who are learning the art
of wood engraving, and doing that very successfully. I cannot add
anything to that which the Lord Chancellor has said as regards the way
in which the institute came into existence, and as to what was done,
except this, by-the-bye — a step that was omitted — which, is that after
the preliminary committee had obtained the advice of the gentlemen
whose names you have heard (and also of Mr. Bartley, whose name Avas not
referred to), a report was drawn up by the Committee and was submitted
to the eleven Companies who had sent their representatives to the pre-
liminary committee ; and I may say that in every instance that report was
received and adopted by the Company who had sent its representative,
and that thereupon the institute came into existence, having for its
members the eleven original Companies. The Corporation also from the
outset sent representatives, but it was some time before they contributed.
However, they sent such a number of representatives as upon our scale
they would have been entitled to send had they contributed 20007. per
annum ; the contribution they eventually gave, guarding themselves,
however, by saying that they only gave it certainly for five years.
When the institute was established, it was determined that there Avere
four main heads of work it might forthwith be engaged in ; and I think
it will be found, as you have been told, that these heads agree very
closely indeed with those set out in the advice which was given us by
Professor Huxley. The four heads were the establishment in London
of a central institution for the instruction of teachers, principals,
managers, foremen, and leading workmen ; the establishment in one or
more places in London of schools where the application of science and

LONDON CITY LI VERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 65

art to tho industries could be taught j the aiding pecuniarily of other sir Frederick
institutions in London or the provinces, providing exhibitions, appren- Bramwell.
tices' fees, and matters of that kind; and the taking over from the
Society of Arts and the developing their technological examinations.
You have been told fully what has been done with respect to the
central institution ; but I may mention that Mr. Waterhouse was the
architect selected, and that the design he has produced is one which,
while not of a meagre and improper character for the neighbourhood,
or for the land which we have had given to us, is by no means ostenta-
tious, and by no means extravagant, and that the greatest possible
attention has been paid to internal accommodation for tho work of the
building, much more attention than to the mere decoration of the out-
side. With respect to the school at the Finsbury College, I may
mention in addition to that which the Lord Chancellor has told you, that
it has taken over the work of the Artisans' Institute, which is now being
carried on in that college ; and also quite recently it has taken over the
work, or is about to take it over, of the City School of Art, an old-
established school of art, which will have to be accommodated in that
building likewise. Then, as regards the pecuniary aid to other institu-
tions, we give 200/. a year to the Chair of Engineering at University
College, London ; 2001. a year to applied chemistry at that college ; 200/.
a year to applied art at King's College, and 200/. a year to a metal-
lurgical professorship there ; and we have given very large sums indeed
for the establishment of the laboratory and works at King's College.
Also in the country we are subsidizing, although not to so large an extent,
certain institutions. At Nottingham, for example, we have recently
endowed a chair in the new university to the extent of 300/. a year ;
and I may say that one of the Companies, the Drapers', who have con-
tributed very largely indeed, have added to their contributions quite
recently a sum of 500/. a year, on the condition that it shall be devoted
entirely to the purpose of aiding provincial institutions. With respect
to technological examinations, the Lord Chancellor has told you of their
great development ; but I wish to point out to the Commission that in
truth these are not mere examinations to ascertain that which is known
by the person who conies up to be examined, but that as we pay the
teachers by the results they are the means of joining and of assisting to
support classes for institution, but I wish to add we do not make it a
necessity that the person examined should have been instructed in any
particular class or school. We examine him and give him a certificate,
whether he has been taught in class or is self taught, but we do not give
him his full certificate unless he has passed in two science subjects as
well. Reverting to the Central Institution, I wish to say that the site
was selected for a variety of reasons. As the Lord Chancellor has said,
having regard to the fact that the education which was to be given there
could not be given to persons who were at the time engaged in industrial
pursuits, as their whole time must be devoted to the education ; it was
thought that it was not important the Central Institution should be in
the neighbourhood where the artisan classes principally dwell. We did
think it was important that it should be in a place readily accessible to
persons living in comparatively cheap houses or lodgings in the outskirts
of London (and almost any site that was within easy reach of a station
upon the Metropolitan Eailway or the Metropolitan District Eailway,
having regard to their extent and ramifications, would fulfil that con-
dition), but then the special reasons for selecting South Kensington
from among all the places in the neighbourhood of stations on these
railways was that our school of applied science and art would be
established close to the science schools where there are hundredsof

66 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Sir Frederick persons being educated in science and in art who, after having passed
Bramwell. A potion of their time there, might come o\ or to our school as (if I may
uso the term) " half-tuners," and eventually come to our school altogether
when they had completed their studies on the other side of the way.
Those were reasons, therefore, for selecting that place. Then again, I
will not conceal from you that there was the pecuniary reason that wo did
not want to spend money for land if we could get it for nothing. If the
letter to which I have referred were read, you would see we pointed out
to the Commissioners that we thought there could bo nothing more
germane to the original objects of the Exhibition of 1851, the Exhibition
which brought the Commissioners into existence, and that there could be
no better following out of the views of the late Prince Consort, and of
those who initiated the Exhibition, than the devotion of this land at
an absolutely nominal rent — a peppercorn rent — to the purposes of
the City and Guilds Technical Institute, and that by so doing that
would be really following the views which initiated the original Exhibi-
tion.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY : May I ask you just as a matter of
explanation whether your work in London is now, or is to be in the
future concentrated at South Kensington ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : No ; certainly not. On the contrary we have
got Finsbury College, where we have 500 pupils at the present time,
and we have got our school of applied art at Kennington.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY : That was the object of my question ; to
ascertain that those were not swallowed up 1

SIR F. BRAMWELL : Clearly not. We hope that that Finsbury
College will be a typical college, representing the kind of establishment
we should like to see throughout the kingdom in manufacturing places.
I further desire to say that in the outset the work of the Institution was
done entirely by the three honorary secretaries who sit behind us, Mr.
Watney, the clerk of the Mercers' Company, Mr. Sawyer, the clerk of the
Drapers' Company, and Mr. Owen Koberts, the clerk of the Clothworkers'
Company ; then we obtained temporary aid from Mr. Truman Wood,
who was at that time assistant secretary of the Society of Arts, by the
permission of the council of that society ; but as the work developed it
was impossible to carry it on in this manner, and it therefore became
necessary to find some gentleman . of competence who would devote his
whole time to it. That was done, and I am happy to say that by the
appointment of Mr. Philip Magnus as director and secretary, I think
the Institute has been very greatly benefited. I am reminded that Mr.
Magnus is a member of the Eoyal Commission on Technical Education
which is now considering the whole subject.

LORD SHERBROOKE put this question : —

Can you tell us at all what sum has been spent upon this good work ?

To which the LORD CHANCELLOR replied, —

It is not all spent. The total amount of the annual subscriptions
down to the present time I may say is 63,000/. in round numbers, and the
sum subscribed for the building funds, 42,250?.; that makes 105,OOOZ.
That is for the Institute alone. The Clothworkers' Company have done
something beyond that.

Do you see any prospect of any great increase in this work, or do you
tli ink it has reached the limit ?

My impression is that when it is well started and the two colleges
are fully at work, that whatever funds are wanted to keep them going
on are pretty sure to be supplied.

You could not go further than that ?

!No. I have read a passage from Professor Huxley's report, in which

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES ' VINDICATION. 67

ho estimates the probable cost of the Central Institution at 5000/. to 60007. Sir Frederick
I daresay it would be more. Bramwoll.

I daresay you could not tell us what the incomes of the persons and
the different Companies that subscribe to this work are 1

No, I cannot tell you that.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY (to Sir F, Bramwcll) : Is there anything
you Avish to add to the evidence you have already given ?

The LORD CHANCELLOR : Yes, I think I should like to say, as bearing
upon the question of whether this work is likely to develop, that un-
doubtedly the advantages to be derived from it will largely develop when
the Central Institution is opened. We have funds sufficient to carry it
on to more than the extent stipulated with the Commissioners. I have
already explained that the savings from income which will go towards
the building fund are the portions of that income which, when the build-
ing is open, will be applied to its work, and there will be then a very
large development of the useful work done by the Institute. And further,
as far as my opinion goes, I have no doubt whatever if the Companies are
left in the control of their funds, that they will not neglect that which
they have begun, and that they will find such funds as can usefully be
applied to the purpose. I have not the slightest doubt about it. I speak
of one Company with very great confidence, and should like to give the
Commission an instance of what they thought fit to do when they doubled
their subscription, as they did a short time ago, and raised it from 2000?.
to 4000Z. a year. The raising of that subscription entitled them to send
two more members to the Executive Committee. They had previously
sent Mr. George Matthey, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and a most
scientific metallurgist, and myself as their representatives. They were
then entitled to two more. They had plenty of members of their own
court, well-qualified men, but they thought they could do better than send
any man from their own court, and accordingly they made Dr. Siemens
a liveryman by special grant, with the express object of being able to send
him as one of their representatives to the Executive Committee, in the
belief that that would be for the benefit of the Institute.

VISCOUNT SHERBROOKE (to Sir F. Bramwell) : Do you consider that
there is no risk, that you may not overstock the market in this manner ;
how are you to judge?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : I do not think you can overstock the market in
this manner, because really that which we are doing is instructing men
how to carry on their business with knowledge instead of without know-
ledge, and I cannot for one moment contemplate that our efforts, however
great they may be, can ever exceed the extent of the manufacturing
industry of the kingdom.

VISCOUNT SHERBROOKE continues : Is it not also attracting people into
a line of business that they would not, except for this inducement, have
ever thought of going into 1

SIR F. BRAMWELL : It does appear to me to be so. What it does appear
to me to be is this, that persons being engaged in business, or having a
taste for business, will be enabled to undertake that business with a know-
ledge of what they are doing instead of being compelled to undertake it
upon the sort of rough practical teaching that they otherwise would have
gained, and which they would alone have gained.

LORD SHERBROOKE : Is not the demand of the public for all things a
surer guide than the speculations of any number of-'gentlemcn who wish
to set a thing of this kind on foot ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : I do not know that I follow you. I do not know
that there was a demand for technical education a few years ago. It was
a thing comparatively unknown in England, '-and we were being beaten

F 2

68 UOYAL COMMISSION.

Sir Frederick by foreigners. "When wo examined into it we found that they had insti-

Bramwell. tutions of this kind throughout their countries, and we believed it to be

mainly owing to those institutions which they had got, but which we had

not, that we had been put into the position we occupied in manufactures.

SIB R. CROSS (to Sir F. Bramwell) : As I understand, one of the prin-
ciples you lay down is that the real practical learning of a trade must be
in the factory and the workshop 1

SIR F. BRAMWELL : Yes.

You do not mean to interfere with that at all, but to enable a person
who goes to the factory or workshop, to go there with superior knowledge
and to put it into use there ?

Precisely so. I should very much like to refer you on that to the original
report. We do not profess to teach the business, we only profess to teach the
application of the science or the art that underlies those businesses. The
report to which I refer was the original report of the preliminary committee
to the Companies, who had appointed it to investigate the subject. It was
called an executive committee then, although that is not to be confounded
with the presentexecutive committee of the Guilds Institute, as incorporated.
Paragraph 6 of that report says : — " It appears to your executive committee
" that, except in some very special instances, such as the introduction of
" a new industry, or the revival of an old one, the Companies should not
" endeavour to effect this improvement by teaching the workman to be
" more expert in his handicraft ; as in their judgment this form of im-
" provement is one which must be derived from greater assiduity in the
" workshop, and from longer practice therein, and they therefore are of
" opinion that, except in special cases, it would be unwise to establish any
" place for teaching the actual carrying out of the different trades ; that is to
" say, a place in the nature of a model manufactory or workshop, or to provide
" instructors, for instance, in sawing and planing, and in chipping and
" filing ; but they advise that the direction to be pursued in improving
" technical education should be one which will give to those employed in
" manufactures the knowledge of the scientific or artistic principles upon
" which the particular manufacture may depend. As illustrative of these
" views they would refer to two great industries, iron and textile fabrics.
" With respect to iron, it is believed it would be unwise to endeavour to
" improve that manufacture by instructing a puddler how to handle his
" tools in a superior manner, or the blast furnaceman how to manipulate
" his furnace ; but on the other hand, your executive committee think it
" would be of great utility to give to such men (and especially to the
" managers of iron works) the scientific instruction which will enable
" them to know why it is that occasionally, in spite of manual dexterity,
" and in spite of attention, the puddle-bar is bad, or the pig iron is un-
" unsalable, except at a reduced price. The application of the science of
" chemistry to the manufacture of iron affords this knowledge. Instructed
" in such application, the ironmaster, his manager, his foreman, and even
" his workmen will know how, when varying fuel, or varying mineral or
" fluxes, are brought under treatment, to alter that treatment to suit the
"particular foreign (and commonly noxious) matters which are found
" accompanying the fuel, the flux, or the ore, and how, notwithstanding
" these admixtures, to succeed in producing an excellent quality of iron."
I should like to break off there to remind the Commission of what has
been done in the enormous improvement in the manufacture of Bessemer
steel by the introduction of an entirely new chemical process which has
enabled the phosphoric iron ores of the Cleveland district to be success-
fully used for Bessemer steel in substitution of the hematite ores, which
alone had been found fit for that purpose previously. "Similarly, as
" regards the manufacture of textile fabrics. While in the opinion of

LONDON CUT LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 69

{ your executive committee it would be unwise to follow the plan which sir" Frederick

' has been pursued in some places upon the continent of endeavouring Bramwell.

' to give extra dexterity to the operative by establishing model manufac-

' tories or workshops, it would be most wise to give the chemical know-

1 ledge and the artistic instruction which would enable the worker to

' grapple with differences in the quality of water, differences in the

' quality of dyes and of the materials to be dyed, and would likewise

' secure the designer from violations of the canons of good taste, and

' your executive committee are glad to say that in the foregoing views

' they are, without exception, fully supported by the reports of those who

' have kindly assisted them with their advice."

VISCOUNT SHERBROOKE (to Sir F. Bramwell) : How do you estimate
the number of persons who are to be taught ? Do you take as many as
choose to come ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : I think we may safely for a long while take as
many as choose to come, and that we have funds for.

How do you know that there will be employment for all those people 1

I am sorry to say that they must take their chance of that, I presume,

as they would have had to have taken if they had been less well educated,

but I should think they would have a better chance when they are well

educated.

Do you think that that necessarily follows ?

I think so. I do not think we are about to add directly to the number
of the persons who will go into an industry, but that we are about to
enable those persons who do go into any business to carry on that busi-
ness with better knowledge.

Suppose you were to educate a number of persons in any particular
trade, do you think that would at all make it certain that there would be
employment for those people ?

I do not think it would make it certain, but I think they would stand
a better chance, because I think if we so educate them we shall bring
trade to England which would otherwise go elsewhere, where the people
are educated ; and I think that they will stand a better chance because
there will be more trade to do, and because employers would rather have
them than others who are not so educated.

Do you not think that by throwing aside the ordinary safeguard of
supply and demand, you run very great risk of bringing up people to em-
ployments that they may not be able to find means of fulfilling in a
lucrative manner 1

I cannot agree with you, to begin with, that we are bringing up people
to follow employments at all. My view of the matter is that persons
having contemplated following certain employments, we are simply aiding
them in learning the business they had already intended to follow.

You do not think that your aiding them has any effect in increasing the
number ?

I do not think it has immediately, although it might remotely, in this
way, it may increase the trade by reason of the work being better done,
and therefore a greater number may go into it.

The LORD CHANCELLOR here observed : I cannot help thinking thai
Lord Sherbrooke's view, as indicated by the questions he has put, is to a
great extent met by the experience of foreign countries, because both aft
Paris and Zurich, and at other places there are very much larger institu-
tions of this kind than we can for some considerable time hope to establish
here, and I believe there is not the least doubt entertained that they are=
found very beneficial to the arts and manufactures of those countries.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON (to Sir F. Bramwell) : 1 should like to ask you
one question ; do you not think that the building at South Kensington,

70 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Sir Frederick upon which you are going to spend the bulk of your fumls, and have
Bramwell. spent the largest amount of your money is badly situated for the use of
the artisan and labouring population 1

I have rmlfavoured to explain that we do not expect that at that build-
ing persons who arc engaged at the time in labour will be instructed. Wo
intend that for the higher class of teaching, and for such teaching as will
involve the persons who are taught not being at that time engaged in
labour at all ; and if, therefore, the building is accessible to those living
in the cheap parts of the outskirts of London, we think it is a thoroughly
suitable site. I have given the reasons why on other grounds we thought
it an extremely suitable site. I may say if we had the matter to do over
again, with all the experience Ave have got upon it, I think we should be
doing rightly to do as we did before, and to approach the Commissioners
to give us this piece of land.

MR. JAMES (to Sir F. Bramwell) : It will be admitted that the basis of
all technical education must be general education ?

SIB F. BRAMWELL : Yes.

MR. JAMES : I should like to know whether, in the case of any of the
pupils who have presented themselves to your college, you have found
that their general education has been so deficient that the endeavour to
engraft technical education upon that deficient general education has been
of no use ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : I do not think we have, up to the present time, at
all suffered from that. I think there has been a sufficient amount of
general education to enable them to appreciate the instruction which has
been given. It may be that some have been debarred from coming, be-
cause they had not got this general education to begin with, but all those
who have come, so far as I know, have been able to profit by it.

MR. JAMES : The distinctions between classes in this country are not
very closely drawn, but I imagine that your pupils are drawn from the
class of those who might be termed the middle class rather than from the
distinctly working class ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL: I doubt if that is so ; at all events it is not so at
the Finsbury College. The other is not open yet, and the Finsbury
College we have put in the very heart of a large artisan population.

MR. JAMES : Of course the distinction between the two is one that is
very difficult to define !

SIR F. BRAMWELL : And I may say that the technological examination
shows that the persons who come to those classes are distinctly the
working class.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON (to Sir F. Bramwell) : Are you not going to
teach at South Kensington precisely what is taught in the building oppo-
site, that is, in the Science and Art School of the Museum 1

No, on the contrary, we hope that after persons have been taught there,
they may come to us to learn the application, to actual manufacture, of
that which they have been taught over the way.

VISCOUNT SHEUBROOKE (to Sir F. Bramwell) : You are then inviting
people to enter upon a particular kind of industry that they would not
otherwise have entered into but for your invitation ?

I again regret to have to say I cannot agree with you. To my mind,
if a man opens a general shop, he cannot be said to invite any one to buy
candles at that shop any more than he invites him to buy soap. "We are
going to open an institution where we shall give instruction as to
the application of science and art to various industries. That does not
seem to me to be an invitation to people to follow a particular business.

LORD SHERBROOKE (to Sir F. Bramwell) : I thought you said that a
number of people would be attracted to certain businesses ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 71

I did not intend to convey that by my answer.

LORD COLERIDGE here remarked : I understand you to say that indirectly
only trade might be increased ; and, therefore, as there would be more
trade to do, there would be more people required to do it ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : That is so.

LORD COLERIDGE : Because it would be better done ?

SIR F. BRAMWELL : Because it would be better done.

ON THE ELEVENTH DAY OF THE INQUIRY.

MR. WILLIAM SPOTTISWOODE, President of the Eoyal Society, was Evidence on
examined on behalf of the City and Guilds Technical Institute.

The Chairman, LORD DERBY : I need not ask you whether you are
the President of the Royal Society 1 cal Institute.

I am- v -A

And you have come here, as I understand, to give evidence on behalf M" -^^e °

of the City and Guilds Technical Institute ? Spottiswoode,

I have. President of

Probably you will prefer to make a statement in your own way, as I the.Royal
am not aware of the particular points to which you desire that it should behal/ofthe
be directed ? City and

It is generally admitted that the British workman is not inferior to Guilds Techni-
his continental competitors in ability to work, in precision, or in ca^ Institute,
dexterity of hand ; but that he is oxitstripped by them, owing to a better
knowledge on their part of the principles on which his handicraft is
(often unconsciously) based, and a better acquaintance with the nature
and uses of the materials which he employs. This knowledge forms part
of general science, and may be made a part of an educational system.
In many parts of the continent a wider dissemination of scientific instruc-
tion, together with better systematized modes of teaching in the secondary,
if not in the primary schools has long prevailed, and has raised the
general level of information on these subjects considerably above that
which is to be found here. In addition to this, technical schools of one
kind or another, on a very large scale, have been instituted ; and it is
believed that the siiperiority of foreign manufacturers, as evinced by
successful competition, is largely due to technical instruction. The
object proposed in the City and Guilds of London Institute has been to
supply this defect in the education and training of our manufacturing
population, by providing and encouraging education adapted to the re-
quirements of all classes of persons engaged, or preparing to engage, in
manufacturing and other industries. With this object the Institute
subsidizes existing educational establishments, which, in the opinion of
the Council, are providing sound technical instruction, and which would
languish except for external aid. It also encourages in the principal
industrial centres in Great Britain the formation of evening classes, in
which workmen and foremen engaged in their several factories during
the day receive special instruction in the application of the principles of
science to the explanation of processes with which they are already
practically familiar. It establishes and maintains in the metropolis
model technical schools, to serve as types of other schools to be esta-
blished by local efforts in provincial towns ; and lastly, it is erecting a
Central Institution, corresponding to some extent to the great polytechnical
schools of Germany, Switzerland, and Italy, and to the Ecole Centrale of
Paris. With this varied programme the City and Guilds of London

72 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. \Vm. Institute is assisting, as efficiently and at the same time as economically
Spottiswoode, as ft can> jn fae professional instmction of all classes of persons engaged
rTu v" 1 ^ industrial operations, of artisans, apprentices, foremen, managers of
Society. works, manufacturers, and technical teachers. The Council of the

Institute has no intention of interfering with any existing social institu-
tion, such as apprenticeship, or any other relationship between employer
and employed, but aims only at supplying the want of further instruction,
which is everywhere felt to exist,by supplementing and by preparing pupils
more thoroughly to profit by workshop training. For the actual training
of workmen engaged in manufacturing processes apprenticeship schools,
as they exist in France, are not recommended for imitation in this
country. That the factory is the place in which skilled workmen
engaged in manufacture can best be trained, is an opinion in which most
of the leading manufacturers of this country and of the continent concur.
In all the large manufacturing towns evening classes in technology, which
are not State-aided, as are the classes in pure science and art, are being
assisted by the Institute. The work done by the students of these
classes is inspected and examined by the Institute, and on the results of
the annual examinations certificates and prizes are granted, which are
frequently regarded as diplomas of proficiency, enabling operatives to
obtain better employment and higher remuneration. These evening
classes have already become, and are likely to be still more in the future,
the nuclei of technical colleges, mainly supported by the towns in which
they are situate, but connected with and affiliated to the City and
Guilds of London Institute, by means of its examinations and super-
intending influence, much in the same way as other colleges are
connected with a central university. The Technical College, Finsbury,
which will shortly be ready for occupation, has been erected to serve as
a model technical college, and to provide for the instruction of artisans
and others in the City of London, and in the district of Finsbury. It
already, in its temporary premises, contains a school of applied science.
It provides systematic evening instruction for those who are engaged in
the staple industries of the district, including cabinet-making, and in
the application of chemistry and physics to special trades, such as spirit-
rectification, electric lighting, &c. What the technical college is to the
east and north-east of London, the art school is to the south-east of
London. This school, situated in the Kennington Park Road, is in-
tended to provide instruction' for artisans engaged in various industries
in which art aptitude is indispensable to success. The courses are for
evening and for day students, for men and women, and the eagerness
with which the instruction is received, and the numbers applying for
admission, necessitating already a considerable extension of the building,
show how much needed is this kind of supplementary training, and how
highly it is appreciated by those for whom it is provided. The Central
Institution is to give to London what it so much needs, a first-class
college, in which those who are to be engaged in the superintendence
of great industrial works may receive their training, and in which
technical teachers for the provincial schools may be educated. The
establishment of this Central Institution will, it is hoped, render
unnecessary the constant appeal to foreign countries, where similar
institutions already exist, for managers of works, engineers, and
industrial chemists, and will be welcomed by manufacturers who feel
the want in London of some such institution in which their sons
who are to succeed them can obtain as good ^an education as at Paris,
Zurich, Carlsruhe, or Berlin. Just as the Ecole Centrale at Paris is
about to be removed to the immediate neighbourhood of the Con-
servatoire des Arts et Metiers, in order that the students may be near to

LONDON C1T5T LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 73

the collections of machinery and other industrial objects which the Con- Mr- Wm«

servatoire contains, so the Central Institution of London is being built Iresklent of

near to the science schools and national museums of South Kensington. ^e K,oyai

By erecting the institution in this district a great saving of first outlay Society.-

and of annual expense will be effected, as the students during their

first year's course will be able to avail themselves of the teaching of pure

science which the new Normal School of Science now provides. That

all intelligent and effective use of natural objects must be based upon

a knowledge of their properties, and the mode in which they act

upon one another, is a statement which can hardly be questioned.

But inasmuch as the majority of handicraftsmen, indeed the majority of

the community at large, can attain to but a very limited measure of

knowledge, it is in the highest degree important that the amount to

which they do attain, and the facts which they can acquire and retain,

should be selected in the best manner, and presented to them in the

clearest and most useful form possible. In proportion as this is

neglected, their minds will either remain fallow, or, being temporarily

burdened with undigested matter, will relieve themselves of their burden

at the first convenient opportunity. It is on this account that the

promoters of the present undertaking have considered that some

elements of scientific instruction should be a part of their charge, and

should form an essential element of the scheme ; and further that in its

more advanced branches, as developed in the curriculum of the Central

Institution and in the technological examinations, some evidence of

scientific knowledge should be pre-requisite to the attainment of the

highest distinctions. By science it should be understood that we do

not mean anything scholastic or academic, or a course of study leading

directly to research ; but merely that knowledge of principles and of

leading facts which, when properly taught, is within the grasp of all

persons of average intelligence. Upon the quality of the teaching very

much will depend, and the importance attached to this point is evinced

in the " qualifications of teachers as recognized by the Institute." The

following is an extract from the regulations : " The examination in most

"of the subjects will be in two grades — I. ordinary ('or pass'); II.

" honours. The ordinary or pass examination is intended for apprentices

" and journeymen ; the honours examination for foremen, managers,

" and teachers of technology ; but candidates may enter themselves for

" either grade; The following classes of persons may on application to

" the central office be recognized as teachers to the Institute. (A.)

" Any person who obtains or has obtained a full technological certificate

" in the honours grade, or who has already obtained a full certificate in

" the first class of the advanced grade (programme 1881) of the subject

" to be taught. (B.) Any person who is engaged in teaching science

" under the Science and Art Department, and who makes application

"to be registered not later than March 30th, 1882, after which date

" no person who is not qualified under A. or C. will be registered. (C.)

" Persons possessing sper.nl qualifications, to be considered by the

" Institute, for teaching technical subjects." The nature of the teaching

contemplated in the technical schools, and, indeed, actually going on

at the college in Finsbury, will be best seen by the programme of

the classes and lectures for the present session. These comprise the

heads of technical chemistry under Professor Armstrong, and technical

physics under Professor Ayrton. To .these there has recently been added

technical mechanics under Professor Perry. I will, with your Lordship's

permission, put these appendices in, merely making a few extracts from

them at this moment. " The Chemical Laboratory will be open daily

" (Saturdays excepted) from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., and on Monday and

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. \Vm.
Spottiswoode,
President of
tlio Royal

Soou'tv.

"Friday evening from G.30 to 9 for students desiring individual in-
struction." "There will also be the following classes and lectures.
" Dr. Armstrong will deliver a course of lectures introductory to the study
"of various branches of applied chemistry on Wednesdays at 10 to 11,
"and on Fridays at 2 to 3, commencing October 5th. A laboratory class
" specially suited to students attending this course, will be held on
"Wednesdays at 11 to 1 and 1.30 to 3.30, commencing October 5th.
" In connection with this course, Mr. Evans will discuss exercises, &c.,
" and give a series of lecture demonstrations at a time which will be
" arranged to suit the convenience of the class. A course of laboratory
" demonstrations in organic chemistry will be given by Dr. Armstrong on
" Monday evenings at . This course is principally intended for

" distillers (including coal-tar distillers and spirit rectifiers), and will be
" suited for candidates in Subject 4 at the technological examinations ;
" but it is hoped that students who have attended a previous course on
" the chemistry of brewing may be able to continue their attendance , and
" that new students of this branch of organic chemistry may also present
" themselves. Students desiring to obtain a knowledge of the chemistry
' of bread-making should attend on this evening. On the same evening
'at G.30 to 9, Mr. Evans, chief assistant in the chemical laboratory, will
' give a course of laboratory and lecture demonstrations on the properties
' of the more important metals and metallic compounds, with reference
' to their practical applications and their analytical determination and
' estimation. Copper, iron, lead, silver, tin, and zinc will be the metals
' principally treated of, arid the wants of plumbers and metal-workers
'generally will be as far as possible considered. Dr. Armstrong will
1 commence on Friday, October 7th, a course of lecture and laboratory
' demonstrations on fuel, with special reference to coal gas as a heating
' and illuminating agent. Laboratory class, 6.30 to 8.30 ; lecture,
8.30. Candidates in the subject fuel at the technological examinations
' may with advantage attend this course. In this course the principles
' on which combustion depends will be fully explained and illustrated ;
'also the methods of determining the heating power of fuels. The
'properties of the several fuels, their composition and their heating
' powers, will be demonstrated ; and the relative advantages of various
' fuels and the different modes of applying heat will be discussed. Sub-
' sequcntly, the determination of temperature, the temperatures required
' for and obtained in various technical operations, and the circumstances
' affecting the combustion of fuels, will be considered. Illuminating
' agents will form the subject of the latter part of the course, but it is
' important that students who may desire to specially devote their at-
' tcntion to this subject should attend the earlier part of the course. In
' the laboratory course the students will have the opportunity of experi-
' mentally studying the laws of combustion, the properties of. fuels, and
' the method of determining their composition and heating power, and of
' instituting various experiments with fuels. Later on they will take
"up the subject of illuminating agents." Then in technical physics :
" The physical laboratory will be open daily (Saturdays excepted)
"from 10 to 5 p.m., and on Monday and Wednesday evenings from
"6.30 to 9.30 for students desiring individual practical instruction in
" technical physics." Then there are courses on electricity, magnetism,
and other subjects, the particulars of which will be seen in the docu-
ments which I hand in. (The documents were handed in: Vide Ap-
pendix.) The scheme in its integrity undoubtedly offers attractions
and inducements to comers of all kinds ; and it contemplates even an
extension of these inducements from time to time, as the liberality of
corporations or of individuals may provide the means. But it must

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 75

not be forgotten that the inducements are mainly opportunities to Mr. Wm.
Avork, and not prizes in themselves. The substantial rewards of success Spottiswoode,
in our courses are to be found not in the institutions themselves, but in ^eSpdenti of
the workshops and the manufactories for which they are a preparation. Society]*
The main inducement to study and training here Avill be measured not
by anything that we have to offer, but by the prospect which the in-
dustry of the country may liold out for the employment of well-qualified
men or women. There is therefore little or no fear that this scheme will
in any way overstock the market in which the ordinary laws of supply
and demand will operate as usual. There are, however, some peculiar
circumstances relating to manufacturing industry, which render special
efforts to promote the education of persons aspiring to the higher
grades of employment desirable or even necessary. There is, in fact,
at the present moment a great dearth of superior men in manufactories.
This is partly due to the fact that the processes and appliances are
so much more elaborate and refined than heretofore, that an amount of
intelligence and knowledge formerly adequate is now inadequate. But
it is also due to the increased sub-division of labour, which obliges the
artisan desiring to rise to any degree of efficiency to devote his whole
energy and attention to his special province, even to the exclusion of
a knowledge of other branches of his trade. Or again, turning to the
lower grades of employment, if any apology or plea be necessary, a thing
which I do not admit, for encouraging young persons to follow handicraft
trades, ample reason would, I think, be found in the growing tendency to
prefer monotonous and umpromising employment at the desk, clerkship
and the like, at a comparatively low salary, to work in the factory with
all the advantages which energy and skill are there certain to command.
I cannot, I confess, look with satisfaction or with hope upon a
generation which reckons the ease and the respectable mediocrity of the
one as superior to the rougher but almost illimitable possibilities of the
other. And anything, therefore, which will raise the tone, or improve
the prospects, or in any way add dignity to handicraft life, may be hailed
as a measure which may influence the community far beyond the
limits of the special industry for which it may have been devised. I
venture to advert to another point ; it has been suggested that, instead of
setting up a new organization on so large a scale, the method of ap-
prenticeship schools might have been adopted, as has already been done
with good effect in France and, in some degree, in Austria. It has, how-
ever, been already explained that the Council of the City and Guilds
Institute have not considered it their province to interfere with the
existing system of apprenticeship. Nor, indeed, has the suggestion of
these schools received sufficient general support in this country to
justify the expenditure of any part of the present fluids upon such an
object. Another suggestion was also made, by way of alternative to
part of the present scheme, namely, that the board schools might have
been turned to account by introducing into their course an element
of manual work. This, however, would not at all fulfil the objects
of the Institute, as it Avould simply then form part of the general scheme
of public elementary education, and could only at the most be a first step
towards our main purpose, the training of the workman. There are a few
additional remarks, supplied to me by Dr. Magnus, our secretary and
director, who has lately returned from a tour of inspection on the conti-
nent, which, with the permission of the Commission, I will read. " With
" primary instruction this Institute has not attempted to interfere. In
" France a technical element is being introduced into primary schools, by
" giving instruction in the use of tools as employed in wood and iron
" work ; but in this movement France is not being followed by Switzer-

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Win. " land, Germany or Italy. It might perhaps bo desirahle to introduce
Spottiswoode, « workshop instruction into some of our primary schools, not, however,
the8Royal " *or ^ie 8a^£e °* teacnino a trade, but only as a means of improvin'g the
Society. " manipulative skill of the pupils, and of arousing in them a taste for

" manual work, and possibly also of shortening the period of apprentice-
" ship. In intermediate or higher elementary education the Institute
' has indirectly taken some part by establishing a working relationship
' between the Finsbury Technical College and the Middle Class School
' in Cowper Street. The teaching of science to the advanced pupils in
' this school has already been handed over to the professors of the college,
' and if the relationship at present existing could be made still closer, and
' the school could be brought under the direct control of the Institute, a
' technical school might be created in London which would serve as
1 a model for the establishment of others throughout the kingdom. The
" Institute's Technical College at Finsbury, whilst representing the third
" grade of technical instruction, does not correspond, and is not intended
' to correspond, exactly with any foreign type. It is hoped that when com-
' pletely equipped and in good working order it will represent the newest
' and most generally approved methods of technical instruction, and will
' give the best teaching that can be obtained to young men during or prior
' to their apprenticeship, as well as to workmen and foremen. A depart-
' ment for the teaching of applied art, which is indispensable to a technical
' college, is still wanting at Finsbury. But it is satisfactory to know that
' although adequate accommodation for the art classes which are about to be
'formed cannot be found in the new building constructed for science
' teaching only, arrangements are in progress for the addition to our
'present teaching staff of an art master, so that work may be com-
'menced at the opening of the next session in such temporary pre-
' mises as may be found available. In the Institute's scheme the
' highest grade of school will be represented by the Central Institution.
' Very great differences exist in the systems of higher instruction
"pursued in the Ecole Centrale of Paris, in the polytechnics of Germany,
"and in the superior institutions of Italy. The Germans themselves are
"not altogether satisfied with the instruction afforded in their own
"schools ; and costly and magnificent as these buildings are, I should not
" be disposed to hold them up for entire imitation in our own country.
" In the arrangements, however, that will be made later on for the curri-
" culum of studies to be pursued at the Central Institution, the experience
" that has been gained during many years in the working of the French
" and German schools will undoubtedly prove serviceable ; but it may be
" confidently expected that the Central Institution as a high school
" of technical science and applied art will be in many respects superior to
" any similar institution abroad. Indeed, the progress of this institution
" is watched with considerable interest by professors and others in Ger-
" many, Italy, and elsewhere, as an instructive experiment, which may
" not be without effect upon their own schools. At present, owing to
" the depression of trade and to the almost entire completion of the rail-
" way system of Germany, the polytechnics are less well attended than
" was the case some few years since ; but notwithstanding this falling off
" in the number of students, fresh efforts are being constantly made to
" improve the efficiency of these institutions, and large sums of money
" are being expended in the erection and fitting of new laboratories. In
" Zurich it is proposed to erect new physical and chemical laboratories at
" a cost of between 50,OOOZ. and 60,000/., in addition to those already
" attached to the polytechnic. In Bonn plans have been prepared for a
" new physical laboratory in connection with the University. In Han-
" over the "Welfenschloss erected some years since as a palace for the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 77

' king has only recently been converted at a very considerable cost into a Mr. Wm.

' polytechnic school. Of the value of this higher scientific training in Spottiswoode,

the development of the industries of the country, the Germans ^ ^^ of

' themselves have no doubt. To it they ascribe the successes gociet/.

' they have achieved as engineers and chemists ; and it is noteworthy

' that the majority of those who have been engaged in great engineering

' works, such as the St. Gothard Tunnel, and in the erection of the

' splendid bridges that span the Rhine and the Moselle, have been

' trained in the polytechnic institutions, whilst to the higher chemical

' attainments of the Germans is certainly due the marked success they

' have achieved in the manufacture of colouring matters, an industay

' which has assumed large proportions in Germany and Switzerland. In

' fact, the discoveries which have led to this trade have been mostly

' made in Germany, and are to a great extent the result of the large

' number of well-furnished laboratories, and of the general diffusion of

' advanced chemical knowledge in that country. In the Central Institu-

' tion at South Kensington it may not be possible to furnish engineering

' and chemical laboratories on anything like the same scale as those

' which are founded in connection with the polytechnics and universities

" abroad, but the arrangements for the teaching of practical physics,

" and especially the various applications of electricity to industrial pur-

" poses may be, and it is to be hoped will be, superior to those found in

" any of the foreign physical laboratories which I have seen. Nothing

" that bears comparison with our system of Government examination in

" science nor with the Institute's examinations in technology is found

" anywhere on the continent. At the same time the opportunities afforded to

" apprentices and- workmen to obtain supplementary evening instruction are

" very great, and in some cases, particularly in the schools supported by

" special societies, this instruction is more systematically developed than

" in England. Our examinations in technology, originally intended to

" test a candidate's knowledge of the technology of certain trades, have

" become, under the direction of the Institute, the means of stimulating

" the establishment of technical classes for the instruction of artisans

" and others, not only in the technology, but also in the principles of

" science in their application to the industry in which they are engaged,

" and it is the aim and tendency of these examinations to develop more

" and more in this direction, and to give an impulse to the establishment

" in different parts of the kingdom of what may be properly called

4 technical schools, i.e. of schools providing a systematic and progressive

' course of instruction adapted to various industrial occupations. The

' interest awakened by the action of the City and Guilds of London in

' promoting technical instruction is not confined to this country. Experts

' have been sent over to England from various parts of the continent to

' inquire into our scheme, and several accounts of the Institute's work have

' appeared in foreign journals. Doctor Exner, the Director of the Techno-

' logical Museum at Vienna, and member of the Austrian Parliament, read

' a paper before the South Austrian Trade Society, dealing exhaustively

' with our technological examinations, which, in a somewhat modified

' form, he is not without hopes of being able to introduce into Austria.

' Dr. Barkhausen, Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the Hanover

' Polytechnic, has also written a series of articles in the ' Deutsche Bau-

' zeitung ' on the general work of the Institute. From America, from

' Italy and Germany, and other parts of the continent, inquiries are

' being continually received with respect to the progress of the Institute's

' scheme ; and it is generally anticipated by all those abroad who take

' an interest in English education, and who know the resources which

' the City and Guilds of London have at their command, that the

78 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Wm. " development of technical education, in their hands, will materially help
Spottiswoode, " in maintaining the industrial success of this country."
President of That is what you wish to put before us?

That is what I desire to place before the Commission.

I suppose you have seen the evidence given by the other witnesses
who came on behalf of the Institute ?

I have.

Do you agree with the general purport of it ?

I do.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : I think you are, as President of the Royal
Society, an ex-officio member of the Guilds Technical Institute ?

I am.

And have the right to be present at all meetings of committees, and
of the Council having control of the Central Institution 1

That is the case.

And I believe you have for a long time past attended very regularly
the meetings 1

I have attended most of the meetings.

I think you are a large employer of labour yourself ?

I am.

And for many years have been in constant contact with skilled
mechanics ?

I have.

From your experience as an employer of labour, and from your know-
ledge of the wants and the aspirations of skilled mechanics, are you of
opinion that the plan which the City of London and Guilds Technical
Institute are endeavouring to carry out is one calculated to supply that
want and to materially assist workmen to obtain better knowledge of all
parts of the trades with which they are connected ?

I am certainly of that opinion ; the more I have seen of the work of
the Institute, the more impressed I have been with the belief that it is
well calculated for the purposes for which it is designed.

For many years you have been a liveryman of one of the City Com-
panies, have you not ?

Of the Stationers' Company.

You have a general idea, have you not, of the resources of the 12 large
Companies and of many of the other principal Companies ?

I have in a general way ; but I am not specially informed of the
details.

And are you of opinion that the appropriation of the money which
they have devoted, and any larger funds which they might devote, to
the development of technical education, not in London only, but in the
provinces, through their cerifral institution, is a wise and satisfactory
appropriation of any funds they have to spare, or any increment they
may herafter have to spare 1

I am quite of that opinion.

Do you think, having regard to the character of their charters and to
the fact that almost all of them were founded for the piirpose of assisting
trade operations, and remembering the extent to which the members of
the Companies are no longer members of the crafts to which their names
are attached, that this method of supporting technical education is
almost a cy-pres appropriation of their funds 1

It seems to me a perfectly legitimate appropriation of their funds, and
well calculated to promote the success of the industries with which they
are connected.

Are you aware that the annual contributions which the various Com-
panies make are made during the pleasure of those Companies ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 79

Yes, I am aware of that.

Do you think it would bo desirable that in some way, with the i^r \vm p
consent of the Companies, the contributions to technical education should Spottiswoodo,
be rendered more permanent ? President of

As a member of the Institute I should be exceedingly glad to see that *he.R°yal
done. e * "

And what would you say as a member of a Livery Company and as a
liveryman ?

My sympathies would be entirely in the same direction.

MR. JAMBS : The only question I would venture to ask is whether
you think that the general interests of science are most promoted by
grants of money, either from the State or public bodies of this cha-
racter, or by individual effort ; in other words, do you think — speak-
ing from your own experience — that scientific discovery or knowledge
of these special technical subjects is most promoted by individuals
relying upon their own exertions or by the expenditure of large sums of
money ?

That is a point on which a considerable difference of opinion exists.
Nor, perhaps, can it be answered in the same way for all branches of
scientific research ; in my opinion some investigations may be safely left
to individual effort ; others, from their magnitude, or from the length of
time during which the researches "must be continued, require external
support. But this is a question of science proper, and the remarks
which I have just made have no necessary application to the case of the
technical instruction here contemplated.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : Do you not think that technical education
for the day is, in some measure, an experiment 1

It is undoubtedly an experiment so far as this country is concerned.
It was not until a few years ago that foreign competition showed us
that our artisans were not the best in the world, and even then the
idea of technical instruction as one means of remedy did not immediately
present itself to the minds of employers or workmen. On comparing
other countries with our own, we found that we differed from them in
this element. The experiment then which we are trying is not whether
technical instruction can be grafted on industrial life, for this has been
tried, and successfully tried, elsewhere ; but whether the same method
which has succeeded elsewhere is applicable here.

Do you not think that sufficiently large sums of money have been put
into it, it being an experiment, for the time being, until it has more
thoroughly taken root 1

I cannot say that I agree with that view, because the undertaking
has already so far thriven that the Institute has found great difficulty in
meeting the many demands (and in the opinion of the Council legiti-
mate demands) made upon it, both in the metropolis and in other parts
of the country. The experiment could hardly be said to have a
fair trial if its operations were restricted to the present amount. The
grants to the Institute are, as said before, still at the pleasiire of the
Companies.

Have not the means been very much crippled by the building of
the museum or college at South Kensington ; would there not have been
ample means for trying all proper experiments if that building had not
been commenced at South Kensington ?

The Institute would certainly have had larger means at its disposal
for other parts of its 'scheme if the Central College had not been begun ;
but in the opinion of those charged with the undertaking that college
forms an integral and important element, and without it the scheme of
instruction would have been very incomplete.

80 EOTAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Wm. But you do not consider the building at South Kensington to be

Spottiawoode, adapted for the purpose, do you?

fhe lS°al °f l quite h°pe t0 tind that {i W1U be S0<

Society* ^ou canno^ reasonably expect that that building at South Kensington,

away from the homes of those for whom it is designed, will be of use
to the artisan and labouring classes, can you ?

I think it has been already explained that it was not expected that
llie artisans employed in the workshops would attend there. The
Central Institution at South Kensington is intended for managers of
works, engineers, industrial chemists, and others who have a desire for
superior education and instruction in the branches of their industry ; it
is not contemplated that the same class of workmen who attend the
Finsbury College and other like institutions would attend South Ken-
sington Museum, and therefore the distance from the centres of industry
is not expected prejudicially to affect the attendance of students at the
Central Institution.

What you have just quoted is not from the original prospectus of
South Kensington, but rather a revised or new idea as to the application
of the college at South Kensington, is it not 1

It states, as nearly as I remember, the present views of the Council
on the subject; and I am not aware that it is in any way at variance
with the original intention.

Do you not think that the present institutions now in existence, such
as the South Kensington Museum (where all those things are taught
which you are now going to teach at South Kensington) and the King's
College, and similar institutions all round and about the metropolis,
would have answered the purpose without your going to the extrava-
gance of erecting (at a cost of, I think, some 80,000?. or 90,000?.) this
building at South Kensington ?

The purposes of the Normal School of Science at South Kensington is
different from the purpose for which this Central Institution is intended,
— one being for purely scientific education, while the other has a more
direct bearing upon trades and the processes of manufacture.

But the processes of manufacture are promoted by these very schools ;
I suppose the analytical chemist will be really the most valuable student
you will get, because his knowledge will improve the profits of the
manufacture by new extracts, new colours, and new designs, will
it not?

There is no doubt that an expert chemist will be very valuable in a
large chemical factory ; but, short of the scientific member of such a
staff, there are overseers and foremen of different grades whose skill and
intelligence would be greatly improved by such instruction as we hope
to give at the Central Institution, and which would be different from
that which they could obtain at the Normal School of Science at South
Kensington.

If you had not commenced this building at South Kensington, would
you do so now ?

That is a question I cannot answer without more consideration ; but
I see no reason for thinking that we should not.

You would rather have the money in hand that the cost of that
building will put you to, for useful purposes, than have it in a building
and have to pay the enormous staff of professors and others that you will
be obliged to have there, would you not ?

I am not at all prepared to admit that.

You doubt its usefulness at South Kensington, do you not ?

No, I do not at all.

What class of engineers do you think of educating there ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 81

\Ve shall endeavour to adapt our courses, as far as possible, to the Mr. Wm.
requirements of those who come ; but, in general terms, we contemplate Spottiswoodc,
teaching the principles of applied mechanics, and the various branches President of
of electric science which form a large portion of the industrial activity
of the present time.

Do you contemplate having workshops at South Kensington 1

Workshops for teaching the principles and mode of construction of
things.

The same professors as are now at South Kensington would pass over
to your college, would they not 1

I do not see how this could be, as the whole time of the professors
and teachers at the Central Institute would be occupied in the work of
the Institute.

Would not many of the same staff do so 1

I imagine that their time is already fully occupied where they are.

Professor Huxley, for instance, comes over to you, does he not, and he
is very busy at South Kensington ?

He is not in any way connected with the City and Guilds Institute.

Is he not to be one of your professors 1 I thought the gentlemen who
were here last week mentioned his name in connection with it 1

He is not.

How many students do you calculate you can accommodate at South
Kensington ?

The number was calculated when the plans were drawn, but I do not
recollect it.

Of course the object of technical education is to teach what you would
call the artisan or lower class in particular, is it not?

We propose to teach the artisan, who is engaged in the ordinary parts
of manufacture at colleges, of which that at Finsbury is a type ; and at
South Kensington to educate the higher grades for overseers, &c., as
well as for training teachers.

For the education of professors and teachers, and men of that stamp ?

Not for teaching the technical subjects which we contemplate.

May I ask you what you mean by the word " technical " 1 I asked
one of the gentlemen here the other day (it is very uncertain in its
ramifications, I think). How would you yourself describe the word
" technical " 1

Definitions, unless very carefully considered, are always open to
criticism ; but I will try to illustrate my view of the question by an
example. The student at the Normal School of Science has to learn
the use of an instrument, and so much of its construction as will eriable
him to adjust it for his various experiments, and to know when it is in
order or out of order. The artisan ought to be able to construct the
instrument, to repair it if out of order, and to know when it is right.
What we hope to add to the knowledge of the artisan is this : The
ordinary artisan can construct the instrument from a given pattern, or
from working drawings ; but without these he can do little. Take the
case of a man of science, who has an instrument adapted to electric
currents of small strength or of low electro-motive force, and requires one
for currents of great strength or of high electro-motive force, the ordinary
workshop-instructed artisan is quite at a loss as to the proportions in
which the instrument should be altered for the new circumstances. We
hope to produce foremen and overseers with sufficient knowledge of the
principles of science, as well as of construction, to enable them to form
at least a fair estimate of the necessary differences in construction
between the instruments to which they have been accustomed and new
form required.

82 BOYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Wm. SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Will not the Central Institute bear the

Spottiswoot'e, same relation to tho technical schools in Finsbury and other places as a
President of higher school does to an olomcntary school, and would not the system
the Royal of technical education be incomplete if you had not the two grades of
Boflfa*' schools?

I am of that opinion.

The Drapers' Company did good service before the Commission in
upsetting the Firth and Beale insinuations as to probability of the grants to
the Technical Colleges being discontinued. Mr. Dalton's evidence was
thorough, and to the point, and completed the denials of everything
Firth and his associates had advanced detrimental to the Companies.
The Drapers' Company are more than generous contributors, as they
were among the very first promoters of the technical education move-
ment. They gave 10,000/. towards the erection of the Technical College
in Finsbury as early as 1877, in which year they voted 2000£. per annum
to the Technical Institute, which grant has been since munificently
increased to 4500/. per annum. The Companies' enemies, with the utter
want of principle and truth marking their every act, aimed to make it
appear that the support of the cause of technical education was a mere
fleeting one, but Mr. Dalton met the gross fabrication by a very forcible
and emphatic assurance that " the Drapers take great interest in the
" matter, and no doubt if funds are wanting, we shall be ready at any
" time with other Companies to come forward and supplement the funds."
Mr. Firth knew well the noble-hearted Drapers are the last men to with-
draw from any good work. Their whole history has been one of true
fraternity and love of the cause of the poor through long drawn-out ages.
Their charity expenditure is close upon 30,000/. per annum, and although
their actual income for expressed charitable purposes is a vast one, yet
it is insufficient to meet the desires of their big hearts, and they supple-
ment it considerably from their corporate income.

The falsehoods as to enormous costs of the management of the various
Companies' charities, promulgated so industriously by Firth and Beale,
and persisted in, notwithstanding every positive denial and proof to the
contrary, were well brought out by Mr. William Henry Dalton, who,
with Mr. John Eogers Jennings and Mr. W. P. Sawyer, represented
the Drapers' Company before the Commission. It was proved that five
per cent, was the cost to the charities. Thus much for the daring
falsehoods of the charities being eaten and drunk up by those whose
duty it was to rightly administer them.

The Salters' Company made a strong muster before the Commission,
its deputation consisting of Mr. Arthur Bowdler Hill, Mr. Frederick Le
Gros Clark, F.B.S. ; Mr. W. H. Eaton, M.P. ; Mr. Alderman Fowler,
M.P, ; and Mr. Lionel Scott, the Company's clerk. Mr. Clark was the
chief witness on the matters connected with the Irish Estates property
of the Company, a subject he had well mastered. He showed the
liberality of the Company in all its dealings with the people on the
estates, and that their charities and donations have always been given
entirely irrespective of religious creed. Indeed, this was clearly shown
to be the case with each of the Companies holding Irish properties.
Referring to Mr. Alderman Fowler's, M.P., presence before the Com-
mission, it is right that mention should bo made of the great services
he has at all times rendered to the various Companies, and which are
beyond estimate. As a loyal citizen and faithful ally he has ever been
ready to stand up fearlessly for the rights of the brethren.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 83

CHAPTER VI.

The old Guilds of London true examples of faithfulness — City Liveries' charitable
gifts evidences of their observing the doctrine of charity universal — Their
Charities administered at cost comparing favourably with any other statement
as to hospitals and general charities of London — The clerks of the various
City Companies deserving of honour for able discharge of duties — W. G.
Prideaux and Wm. Beckwith Towse examples of the great labour falling on
executive officers' — The Fishmongers' donations over a period of ten years
given as fair example of each of the various Companies proportionably
•with means— All the various Companies generous donors according to their
means

QUEEN VICTORIA'S Royal Commission to look into her London Livery Tlie old

Companies and see whether they had been slandered or not, has done Guilds of Lon-

great good as placing these noble old institutions before the world's eye don true

as the embodiment of faithfulness. If we had permission to demand examples of

from the Creator some power of merit which the world has not yet fully faitnfulness-

acquired or even measured, but of which the need is most pressing, it

would be faithfulness. Is it not a virtue which our time greatly needs 1

Let us not dispute with St. Paul, when he says, " the greatest of all is

charity," but let us confess that charity must indeed be a rare form of

excellence if it can surpass the heart dreamed of by St. John as having

been faithful unto death. St. John's statue of faithfulness is a noble

one. It was a defect of Greek sculpture that its marbles stood chiefly

for physical perfection, and not for the highest forms of mental finish.

The Venus, the Apollo at least, were expected to recall all the physical

loveliness of mankind. It is an excellence of modem art that it aims

to picture ideal truths as well as ideal forms, and were it to carve or

paint an image of Fidelity, and were it to do justice to the subject, we

should see a work of amazing beauty. When we pause to pass before

us the attractive qualities of image, we see a procession long and noble

as some of those pictured upon old wall or frieze of Roman temple.

Beauty, conversation, taste, music, festivity, worship, science, and poetry

are in the great collection ; but there is one form of human greatness

that is not seen often enough in our groups of great ideals — that form is

the being over which may be written the words, " Faithful unto Death."

The principle acted out by the old charities of the London Liveries, The City
as evidenced from their wondrous list of charities extorted from them Liveries' char i»
through this Commission, should be an antidote to the doctrine of modern dencef of thd "•
aunexors and spoliators who cry " Every man for himself." The Firth observing the
and Beale type might say : If there be [only room for one in the life-boat, doctrine of
get in yourself ! If there be a burden to bear, supervise other men while chanty uni-
they shoulder it. You be the digit and other people the ciphers on the ver'
right-hand side, nothing in themselves, but augmenting you ! The London
Livery Charities seem to proclaim the opposite of that selfish theory, and
to hug St. Paul's blessed words, " Bear ye one another's burdens, and so '
fulfil the law of Christ." No one escapes burdens ; they come down on
both shoulders, on the heart, and on the head. St. Paul proposed to

o 2

KOYAL COMMISSION.

The City
Liveries'
Charities ad-
ministered at
a cost com-
paring most
favourably
with any
other.

Statement as
to Hospitals
and General
Cbarities of
London.

split them up into fragments. You take part of mine and I will take
part of yours, and all of us part of each other's load. The temple of
Baalbcc had built into its wall three stones at a height of twenty feet,
each of the stones weighing eleven hundred tons. The machinery by
which that immense heft was lifted is among the lost arts. But there is
a machinery which will yet lift a vaster and heavier tonnage of the
world's burden off the great suffering heart of the race, and it is the
spirit of helpfulness such as we see displayed in the sympathetic charities
of London's ancient City Guilds.

"NVho can adequately estimate the good that the London City Liveries
have wrought in the metropolis, by their examples of thrift and
wiso economy of management, uniformly exemplified through the
many generations that have existed since the days of their earliest
incipiency. It is a part of the scheme of the Companies' enemies to
pretend that the cost of management is excessive, albeit though when
making this assertion the fabricators know that it, in common with their
other charges, is the reverse of truth. Without fear of contradiction, it
can be asserted they stand alone and unexampled in economic management,
judging on the true basis of net amount actually distributed out of a
given gross income. The cost of administration of other charities is in
many instances excessive, and generally largely in favour of those
controlled by the Livery Companies. Indeed, without more security
than the public now has for the possession by the crowd of London
charities of any just title to exist, the stream of pecuniary benevolence
towards deserving objects may not unlikely gradually cease to flow.
Already through this cause, in a large degree, various institutions, of
whose charitable solvency there can be no question, have begun to find
the current run slower. Several of the great hospitals so indispensable
to humanity that if voluntary funds were permanently withheld public
funds would have to be supplied, have had to curtail their usefulness
consequent on diminution of their incomes. According to an admirably
classified statement of the Metropolitan Charities, compiled by Mr. W. Y.
Howe, the approximate income of the Metropolitan Charitable Institutions
for 1883-4 are arrived at. It appears that a total of 1013 charitable
institutions in London enjoy an income of 4,447,436/. There are four
Bible and 14 book and tract societies, which possess betAveen them an
income of 288,981?., while 92 home and foreign missions have a revenue
of 1,572,599/. Six church and chapel building funds have an income
of 31,483/., while 46 charities for the blind, deaf and dumb, incurables,
and idiots enjoy between them 160, 451/. a year. The 17 general
hospitals in London have an income. of 341, 896/., and the 73 special
hospitals make up, with the former, a revenue for the London hospitals
of 601, 433?. Dispensaries and convalescent institutions are credited
with an income of 95,236?. Coming to pensions and institutions for
the aged, there are 158 of these charities, with a revenue of 435,7 101.
Other institutions for general relief, loans, &c., possess 323,021?. per
annum. The remaining charitable institutions, consisting of homes,
orphanages, and reformatory and educational societies, contribute to
swell the total of nearly four millions and a half annually spent on
chanty in the metropolis. These astounding figures should be pondered
on by all who desire interest in the cause of the alleviation of human
suffering. The good deeds of the charitable men who, in the days when
the population of London was not one-twentieth what it now is, founded
our noble City Companies, have proved a good example. Probably no
such action in modern or other times ever germinated into such quick
and widespread production. It has been well said that the amount of
good done, and of real suffering and undeserved want relieved by these

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 85

charities is very great ; and as a proof that they are administered with W.G.Prideaux
care and discrimination, and so as not to weaken the spirit of self- of Goldsmiths'
dependence, it is understood that the number of members of some of the ^J]fn ^ Beckf"
Companies of this class who apply for assistance has been for some time Fishmongers'
gradually diminishing. It can advisedly be declared that it would have Companies,
been well for the metropolitan charities generally if the marvellous examples of
exhibit of the detailed distribution of the Livery Companies' benefactions |h® gre^tii-
had been earlier made public. Great good cannot fail to result from the on executive"
divulgence, through the Roj'al Commission, of the extraordinary care and officers of tho
more than discretion used by the various Liveries in their application of the various
funds at their disposal. It must have sorely taxed the executive officers Companies,
of the various Companies to prepare and lay befure their respective courts
such lists of marvellously well-selected objects as the veterans "W. G.
Prideaux of the Goldsmiths', and William Beckwith Towse of the Fish-
mongers' sent forth, year after year, through a long vista of periods,
as the adoption of their Companies.

All honour to the gentlemen officiating as Clerks to the various City Extremely
Companies, and who, in compiling the complex and complete returns ren-
derecl to the Commission, show how faithfully and zealously they perform
their duties. The salaries of these able officers are shown to be in every
instance most moderate, and in many cases much below their deserving,
and certainly far less than is paid to the executive officers of Railways,
Banks and Insurance Companies to gentlemen of their ability and standing.

The second secret and confidential circular issued with intent to
damage the Companies refers to them as jealous of each other. No such
unworthy feeling on the part of the wealthier, or even the poorest and
humblest of the whole hundred of the fraternities, will be felt in the
selection of the Fishmongers' list for publicity in this volume. It is
made in their one and all same good cause, as exemplifying the fairest
and truest illustration of the acts of each and every one of the Companies
that can in justice to all be laid before the world. Proportionately with
their incomes, it can be declared that each, from the richest to the
poorest, has exercised the same wise selections of channels for flow of
their bounties, and therefore, according to degree, each has done its
share of good.

Yast and inconceivable as are the needs for charitable purposes in our
modem Babel, yet there is cause of great thankfulness for the response,
yielded as it is relatively by only a few of those who are blessed in the
will to contribute. Recent times have pressed heavily on the con-
tributors to benevolent purposes, and economy in subscriptions is as easy
as dispensing with men-servants or the " putting down " horses and
carriages. But, while the charitable funds of London have not lately
increased, or, at all events, have not multiplied after their usual rate,
they remain happily at a point which shows that no resistance damps
the good cause, and that by one device or another they can be made to
force an entrance into all but the stoniest hearts.

The writer of this Vindication of the good old Liveries begs to reiterate The writer's
that he does not recognize the term " Minor Companies." He regards the devotion to
poorest as of equal importance with the richest in this struggle with the go^ii"^0 °
enemy. The one in the possession of "greater goods " realizes, he trusts « jflinor
and believes, the larger responsibility and duty attaching to these God's Companies.''
gifts. The enemy's tares seek to create jealousies, but the honourable,
right-minded Liveryman will acknowledge that in selecting the Fish-
mongers' lists of public donations over a period of ten years the writer
has been animated by none other than laudable desire to place same before
the world as a fair and just illustration of that blessed spirit of charity
universal which he believes to rule and govern the hearts of all.

86 BOYAL COMMISSION.

FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN ENGLAND.

IN 1870.

£ s. dt
.Tii n. 14 Association for the Welfare of the Blind, 210, Oxford

Street 10 10 0

Royal Alfred Merchant Seamen's Institution, Erith . . 52 10 0

Saint Luke's Schools (Whitfield) Tabernacle . . . . 26 5 0

British Home for Incurables, Claphnm Rise .... 105 0 0

Feb. 10 John Rhys (Exhibitioner) 21 0 0

King Edward's Ragged Schools and Refuge for Girls, Spital-

fields 21 0 0

Deptford Soup Kitchen 30 0 0

Mar. 11 Asylum for Idiots, Earlswood 105 0 0

East London Mission and Relief Society, Adelphi . . . 52 10 0

Parochial Mission Women's Society, Cockspur Street . . 52 10 0

April 8 Finsbury Dispensary 21 0 0

School for Sailors' Children, Whitechapel . . . . 21 0 0

Sufferers by loss of the Alexandra lugger on Goodwin Sands . 30 0 0

Saint Anne's Schools, Wandsworth 26 5 0

London Hospital 210 0 0

May R Workmen's Trains Metropolitan Association . . . . 21 0 0

June 10 London Fever Hospital, Liverpool Road 105 0 0

All Saints' Church, Walworth 50 0 0

Sailors' Homes in the United Kingdom and Colonies . . 52 10 0

July 16 Saint Mary's, Whitechapel, Ragged School . . . . 20 0 0

British Asylum for Deaf and Dumb, Clapton . . . . 25 0 0

Saint Michael's Ragged Schools, Lant Street, Borough . . 21 0 0

Aug. 2 Royal Naval School, New Cross 52 10 0

„ 24 Frederick Mace (Doggett's Wager accident) . . . 110
Sept. 29 National Society for Aid to the Sick and Wounded by the War

between France and Germany 210 0 0

„ 30 Little Boys' Home, Farningham 52 10 0

Sufferers by the fire at Constantinople . . . . . 52 10 0
Bishop of Rochester's fund for erecting churches, &c., &c., in

districts of Barking, Woolwich, and Greenwich . . 105 0 0
Oct. 13 Captain Relief Fund, for the relief of widows, &c., of those

drowned on board H.M.S. Captain off Cape Finisterre . 105 0 0
„ 20 Distressed peasantry of France through the war . . . 210 0 0
Nov. 11 Deaf and Dumb Association, 309, Regent Street . . . 21 0 0
Saint John's Schools, Walworth (Rev. G. T. Cotham) . . 50 0 0
Dec. 8 Refugees' Benevolent Fund, 30, King Street, Cheapside . . 105 0 0
National Industrial Home for Crippled Boys, Kensington . 100 0 0
Royal Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, City Road . . 21 0 0
Rev. J. E. Austen Leigh, towards expenses incurred by him on
cottage allotments on Company's land opposite Jesus Hos-
pital, Bray 20 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall, 251. each 50 0 0
To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Greenwich
and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Marylebone,
Southwark, Thames, Westminster, Worship Street, and

Wandsworth and Hammersmith Police Courts, 20Z. each . 220 0 0

2,454 11 0
Annual subscriptions 169 12 0

£2,624 3 0

L\ 1871.

Jan. 13 Great Northern Hospital, Caledonian Road . . . . 100 0 0
Walworth Road Schools in Vowlcr Street . . . . 25 0 0

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 87

[Fishmongers' Donations.'] £ s. d.
Jan. 13 North London or University College Hospital, for the use of

patients suffering from Skin Diseases .... 105 0 0
Industrial Home for Crippled Boys at Kensington (in addition

to 100Z. in 1870) 110 0 0

Feb. 10 Mansion House French Relief Fund 315 0 0

Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, 39, Charing Cross . . 105 0 0
Westminster Memorial Refuge for Female Convicts, in con.

nection with the Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society . . 105 0 0
Cripples' Home and Female Refuge, Northumberland House,

Marylebonc Road . . . 210 0 0

City of London Volunteer Fund 100 0 0

City Orthopaedic Hospital, Hatton Garden . . . . 21 0 0

Mar. 10 Royal Infirmary for Children and Women, 51, Waterloo Road 25 0 0
Hospital for Sick Children, 49, Great Ormond Street, Queen's

Square 62 10 0

Post Office Orphan Home Institution 21 0 0

Wandsworth Benevolent Society . . . . . . 10 0 0

British Lying-in Hospital, Endell Street, Saint Giles' . . 21 0 0

April 14 Mariners' Friend Society, 172, High Street, Wapping . . 21 0 0

Royal Asylum of Saint Anne's Society School, Stroatham . 52 10 0

National Schools of Saint Michael's Mission, Woolwich . . 52 10 0

School of Discipline, Queen's Road West Chelsea . . . 25 0 0
Artists' General Benevolent Institution for the Education of

the Orphan Children of Artists 25 0 0

May 12 British and Foreign Sailors' Society, Mercers Street, Slmdwell 52 10 0

Lock Hospital and Asylum, Westbourne Green . . . 52 10 0
Railway Benevolent Institution for the Relief of Railway

Officers and Servants, 123, Seymour Street . . . 25 0 0

Provident Clerks' Benevolent Fund, 15, Moorgate Street . 50 0 0
Society for the Relief of Distressed Widows applying within

One Month of their Widowhood, 32, Sackville Street . 21 0 0

Working Men's Club and Institute Union, 150, Strand . . 52 10 0

June 9 Royal Maternity Charity, 31, Finsbury Square . . . 52 10 0

National Hospital for Consumption, Ventnor, Isle of Wight . 84 0 0

July 14 New schools in connection with the Wesleyan Chapel at

Barking 26 5 0

Church Schoolmasters' and Mistresses' Benevolent Institution . 10 0 0
St. Michael's Free Mission and Schools, church and district,

Lant Street, Southwark 25 0 0

National Sanatorium for Consumption and Diseases of the

Chest at Bournemouth 50 0 0

Sept. 29 City of London Ragged Schools 26 5 0

Infirmary for Epilepsy and Paralvsis, Charles Street, Portmau

Square . . . . " . . . . . . . 26 5 0

Oct. 13 Sufferers by the extensive fire at Chicago .... 262 10 0

Charing Cross Hospital . ...... 105 0 0

„ 16 Camden Town School for Girls . . . . . . 105 0 0

Nov. 10 West India hurricane . . . . . . . . 52 10 0

Dec. 15 Ragged and Industrial Schools, Maida Hill . . . . 10 10 0

Refuges for Homeless and Destitute Children, Queen Street,

Holborn 52 10 0

Saint Stephen's, Wai worth, for a parsonage house . . . 21 0 0

Walworth Road Chaptl — repairs 50 0 0

Friendly Female Society 52 10 0

Saint Andrew's Waterside Mission Chui-ch at Gravesend . 100 0 0

Saint Michael, Nunhead, towards infant school . . . 10 10 0

Ragged Schools, Wilkes Street, Spitalfields . . . . 10 10 0

„ 21 Waiters employed in the City . . . . . . 550

Persian Famine Relief Fund . 105 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall, 251.

each 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Greenwich,
Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Marylebone,
Southwark, Thames, Westminster, Worship Street, and

Wandsworth and Hammersmith Police Courts, 201. each . 220 0 0

3,268 0 0

Annual subscriptions . . 211 2 0

£3,479 2 0

88 ROYAL COMMISSION.

FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN 1872.

£ s. d.

Jan. 11 Home for Consumptive Females, 50, Gloucester Place, Port-
man Square 25 0 0

London Female Preventive and Reformatory Institution,

200, Euston Rond 21 0 0

Saint Mary's Hospital, Piuldington 100 0 0

Female Missions to the Fallen, Ac., 24, Now Street, Spring

Gardens . . . . 52 10 0

Feb. 8 Discharged Female Prisoners' Aid Society, Wandsworth

Road, Vanxhall 52 10 0

North Eastern Hospital for Children, Hackney Road . . 52 10 0

Saint Mark's Hospital for Fistula, &c., City Road . . 52 10 0
Mar. 21 Society for Supplying Home Teachers and Books to enable

the Blind to Read the Scriptures, Fleet Street, E.G. . 25 0 0

Saint Paul's Cathedral, towards Completion Fund . . 1,000 0 0

April 11 Wesleyan Chapel near Soutbend, towards building . . 50 0 0
City of London Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, Victoria

Park 105 0 0

Loss of a fishing boat, near Penzance, towards making good

the same 10 10 0

Royal Alfred Aped Merchant Seamen's Institution, Belvidere 105 0 0

May 9 Saint Mark's, Walworth, towards building a church . . 52 10 0

British Medical Benevolent Fund, Upper Berkeley Street . 26 5 0

Sailors' Orphan Girls' School and Home, Hampstead . . 52 10 0

Royal Free Hospital, Gray's Inn Road 105 0 0

St. Peter's Orphan Home, Isle of Thanet . . . 200 0 0

Juno 13 London General Porters' Benevolent Fund . . . . 52 10 0

Mayo Memorial Fund 50 0 0

Planting and improvement of Wandsworth Common . . 10 10 0

Marine Society, Bishopsgate Street ..... 105 0 0

„ 27 Harriet Ann Wilson 20 0 0

July 11 City of London Industrial School, Bisley, Surrey . . . 105 0 0

Thames Church Mission 25 0 0

Home for Confirmed Invalids, South House, Highbury Park

South 21 0 0

Saint .Michael's Free Mission Churches and Schools, Lant

Street, Borough 21 0 0

London Hospital, Whitechapel, first instalment of 5001. . 100 0 0
Aug. 8 Metropolitan Dispensary, 9, Fore Street . . . . 52 10 0
Oct. JO Evelina Hospital for Sick Children, Southwark Bridge Road 52 10 0
Sarah Rose Spencer, grant to enable her to take up her free-
dom 200

Nov. 14 Gentlewomen's Self-help Institute, Baker Street, Portmau

Square 25 0 0

Harleian Society, Clifton, Brighouse . . . . • 550

Dec. 11 City Orthopedic Hospital, Hatton Garden . . . . 21 0 0
British Nursing and Training School, Cambridge Place, Pad-

dington . . . . 50 0 0

Italian Inundation Relief Fund (Mansion House) . . . 105 0 0

Tothepoor'sboxesattheMansionHouseandGuildhall.25Z.each 50 0 0
To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Green-
wich and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Mary-
lebone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, Worship
Street, and Wandsworth and Hammersmith Police

Courts, 20Z. each 220 0 0

„ 19 British and Foreign School Society, Borough Road . . 105 0 0

Family of the late Mr. Thomas Young, professional singer . 500

3,291 0 0

Annual subscriptions 201 2 0

£3,492 2 0

IN 1873.

Jan. 1C National Orphan Home, Ham Common .... 105 0 0

Alexandra Orphanage for Infants 105 0 0

Orphan Working School, Haverstock Hill .... 105 0 0

Royal National Lifeboat Institution 105 0 0

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 89

[Fishmongers' Donations.] £ #. d.

Jan 17 National Training School for Music 50 0 0

Feb. 13 Infant Nursery, St. John's, Wai worth 21 0 0

City Dispensary, 46, Watling Street 26 5 0

University College Hospital 105 0 0

Stepney Parish Church, Restoration Fund . . . . 26 5 0

National Institution and Homo for Ladies, Netting Hill Square 25 0 0

„ 20 London Homoeopathic Hospital, Great Ormond Street . . 52 10 0
Mar. 13 Shipwrecked Mariners' Society, Hibernia Chambers, London

Bridge 5000

Royal Medical Benevolent College, Soho Square, towards

establishing four free medical scholarships . . . 52 10 0

Saint George's Hospital, Hyde Park Corner .... 105 0 0
Proposed Soldiers' Home and Mission Hall Woolwich

Garrison . ' 100 0 0

Society for Encouragement of Arts, &c , John Street,

Adelphi, towards their technological examinations . 52 10 0

Harrietsham School, house repairs 10 10 0

Billingsgate and Thames Street Mission . . . . 10 10 0
April 10 Chapel Building Fund of the Royal National Hospital for

Consumption, Ventnor . . • 52 10 0

All Saints' National Schools, Walworth .... 100 0 0
Pure Literature Society for Working Men's Libiai'ies, 11,

Buckingham Street, W.C 52 10 0

„ 17 London Hospital, Whitechapel, Building Fuud . . . 500 0 0
Society for the Protection of Women and Children, 99,

Strand 25 0 0

May 8 North London Consumption Hospital, Hampstead, &c. . . 52 10 0

Mr. Parker, to further his pursuits in the anatomy of fishes 50 0 0

Also 20J. per annum for three years.

June 12 Metropolitan and City Police Orphanage .... 105 0 0

Bucking Schools, near Hollingbourne, Kent . . . . 52 10 0

Poplar Hospital for Accidents, East India Road . . . 52 10 0
East London Hospital for Children and Dispensary for

Women, Ratcliffe Cross 105 0 0

Hospital for Hip Diseases in Childhood, 18, Queen Square . 52 10 0

Relief of sufferers by fishing calamities on coast of Galway . 20 0 0

Mrs. Gladstone's Convalescent Home, Woodford . . . 100 0 0
„ 25 London Hospital, second annual instalment on account of

grant of 5001 100 0 0

July 10 Saint Mary's Church, Newington, towards the rebuilding . 52 10 0
For providing larger boats, &c., for fishermen of the Islands

of Boffin, &c. . ' 50 0 0

College of Saint Columba, Rathfarnham, Dublin . . . 105 0 0
Saint Michael's Free Mission Churches and Schools, Borough,

S.E 25 0 0

Sea-side Convalescent Hospital, Seaford . . . . 52 10 0

Aug. 1 King's College Hospital . 105 0 0

London Diocesan Penitentiary, Highgate .... 105 0 0
Lord Lawrence, for expenses of lectures to be given on tech-

nical subjects to the boys of various schools in London . 10 10 0

London Philanthropic Society 550

Oct. 9 Saint James' Church, Kennington Park Road . . . 52 10 0

Dec. 11 Steam Lifeship Fund, 21, Ashley Place, Victoria Street . 52 10 0

London Cabmen's Mission, 43, Marchinont Street . . 52 10 0
Towards a boat slip at Shank Island and a pier at Boffin

Island, Galway, Ireland 25 0 0

City kitchen (extra) 550

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall,

251. each 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street,Clerkenwell, Greenwich
and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Mary-
lebone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, Worship
Street, and Wandsworth and Hammersmith Police

Courts, 201. each . 220 0 0

3,495 10 0

Annual subscriptiona 263 12 0

2 0

ROYAL COMMISSION.

FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN 1874. £ ,<?. d.

Jan. 15 Trowint Industrial Homo, Mare Street, Hackney, E. . . 26 5 0
St. Saviour's Church for Deaf and Dumb, Oxford Street, W. 25 0 0
Royal Seamen's and Marines' Orphan Schools and Female

Orphan Home, Portsmouth, Building Fund . . . 100 0 0
Infant Nursery in connection with St. John's National

Schools, Wai worth 21 0 0

Baths and washhouses for East London .... 100 0 0

Benjamin Dobell — late a tenant 500

Feb. 12 York Street Chapel, Wai worth, Renovation Fund. . . 100 0 0
Royal Norman College and Academy for Music for the Blind,

Upper Norwood 105 0 0

Royal Architectural Museum, Tufton Street, S.W. . . 52 10 0

Finsbury Dispensary 26 5 0

„ 19 Bengal Famine Relief Fund . . " 200 0 0

Mar. 13 London Cabmen's Benevolent Association, King's Cross

Circus 52 10 0

Ragged School Shoe-black Society (Central) . . . 52 10 0
April 9 Home for Little Boys, 78, Cheapside, and Farningham, for-
merly at Tottenham 52 10 0

Miss Rye's Emigration Home, Peckham . . . . 52 10 0

Royal Naval School, New Cross 52 10 0

Royal Humane Society, Trafalgar Square .... 105 0 0
Royal British Female Orphan Asylum for the Female
Orphans of Sailors, Soldiers, Marines, and others con-
nected with Her Majesty's Service, Devonport . . 50 0 0

Benevolent Society of Blues i 6 5 0

„ 16 Thames Inundation Relief Fund 2G 5 0

May 14 Borough Jewish Schools, Heygate Street (towards enlarging

same) 50 0 0

Royal National Hospital for Consumption and Diseases of

the Chest. Ventnor 105 0 0

Tenby Quay Mission ( Fishermen's reading-room) . . . 21 0 0
,, 22 Newnham College (late Merton College), for the Higher

Education of Women 105 0 0

Girton College, Cambridge, for the Higher Education of

Women 100 0 0

Widows and orphans of the Grimsby Deep Sea Fishermen
who were lost on the Dogger Bank on the 8th of March

1874 26 5 0

Owen Jones' Memorial Fund. ..... 21 0 0

June 11 Soldiers' Daughters' Home, Hampstead ... 52 10 0

National Training School of Cookery .... 25 0 0

With a prize of 5Z. for the best suggestions for

cooking fish, &c.

St. Mark's Church, Victoria Docks, towards building new
church and school . .......

Friendly Female Society . .

Surgical Aid Society

17 Dr. William Kitchen Parker, F.R.S., annual grant of 201. for
three years, to enable him to continue his researches in
the anatomy of fishes . . . . . . . 20 0 0

,, 21 London Hospital, third annual instalment on account of

grant of 5001 100 0 0

„ 25 Woolwich Watermen's Sailing Barge Match .... 110

Dr. Sedgwick Saunders' Testimonial Fund . . . . 550

July 9 Home for Confirmed Invalids, Highbury, N 21 0 0

Royal Orthopaedic Institution, Oxford Street . . . 50 0 0
Saint Michael's Free Mission Churches and Schools, &c.,

Lant Street, Borough 31 10 0

Widow and family of the late Mr. Brooks, foreman of works

during rebuilding of warehouse at Old Swan Wharf . 10 0 0
Aug. 4 Rev. William Frederick Witts, towards erecting a new school

at North Woolwich 25 0 0

Metropolitan Drinking Fountain and Cattle Trough As-
sociation 25 0 0

Metropolitan Convalescent Institution . . . . . 26 5 0

Lock Hospital 52 10 0

British Hospital for Diseases of the Skin, Great Marlborough

Street 21 0 0

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 91

[Fishmongers' Donations.^ £ s. d.

Aug. 4 Fishmongers' and Poulterers' Institution, Wood Green . 62 10 0
Mr. Brady, on behalf of twelve orphans and three widows,

whose husbands wore drowned off Arran Islands . . 10 0 0
Sept. 24 Provident Surgical Appliance Society, 37, Great Ormond

Street 550

Working Men's Club and Institute Union, 150, Strand, W.C. 25 0 0
Nov. 12 St. Peter's Orphan Home, Isle of Thanet, towards the liqui-
dation of the debt on the building 100 0 0

Saint Mary's Church, Newington, Surrey, towards rebuilding 52 10 0
Teddington Cottage Hospital . . . . . . . 26 5 0

Whitechapel Church Kebuilding Fund 100 0 0

Kegent's Park Explosion Fund 52 10 0

Dec. 10 Towards building a New Hawkstone Hall in Westminster

Bridge Road, for the benefit of the working classes . 105 0 0
Eoyal Naval Benevolent Society, 18, Adam Street, Adelphi,

W.C 105 0 0

Servants' Training Institution, 63, High Street, Clapham . 25 0 0
Billingsgate and Thames Street Mission (per Miss Hard-
castle) . 10 10 0

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall,

25/. each 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Green-
wich and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street,
Marylebone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, Worship
Street and Wandsworth and Hammersmith Police

Courts, 20Z. each 220 0 0

„ 17 Wandsworth Benevolent Fund 10 0 0

3,179 16 0
Annual subscriptions . 191 2 0

£3,370 18 0

IN 1875.

Jan. 14 Chelsea Hospital for Women, 178, Kings' Road, Chelsea . 25 0 0
Training ships, Chichester and Arethusa, for Destitute

Boys 105 0 0

Feb. 18 Merchant Seamen's Orphan Asylum 105 0 0

Patriarch of Antioch, towards expenses of visit . . . 21 0 0

Asylum for Fatherless Children, Reedham, near Croytlou . 105 0 0

Home for Crippled Boys, towards building new wing . . 100 0 0

Congregational Church, Wandsworth 52 10 0

Annuitants' Home for Gentlewomen, Wandsworth . . 25 0 0
Royal South London Ophthalmic Hospital, St. George's Circus,

S.E 52 10 0

Mar. 11 Dr Wm. Kitchen Parker, F.R.S., second annual payment . 20 0 0

April 15 Home for Female Orphans, Grove Road, St. John's Wood . 52 10 0
Bedford College, York Road, Portman Square, late Bedford

Square .... 105 0 0

Royal Normal College and Academy of Music for the Blind 105 0 0
St. Peter's Orphan Home, Isle of Thanet, towards building

infirmary 50 0 0

North London Hospital for Consumption and Diseases of the

Chest, Tottenham Court Road and Hampstead . . 52 10 0
Railway Guards' Universal Friendly Society, &c., in Birk-

beck Institution, Chancery Lane 10 10 0

Ann Hopwood, grant as late laundress 10 10 0

June 17 Harrietsham School premises, towards enlarging same . 25 0 0

Working Men's College, 45, Great Ormond Street . . 52 10 0
Royal Cambridge Asylum for Soldiers' Widows, 40, Charing

Cross 52 10 0

Invalid Asylum for Respectable Females, Stoke Newington 25 0 0
National Benevolent Institution, 65, Southampton Row . 52 10 0
Church of England Scripture Readers' Association, 56, Hay-
market 31 10 0

Royal Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, City Road . . 105 0 0

92 ROYAL COMMISSION.

[Fishmongers' Donations.] £ t. d.

June 17 Association for the Oral Instruction of the Deaf and Dumb,

12, Fitzroy Square 52 10 0

Saint Michael's Free Mission Chui'ches and Schools, Lant

Street, Borough 30 0 0

Royal Female Philanthropic Society, Great Church Lane,

Hammersmith 105 0 0

Gardeners' Royal Benevolent Institution . . . . 10 10 0
,, 25 London Hospital, fourth annual instalment on account of

grant of 5001 100 0 0

July 8 In aid of the sufferers by the late floods in France . . 105 0 0
Aug. 12 City of London Hospital for Consumption and Diseases of

the Chest, Victoria Park 105 0 0

Royal School for Daughters of Officers of the Army, 22,

Cockspur Street ... > 52 10 0

Towards the Relief of the Distressed in Iceland . . . 25 0 0
City of London Volunteer Rifle Rangers' Fund, per Captain

Grey 21 0 0

,, 18 Rev. H. J. Carver, grant to enable him to take his M.A.

degree, he being formerly a Holt scholar . . . 20 0 0

Oct. 21 City Orthopedic Hospital, Hatton Garden ... . 21 0 0

Dec. 16 Finsbury Dispensary, Brewer Street, Clerkenwell . . 25 0 0

Provident Clerks' Benevolent Fund, 15, Moorgate Street . 105 0 0

Working Men's Club and Institute Union, 150, Strand, W.C. 25 0 0

Hampstead Female Reformatory 50 0 0

Artisans' Benevolent Fund for the Technical Classes, 4,

Trafalgar Square 26 5 0

Great Northern Hospital, King's Cross 52 10 0

Coburg Homes for Orphans and Destitute Girls, Elsham

Road, Kensington 25 0 0

Missionary Fund for the town of Barking . . . . 2100
Royal Association in Aid of the Deaf and Dumb, 272, Oxford

Street 52 10 0

Surgical Aid Society 2100

London and Dover Female Convalescent Home, Dover, Mrs.

Marsham 26 5 0

Association for Promoting the Welfare of the Blind, 211,

Oxford Street 26 5 0

Hospital for Diseases of the Throat, Golden Square . . 26 5 0
To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall, 2ol.

each 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at the Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Green-
wich and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street,

Marylebone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, and

Worship Street, 20/. each 200 0 0

2,720 10 0
Annual subscriptions 223 3 0

£2,943 13 0

1st 1876.

Jan. 13 Marine Society's ship Warspite burnt 50 0 0

Feb. 17 Home and Colonial School Society 52 10 0

St. Mary's Hospital, Paddington 105 0 0

Trewint Industrial Home, Mare Street, Hackney . . . 21 0 0

National Hospital for Diseases of the Heart and Paralysis . 25 0 0

Gentlewomen's Establishment, Harley Street . . . 52 10 0

St. Joseph's Home, Bournemouth (Miss Zuluata) . . . 52 10 0
St. Paul's Cathedral, Bell No. 9, bearing name and arms of

Company 210 0 0

Towards the support of a City Missionary for Billingsgate . 50 0 0

British Home for Incurables, Clapham Rise .... 100 0 0
St. Alban's Abbey Restoration Fund, 2101. (in four annual

payments of 521. 10s. each) 52 10 0

Mar. 9 London Hospital, Queen's fund for new wing . . . 210 0 0
„ 25 Dr. William Kitchen Parker, F.R.S., third and last annual

grant . . . . . . . . 20 0 0

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 03

[Fishmongers? Donations."] £ s. d.

April 20 Benevolent Friends' Society 31 10 0

Ramsgate Sailors' Home and Mission Church . . . 52 10 0

Lambeth School of Art 25 0 0

Commercial Travellers' School, Pinner 105 0 0

St. John's Church, Walworth, for a second curate . . . 21 0 0

Earlswood Asylum for Idiots 105 0 0

British and Foreign School Society ..... 105 0 0

London Aged Christian Society 26 5 0

June 15 City of London Truss Society 52 10 0

Sheriff's Fund Society to aid discharged prisoners . . 10 10 0
St. Michael's Mission Churches and Schools, Lant Street,

Borough 31 10 0

Towards building a Day and Sunday School at Barking . 50 0 0

Princess Mary's Village Homes at Addleatone . . . 31 10 0

King's College Hospital 52 10 0

„ 22 Society for Organizing Charitable Relief and Repressing

Mendicity . . 52 10 0

British Medical Benevolent Society . . . . 52 10 0

Cornwall Reformatory Ship 105 0 0

24 London Hospital, fifth annual instalment on account of grant

of 5001 100 0 0

Aug. 1 Westminster Training School and Home for Nurses . . 105 0 0

„ 10 Wandsworth Presbyterian Chapel. . . . . . 52 10 0

British and Foreign Sailors' Society, Shadwell . . . 52 10 0
Metropolitan Drinking Fountain and Cattle Trough As-
sociation 25 0 0

Gentlewomen's Self-help Institute, Harley Street . 25 0 0
Oct. 19 Dr. W. Moon, of Brighton, toaid him in circulating embossed

books in various languages among the blind . . . 100 0 0

Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich (late Dreadnought) . . 52 10 0

Thames International Regatta . . . . . . 10 10 0

Dec. 21 Book Society, Paternoster Row 26 5 0

Workmen's Institute and Hall for the Poor at the East End,

in St. Mark's, Bow 25 0 0

Refuge for Deserted Mothers and their Infants, 35, Great

Coram Street 26 5 0

The Destitute Children's Dinner Society . . . . 21 0 0
Professorship of History in the University of Cambridge, en.

dowment of, in memory of the late Bishop Thirlwall . 52 10 0

Girton College, Cambridge, Building Fund .... 105 0 0

National Institute and Home for Ladies, Netting Hill Square 25 0 0

London Female Penitentiary . . . . . . 52 10 0

City Volunteer Rifle Rangers' Fund 10 10 0

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall,

25J.~each. 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Greenwich
and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Maryle-
bone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, and Worship

Street, 20Z. each 200 0 0

„ 22 Henry Torrens Kenny, late scholar of Holt School, for the
purchase of books, he having been elected to a Sizarship

of St. John's College, Cambridge 10 0 0

3,037 15 0

Annual Subscriptions 202 3 0

£3,239 18 0

IN 1877.

Jan. 3 Martha Sarah Jackson, grant as a late tenant at Holt . 500

Feb. 22 " George Moore " Memorial Fund, for establishing scholar

ships for boys in elementary schools
Walworth Road Infant Schools
Fishmongers' and Poulterers' Institution

( Being amount granted June 15th, 1876, to the fish
salesmen, Billingsgate, towards the expenses of
memorializing the Board of Trade in respect of the
new byelaws, which was not required by them.

52 10 0
26 5 0
52 10 0

94 EOYAL COMMISSION.

[Fishmongers' Donations.'] £ s. d.
Fob. 22 Shipwrights' Company, for prizesat their exhibition of ships'

models, fishing smacks, tugs, and barges . . . 52 10 0

Reformatory and Refuge Union, 435, West Strand, W.C. . 52 10 0
To the fund for the relief of the sufferers by the recent loss

of fishing boats off Glengad Head, Londonderry . . 20 0 0

St. Mark's, Walworth, Mission Hall and Schoolroom . . 52 10 0

„ 26 Surrey County Gaol, second payment of annual gift . . 2 1 10
Mar. 9 Relief of the widows and children of fishermen lost in the gale

on the east coast, 30th January last .... 105 0 0

,, 15 Metropolitan Free Hospital, Bishopsgate (Building Fund) . 250 0 0

April 26 Provident Surgical Appliance Society 26 5 0

Shipwrecked Fishermen and Mariners' Royal Benevolent

Society, Hibernia Chambers, London Bridge . . . 52 10 0

Royal General Dispensary, Bartholomew Closo . . . 21 0 0

Saint Bartholomew's Hospital (Samaritan Fund) . . . 52 10 0

Royal Orthopaedic Hospital . 26 0 0

Little Boys' Home, Farningham 105 0 0

Artisans' Institute, Castle Street, St. Martin's . . . 26 5 0
Artisans' Institute, Castle Street, St. Martin's (special

classes) 21 0 0

German Hospital, Dalston . 52 10 0

New Hospital for Women, Marylebone Road . . . 31 10 0
June 14 Marine Society's ship Warspiteon its inauguration by H.R.H.

the Prince of Wales 105 0 0

,, 21 Hospital for Diseases of the Throat, Golden Square, W. . 21 0 0

St. Mark's Hospital for Fistula, City Road . . . . 52 10 0

Royal Naval Female School, Twickenham . . . * . 52 10 0

North Eastern Hospital for Children, Hackney Road . . 52 10 0

Essex Industrial School and Home for Destitute Boys . . 52 10 0
St. Michael's Mission Churches and Schools, Lant Street,

Borough 31 10 0

York Street Chapel, Wai worth 26 5 0

Westminster Hospital, Broad Sanctuary, S.W. . . . 52 10 0

„ 28 Artists' Amicable Fund , . 26 5 0

Fire at St. John's, New Brunswick 105 0 0

St. Alban's Abbey Restoration Fund, second annual pay-
ment .....'.... 52 10 0

July 12 Thames International Regatta . . . . . . 10 10 0

William Webb, grant on removing shed from rear of 30,

Deacon Street 10 0 0

Aug. 9 London City Mission, City Auxiliary, New Bridge Street,

Blackfriars 20 U 0

Working Men's Club and Institute Union, 150, Strand . . 25 0 0
Charity Organization Society, Buckingham Street, Adelphi 25 0 0
Towards the expenses of the team of British Riflemen pro-
ceeding to America to compete for the Centennial Trophy 550
Sept. 27 Indian Famine Relief Fund, Mansion House . . . . 525 0 0
Oct. 18 London Diocesan Penitentiary, Park House, Highgate . 100 0 0
Dec. 20 Coburg Home for training girls for service, Elsham Road,

Kensington 25 0 0

Finsbury Dispensary, Cierkenwell 10 10 0

British and Foreign Bible Society, Blackfriars . . . 52 10 0

Destitute Children's Dinner Society 2100

To the poor's boxes at the Mansion House and Guildhall,

251. each 50 0 0

To the poor's boxes at Bow Street, Cierkenwell, Greenwich
and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Maryle-
bone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, and Worship

Street Police Courts, 201. each 200 0 0

2705 6 10
Annual subscriptions 234 4 0

£3029 10 10

IN 1878.

Feb. 7 St. Paul's Cathedral, balance for bell. (See December 12th

for balance) . . . . . . . . . 20 0 0

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 95

[Fishmongers' Donations.'] £ s. d.
Feb. 21 Koval Infirmary for Women and Children, Waterloo Bridge

" Road . . . 50 0 0

Invalids' Homo Association (Home Hospital) . . . 105 0 0
Deaf and Dumb Asylum, Old Kent Road . . . . 52 10 0
Mission Hall and Schools, Trodegar Road, Old Ford . . 21 0 0
Mar. 5 St. Alban's Abbey Restoration Fund, third annual payment 52 10 0
„ 15 Hall, reading and coffee room at the Fishermen's Hall, Dun-
more East, Waterford Bay 10 0 0

April 18 Home for Working Boys in London, 30, Spital Square . . 25 0 0

Turkish Compassionate Fund, per Baroness Burdett Coutts. 105 0 0

Royal Naval School, New Cross 52 10 0

Bethnal Green Library, the Hall, London Street, E. . . 26 5 0
Army Scripture Readers and Soldiers' Friend Society,

4, Trafalgar Square, Charing Cross . . . . 25 0 0

Belgrave Hospital for Children, Cumberland St., Eccles Sq. 25 0 0

City Orthopaedic Hospital, Hatton Garden . . . . 21 0 0

June 20 Home for the Smack Boys in Ramsgate . . . . 20 0 0

Cheyne Hospital for Sick and Incurable Children, Clieyne

Walk, Chelsea 52 10 0

Towards defraying the expenses of the visit of artisaus to
report upon the various technicalities and industries
displayed at the Paris Exhibition . . . . . 26 5 0
Home for Working Girls in London . . . . . 26 5 0
To the Agricultural Exhibition proposed to be held in Lon-
don in 1879 under the auspices of the Royal Agricul-
tural Society of England 52 10 0

London Hospital, Whitechapel 105 0 0

Cabmen's Mission Hall and Rest, King's Cross . . . 26 5 0
Saint Michael's Free Mission Churches and Schools, Lant

Street, Borough 31 10 0

Wandsworth Home for Ladies with Limited Incomes . . 26 5 0

City of London Volunteer Rifle Range Fund. . . . 10 10 0
Young Women's Christian Association, 56, Welbeck Street,

Cavendish Square 21 0 0

Saint Mark's, Walworth, Organ Fund 21 0 0

Saint John's Church, Walworth (per Rev. Mr. Gotham),

towards cost of fences, &c 20 0 0

West Ham, Stratford, and South Essex Dispensary . . 50 0 0

Servants' Training Institution, Manor Road, Clapham . . 21 0 0

Provident Clerks' Benevolent Fund, Moorgate Street . . 21 0 0

Aug. 1 Thames International Regatta 10 10 0

Thames Angling Preservation Society 10 10 0

Sept. 26 Princess Alice, accident on the Thames ..... 105 0 0

Abercarne Colliery Disaster ....... 105 0 0

Oct. 29 Decoration of Bridge Ward, Lord Mayor's Day . . . 10 10 0

Dec. 12 St. Paul's Cathedral, balance for bell 59 9 8

Saint Mark's Institute and Mission Hall, Dalston. . . 50 0 0
Royal National Hospital for Consumption and Diseases of

the Chest, Ventnor, Isle of Wight 52 10 0

Parish Church of St. George the Martyr, Southwark, resto-
ration fund 105 0 0

Fox and Knot Society Building Fund 10 10 0

Religious Tract Society, 56, Paternoster Row . . . 50 0 0

Saint Anne's Home for Gentlewomen, Wandsworth . . 10 10 0

Right Hon. the Earl Russell's Memorial Fund . . . 10 0 0
London and Brighton Female Convalescent Home, purchase

fund 105 0 0

Boys' Home, East Barnet 52 10 0

To the poor's boxes at Mansion House and Guildhall, 251. each 50 0 0
To the poor's boxes at Bow Street, Clerkenwell, Greenwich
and Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Maryle-
bone, Southwark, Thames, Westminster, and Worship

Street, 201. each . . . . . . . 200 0 0

2118 14 8
Annual subscriptions . . 211 1 0

£2329 15 8

96 ROYAL COMMISSION.

£ s. d.
FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN 1879.

Fob. 20 Lock Hospital 52 10 0

National Sanatorium for Consumption and Diseases of the

Chest, Bournemouth 52 10 0

Society of Friends of Foreigners in Distress, 10, Finsbury

Chambers, E.C 21 0 0

Charing Cross Hospital . . 52 10 0

Hospital for Women, Soho Square 105 0 0

University College, London, building fund, IOOOL, the other

half to be paid in 1880 500 0 0

Fishmongers' and Poulterers' Institution, two annual pen-
sions of 15/. each, to be called the " Fishmongers' Com-
pany's Pensions " 22 10 0

Association for Promoting the General Welfare of the Blind,

28, Borners Street, W 21 0 0

Destitute Children's Dinner Society 10 0 0

Parish Church, St. Catharine Cree, Leadenhall Street,
towards restoring the Company's arms, lately discovered

with others in the ceiling 10 10 0

Mar. 5 St. Alban's Abbey Restoration Fund, fourth and last annual

payment 52 10 0

April 17 Female School of Art, Queen Square, Bloomsbury, W.C. . 52 10 0
Hospital for Epilepsy and Paralysis, &c., Portland Terrace,

N.W 26 5 0

Working Men's Club and Institute Union, 150, Strand . . 25 0 0

Towards establishment of an Indian Institute at Oxford . 100 0 0

Seamen's Hospital Society (late Dreadnought), Greenwich . 52 1 0 0

Clayton Girls' Schools, York Street, Walworth . . . 25 0 0
North London Hospital for Consumption and Diseases of the

Chest 52 10 0

Establishment for Gentlewomen during Illness, 19, Harley

Street, W 21 0 0

Royal Asylum of Saint Anne's Society, Streatham . . 52 10 0
Wandsworth Home for Ladies with Limited Incomes . • 550
New Hospital for Women, Marylebone Road. . . . 31 10 0
Metropolitan and National Nursing Association, 23, Blooms-
bury Square, W.C 26 5 0

June 19 Dudley Stuart Home, 77, Market Street, Edgware Road, W. 25 0 0

To fishermen of Leigh, to rebuild the chapel . . . . 2650
Saint Michael's Free Mission Churches and Schools, Lant

Street, Borough 31 10 0

Endowed Schools, Kingston-on-Thames . . . . 50 0 0
Metropolitan Association for befriending Young Servants,

7, Great College Street, S.W 26 5 0

City Orthopaedic Hospital, 27, Hatton Garden . . . 26 5 0
„ 26 All Saints' National Schools, Walworth (per Rev. O.

Mitchell, M.A.) 26 5 0

Aldgate Ward Schools 26 5 0

St. Peter's Home, Isle of Thanet, memorial fund . . . 50 0 0
Aug. 7 Parish Church of St. Giles, Wormshill, Kent, towards

restoring and partially rebuilding it ; . . . 21 0 0

Boys' Industrial Home, Forest Hill, S.E 10 10 0

Thames Church Mission Society, 14, Bow Lane . . . 26 5 0

Nov. 14 Sir Rowland Hill Memorial Mansion House Fund. . . 25 0 0
Dec. 18 Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution, 26, Charles

Street, St. James's, W.C 105 5 0

London Homoeopathic Hospital, Great Ormond Street, W.C. 52 10 0

Artisan's Institute, Castle Street, Leicester Square . . 50 0 0

House Boy Brigade 52 10 0

Saint Anne's Parochial Sick and Visiting Society ,Wandsworth 10 10 0

To the poor's boxes at Mansion House and Guildhall, 25/. each 50 0 0
To the poor's boxes at Bow Street, Clerkenwoll, Greenwich and
Woolwich, Lambeth, Marlborough Street, Maryleboue,
Southwark, Thames, Westminster, and Worship Street

Police Courts, 201. each 200 0 0

2261 5 0

Annual subscriptions 231 11 0

£2492 16 0

r-l

•^jo oo ooooo o oo
«»' <N 100 <c co co O o o oo

<^ <N OO CO CO CO O O US O CO

1— 1 »-H I— 1 I— 1 US

••*
l-l

i-l

i-H

-^ o o oooo ooo

w IN IIO 1 CO CO O O O OO

SJ N O CO CO O O US O CO

i— 1 i-^ i— 1 IO

0
00

CO
O5

t^
1^

I-H

-e o o ooooo o oo

oo (N IIO COCOWOO O OO

e^sj o MCOMOO us oco

.-1 l-l i-H 0

1— 1
iH

i— i

•5; O OO OOOOO O OO
*ied IOO COWC3OO O OO

WM oo oocoeooo 10 oco

i-( i-H i-H i-l O

l-l

r^O OO OOOOO O OO
oe ffl IOO COCOCOOO O OO

CiiN oo eoeoeooo o oco

i-l rH l-l i-l »0

.—1
l-l

l-l

ry'O O OOOOO OOO

«t'iM iio eoeoeooo o oo
UN o eoeoeooo *a o«o

rH -^ i-l US

l-l
l-l

1— 1

i-l

^o oo ooooo o o
oj IM IOO eoeoeooo O °|
iw N oo eoeoeooo us o

•-H iH i-l iH US

l-l
l-l

t-l

00
l-l

r^'O OO OOOOO OO

oS IN IOO eoeoeooo I oo
SON oo eoeoeooo oco

i-H l-l i-l i-l US

l-l
l-l

.— 1

i-5

So
l-l

^ O OOO OOOOO O OO

o5 <M cooo eoeoeooo o OO
cjiN #500 eoeoeooo us oo

N l-l ^H i-l 0

•*
l-l

i— i

i-l

T3O O O OOO O

«<M eoio eococoio i i i

s^sqeo o eoeoeo o
i— i i— i

-*
l-l

<•

- . : !

:n : ,: : '.ilil:l :
.1:1 . i. . . M i; ii ,

« -2 Jj ^^^^-g^^g

S^ 2 ^ «>;§.i3iJ^|

I «» i & II, "s I I 8 || |- |

'a^^l S^ fl S'^-S^^P,^0

| S3 | 1 |I I 1 I 1 l& & *
1 |1 1 1 | ^11 1

mQw1^! £ fi | p

'.IS KOYAL COMMISSION.

FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN IRELAND.

IN 1870.

£ s. d.
60 0 0

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual)
Pensions and casual relief ........
Farming societies
Schools on the estate ..... ....

. 120 0 0
. 216 6 7
47 2 0
. 529 4 7
45 0 0

34 14 0

£1052 7 2

IN 1871.

60 0 0

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) .

120 0 0
234 0 7

77 2 0

525 9 1

125 14 0

£1142 5 8

IN 1872.

Dispensaries 40 0 0

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 120 0 0

Pensions and casual relief .' 265 1 2

Farming societies 47 2 0

Schools on the estate 507 9 3

Roman Catholic Chapel at Park 10 0 0

Town Hall, Newtownlimavady 100 0 0

Irish Church Sustentation Fund, part of 20001 1000 0 0

Annual subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . 101 11 0

£2194 3 5

IN 1873.

Dispensaries .... . . . . 54 18 5

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 120 0 0

Pensions and casual relief 355 10 4

Farming societies 27 2 0

Schools on the estate 583 18 3

Roman Catholic Chapel 69 12 8

Irish Church Sustentation Fund, part of 2000/., leaving 500/. to pay 500 0 0

Grants towards buildings 2 . . 35 0 0

Annual subscriptions 106 11 0

£1852 12 8

1 Matthew Eakin, donation in consequence of a fire on his premises, 201. J. B.
Scott, grant towards the restoration and repairing Banagher Church, 251,

2 Rev. S. M. Dill, towards building a manse for the Presbyterian Church at
Lower Cumber, 251. Rev. N. M. Brown, towards expenses of Presbyterian
meeting house, Drumachose, 101. — Total, 35Z.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 99

FISHMONGERS' DONATIONS IN 1874. £ s. d

Dispensaries 25 10 9

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 120 0 0

Pensions and casual relief ......... 404 16 3

Farming societies 47 2 0

Schools on the estate 724 18 7

Roman Catholic Chapel 46 13 2

Irish Church Sustentation Fund, balance of 2000^ 500 0 0

Donations 1 , . 130 10 0

Annual subscriptions 102 11 0

£2102 1 9

IN 1875.

Dispensaries . . . . . 88 19 8

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 110 0 0

Pensions and casual relief 372 11 1

Farming societies. . . . . . . . . . . 67 2 0

Schools on the estate 698 14 5

Royal Agricultural Society, towards expenses of show at Londonderry 50 0 0

Presbyterian Church and Manse, Ballykelly 10 0 0

John Robinson, grant towards funeral expenses of his mother . . 300

Annual subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . 109 11 0

£1509 18 2

IN 1876.

Dispensaries 23 2 6

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 130 0 0

Pensions and casual relief 317 12 7

Schools on the estate 765 2 3

Farming societies. . . . . . . . . . 52 7 0

Annual subscriptions 109 11 0

£1397 15 4

IN 1877.

Dispensaries .......... 49 1 3

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests (annual) . . 140 0 0

Pensions and casual relief . . . . . • . . . 257 11 0

Schools on the estate 1192 5 11

Farming societies 72 7 0

Wesleyan Chapel Limavady Building Fund 10 0 0

Meeting House, Eglinton, repairs thereof 25 0 0

„ (second donation) 25 0 0

Walker's Monument in Derry (repairs) 10 10 0

Presbyterian Meeting House, Myroe 10 0 0

Rev. Edward Loughery, Roman Catholic Curate of Park, towards

building a house 15 0 0

Annual subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . 99 11 0

£1906 6 2

1 Jane Robinson, as widow of lute bailiff, 5?. ; John McGrath, for the orphans of
John Reid, of Glasvea, 4.01. ; Martha Dunn, to build a porch at back of house, 141.;
North of Ireland Horticultural Society, 101. ; David Evans, sub-agent, on leaving
house, 51. ; Mrs. Scott, late Miss Gage, on her marriage, 31Z. 10s.; Rev. R. L.
Rogers, 257.— Total, 130/. 10*.

H 2

100

ROYAL COMMISSION.

FISHMONGEES' DONATIONS IN 1878.

Dispensaries. •

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests .

Pensions and casual relief

Schools on the estate

Ulster Institution for the Deaf, the Dumb, and the Blind

Farming societies

Annual subscriptions

£ s. d.

22 15 0

120 0 0

257 H 9

10_'0 12 11

300

72 7 0

96 8 0

£1592 17 8

IN 1879.

Ballykelly Dispensary. 26 10

Presbyterian Ministers and Roman Catholic Priests . . . 1 20 0

Pensions and casual relief 250 4

Schools on the estate 1188 16

Fanning societies. .......... 42 7

Ulster Institution for the Deaf, the Dumb, aud the Blind ... 30
Faughanvale Presbyterian Church, Eglinton, towards Manse Purchase

Fund : 50 0

Fiiughanvale Roman Catholic Chapel, towards its enlargement . 10 10
Upper Cumber Presbyterian Church, in aid of a Building Fund for a

Manse ; 50 0

Annual subscriptions • 112 14

£1854 2 5

The Livery
Companies'
general
beneficence.

The Iron-
mongers'
Company and
Church of St.
Bartholomew
Great.

It is within the mark to say of this ten years' record of the good Fish-
mongers, that if Mr. Firth and his comrades have been guilty of no other
good, they merit general gratitude in having been the means of its
publicity. The Goldsmiths', the Drapers', the Clothworkers' and indeed
all the Companies make like exhibit of boundless charity, and these
donations are all outside and irrespective of their general charities.
London abounds in evidences of their goodness. One of the greatest
pleasures of the writer in occasional visits to London is to grope about
among the old City churches. The general world has little idea of the
charms these old temples of God afford. When worshipping in that
venerable and beauteous fane, St. Bartholomew the Great, close to the
Hospital, he found it evidenced that the good Ironmongers had been for
generations thoughtful for it, and that probably they have been no mean
helpers in keeping the blessed edifice from becoming a ruin. The paint
on the old Benefaction Board is well-nigh worn off, but strong spectacle
power enabled the deciphering that every now and then the Ironmongers
look in and drop a hundred-pound note as evidence of minclf ulness. Good
Companies all ! treasure you up this grand old St. Bartholomew relic, it
is a gem of old London, beauteous in the extreme ! Make it a suitable
approach for the world's entrance and gaze ! The service now rendered
within its sacred walls is hearty, and well conducted, the worshippers are
many, and though perhaps not over-endowed with this world's goods, yet
they show becoming reverence for God's sanctuary. Good Ironmongers
keep their holy temple in remembrance.

In course of the inquiry several of the public Educational Colleges, and
also a few Charitable Institutions presented themselves before the Com-
mission as candidates for any monies that may be lying about in odd
corners, should the hoped-for plunder ever be consummated. The wily
agitators had urged the applicants to push their several imaginary claims
to the front, knowing that in so doing they were adding fuel to the fire.
Like adroit public showmen at the fair, they realized that noise was the
all-desirable feature.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 101

CHAPTER VII.

The testimony given by her Majesty's Charity Commissioners in itself a refutation
of the false words of Companies' slanderers — Evidence of Mr. Hare, her Majesty's
Senior Inspector of Charities ; his definition of functions of the Charity Com-
missioners under the Act of 1853 — Charity Commissioners' powers to call for any
documents relating to charities — Case of Wax Chandlers' Company applying a
surplus to their own funds— Vice-Chancellor Hall and Lord Selborne advise
Merchant Taylors' Company as to their surplus — Charity Commissioners
practically in possession of the whole of the charitable trusts of the guilds —
Suggestions of Mr. Hare — Explanations of Mr. Hare relating to his evidence—
Evidence of Mr. Longley, her Majesty's Commissioner of Charities — He testifies
that the Companies are exceedingly liberal in the administration of their trusts,
and that all the Companies have rendered proper accounts — Mr. Longley says
the various Companies are anxious their alms-folk shall have sufficient stipends
— Mr. Longley testifies that the Mercers' Company's large income of St. Paul's
School is judiciously expended ; and that the management of the Mercers'
Company is excellent— Mr. Longley states that he never knew of any member
of a court taking lease of property and. subletting at higher rate — Necessity of
heed being given to the important declarations of the Charity Inspectors so
favourable to the Companies.

THERE is not any more important feature of the Royal Commission
of Inquiry into the Livery Companies than the testimony given so readily
by her Majesty's Charity Inspectors, evidencing as it does such thorough-
ness in the charity work of the much-abused Companies. It has been
the object of Mr. Firth and his lieutenant Beale to represent to the in-
dustrial classes at the meetings of their clubs that the working classes
of the metropolis would in some way or other be benefited by the
transfer of the corporate property of the Livery Companies from the
Companies to some other body or trust, and used in some way for their
purposes. It is to be hoped the class will look at the question fairly and
honestly, free from the serpent- charm ing of paid agitators who for their
own purposes of getting hold of the constituency, make outrageous mis-
representation of actual facts. If this class will listen to the counsels of
safer advisers, they would find that the money now expended by the
Companies either directly or indirectly for their benefit would be with-
drawn from them, and without their getting any equivalent.

Mr. HARE, her Majesty's Senior Inspector of Charities, and Mr. Long-
ley, her Majesty's Commissioner of Charities, gave evidence at the
earliest sitting of the Commission.

The CHAIRMAN (Lord Derby), addressing Mr. Hare, said : I think you
are the Senior Inspector of Charities under the Charity Commission,
and I need not ask you whether you have taken considerable interest
in, and paid much attention to, questions of municipal government and
of charity administration ?

I have.

You have been occupied, as I understand, with the charities ad-
ministered by the City Companies at various times 1

At various times, many years ago. I have not done much in that
way since 1865.

Between 1860 and 1865 I think you were employed in that way 1-

I was.

Will you kindly explain to the Commission what are the functions of
the Charity Commission ; under what Act of Parliament it obtains its
powers, and what is its position as regards the City Livery Companies.
Probably you would prefer to give your explanation in your own way 1

102

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. Hare's
definition of
the functions
of the Charity
Commission
under Chari-
table Trusts
Act of 1853.

I suppose that the Commission knows that the Charitable Trusts Act
was passed in the year 1853. It was the first jurisdiction then esta-
blished applicable to charities exclusively, and it was intended to
]uv\vnt the vast waste of money which was constantly incurred
in charities, by the institution of suits by relators whenever they
thought they had an opportunity of having them inquired into in the
Court of Chancery. The powers, which were general, are set forth at
coiuiderable length in the Act of 1853; it gave power of inquiry; it
gave power of authorizing leases and for the alienation of estates ; it
gave also for the first time an officer who should be the conduit-pipe of
the real estate, so that the real estate should be vested in one person
continually, while the trustees should have the management as before
for the purpose of administration. It gave also the power of taking
proceedings for setting new schemes where the charities Avero under 30/.
a year ; the amount was afterwards increased to 50/. upon the application
of one or more inhabitants or persons interested. That is the present
restriction. It gave full power of inquiry into all charities.

You have been brought, as inspector, into contact with the Courts of
the various Companies, I suppose ?

No, not with the Courts ; very rarely were they attended by anybody
but their clerks or one or two persons who produced the documents and
gave me the papers I asked for ; but very rarely by any of the
members of the Courts.

There are in existence, as we understand, reports dealing with all the
charities of the City Companies 1

The Charity Commission, which commenced about 1818 by Lord
Brougham's instigation, went on under several separate Acts of Parlia-
ment and finished its work about 1840 or somewhat later. All their
reports are printed, and they occupy about forty or fifty folio volumes.

Have you had to examine those reports, and, as a matter of fact, have
you done so ?

In all cases when I went to the City Companies I took the printed
report of the former Commission, and began by inquiring w hether that
•was accurate, and whether there was any addition or amendment to be
made to it. I adopted that as the basis of my inquiry, taking up, of
course, the subject of any variations in the property, and subsequent
gifts, if any.

Had the framers of those earlier reports which you consulted full
access to .the documents of the Companies ?

The power given by the Act of Parliament enabled them to inquire
into trusts only, and, therefore, if an independent title was asserted, they
would have had no power to go beyond the trust.

The Commissioners had power to call for any documents relating to
the charities of the Companies, had they not ?

Yes ; they had.

But I presume in a doubtful case the Company itself would be the
menTsrelating judge whether the property was held in trust or otherwise ?
to charities. They must necessarily be the judge.

You have drawn up reports of your own between the dates you
mentioned, 1860 and 1865?

Yes, for a great number of Companies — all that appeared by the
former reports to have had charities.

Did you base your reports upon those of the earlier Commissioners 1

I began with those in my inquiry ; I took them as the basis of my
inquiry, and then I referred, where the documents were the same, to the
former report.

The Charity
Commis-
sioners have
powers to call
for any docn

LONDON CITY L1VEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 103

Are you aware of any cases in which informations have been filed by
the Attorney-General against the Companies for breaches of trust?

I am not aware of many cases of that kind. I might accidentally have
heard of them, but I never had an official knowledge of the cases
I may mention one case, by the way, of which I was cognizant, that of Case of Wax
the Wax Chandlers' Company, in which I found that there were some Chandlers'
houses in the Old Change charged with a payment of about 81 a ComPany aP-
year to poor persons, with the direction that the remainder of the rent pius^ltheii"
of the houses was to be carried to the chest of the Company and applied own funds
to the repair of the houses. I told the Company that it appeared to me
that that was not a gift to them, but still continued to be a charity.
They applied all the surplus over SI. a year to their own funds. I found
the same to be the case in the Merchant Taylors' : they hud a very large
charity, about 2000?. a year, and they had taken the opinion of their
counsel, the present Vice-Chancellor Hall, and Lord Selborne, who Vice- Chancel-
advised them that the surplus was devoted to charity. They accordingly ^or Hall and
founded with it the Convalescent Hospital at Bognor, instead of apply- a(j^se Mer™
ing it to their own funds ; and I recommended the Wax Chandlers' chant Taylors'
Company to do the same, but they thought it would take away so large a Company as to
portion of their funds that they declined to do it. An information was their fb&rity
filed. It was heard first before Lord Komilly, and then before Lord E thend'?
Hatherley, who decided in favour of the Company. It then went before voted to found
the House of Lords, who decided that I had been right in holding Convalescent
it to be a charity, and the whole surplus was then handed over as a Hospital at
charitable trust. I do not remember at this moment any other case. ognor.

The CHAIRMAN : I do not know whether I am right in assuming that
your reports are unpublished and have not been printed 1

They have not been printed; the reports of the City Parochial
Charities have all been printed, but not of the Companies.

Have you any idea what would be the bulk of your reports if it were
found desirable to publish them 1

I fear that it would be found to be a very voluminous document of a
great many hundred folio pages.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : Are you aware that the Charity Commis-
sioners speak very highly indeed of the liberality of the Companies in
respect to the charities administered by them 1
I believe so.

They find no fault as to that ?
I believe not.

When the Charity Commission looked into the trusts of the various
guilds they were found, considering the long time they ran back to, to
have been most honestly, straightforwardly, and well administered, was
not that so ?

I do not know that any verdict of that kind was found one way or
another ; but I do not know on the other hand that any fault was
found with them.

MR. ALDKRMAN COTTON : The Charity Commissioners have taken Charity Com.
possession lately of the whole of the charitable trusts of guilds — I speak missioners in
with authority upon that matter ; and if you will make inquiries, you ^he^hohTo'f
will find that it is so — the only moneys which the guilds are now dealing the charitable
with are those which they consider to be their own property 1 trusts of

What you mean is, that the funds are administered under the direction
of the Charity Commissioners ?

The schemes are submitted to the Charity Commissioners, and when
they are widened we have to ask their consent to the widening ?
Perhaps you will refer me to one scheme ?

104 ROYAL COMMISSION.

There are a groat many small schemes in connection with the Saddlers'
Company under which pensions and things of that kind are made 1

I am not aware of any.

A iv you aware that the Haberdashers' Company's schools are under
the control of the Charity Commissioners 1

Perhaps you refer to the accounts being given ?

I call it a very strong control when the Company are not allowed to
spend any money whatever without the consent of the Commissioners'!

AYe have no power of auditing.

You have an audit, have you not 1

AVo make inquiries, but cannot disallow anything.

SIR NATHANIEL M. DE EOTHSCHILD : You say you have no power to
control the charities or the way in which the charities are dispensed by
the different Companies ?

None at all.

But you have the power of observation 1

Yes.

Having the power of observation, do you think as a rule that the
Companies, as trustees, have behaved honestly, or behaved dishonestly ?

I am not able to place my hand on any act of dishonesty, that I know
of. I believe they have acted honestly, to the best of their judgment.

AVhenever there have been any cases, you have taken notice of them ?

Yes.

You took notice of it in the case of the Mercers' Company once ?

I am not aware of the case.

You brought an action against them which you won, when you said
that they had not applied all the funds to a certain school ?

There were two cases ; one the Merchant Taylors' Company, and the
other the "Wax Chandlers'.

You have power of observation ; so that if there were any gross
violation of trust, you would know it, though yon have no power of
management ?

Yes.

Additional to his evidence, Mr. Hare supplied the following sugges-
tions : —

"^ sugoesti°ns for the reform of the present administration of the
Companies is, that their connection with the arts, crafts, and trades
which, according to the terms of their constitution they are designed to
comprehend, shall be restored, including within the latter all the
analogous trades and industries which have grown out of, or been
developed from, or into which the arts and crafts originally named have
since expanded. The avocations included in the business of mercers,
drapers, haberdashers, and clothworkers, would embrace vast numbers
of the working classes, to whom an intimate association with bodies of
the wealth and importance that these guilds have attained may be made
a source of great advantage. The members to be admitted may be of
two main classes, those employed in the manufacture and those in the
distribution of the several productions. The factories for production are
now widely spread throughout the kingdom, and no persons engaged in
them, wherever situated, should be excluded. The distributive workers,
as keepers of shops and those employed therein, might be confined, as
the Companies now generally are, to London and the suburbs.

It is impossible not to see that the increase of population and the
progress of wealth in modern times, followed up by the amazing changes
introduced by machinery, and the boundless power of steam, has altered

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 105

the old conditions and relations which existed between capital and
labour, and has vastly widened the separation, and has, in many cases,
produced what may be called an estrangement between the employer and
the workman. Nothing is more important than to seize and make the
utmost of every opportunity of creating a common feeling of interest,
that the labouring classes may clearly perceive that their welfare is
bound up with that of their neighbours, and of society in general.
Efforts are being made by many with this view to give to the agricultural
labourer an interest in his cottage and garden and allotment, or to enable
him to acquire some proprietary right ; and to extend to the working
people of the towns the advantages which their association with these
Companies might confer would, in like manner, be calculated to win
and secure their adherence to the side of law and order.

The admission of the member to the Company might be on a certificate
of age, of his actual employment or trade, and whether obtained and
taught by apprenticeship, or other instruction.

A small admission fee, not exceeding, say, 5s., may be required, and an
annual payment of a shilling or two, for preserving the connection. The
wardens and members composing the Courts of the Companies would be
properly elected by the members at large. There would be no reason
why the present members of the Court should not be continued for their
lives, an additional number of newly elected members being added.

The identification of the Companies with their trades, and the
association of them with the working classes, may be beneficial to the
latter in more ways than can, at present, be imagined. The names of
the children of a member might be entered in the register of his Com-
pany, stating the public, elementary, or other schools at which they are
educated. They may be admitted on favourable conditions as scholars,
and be encouraged to compete in prizes and exhibitions in the technical
colleges. To these colleges may be added travelling fellowships, whereby
other countries may be visited, and their methods and appliances in the
various arts and manufactures ascertained and compared with our own,
and economical and artistic progress thus promoted. The officers of
every Company would be supplied with constant statistical information
of the greater or less activity and state of trade in the chief manufac-
turing towns and districts, and where labourers may be needed, or are in
excess. In the distribution of the eleemosynary funds, in almshouses,
or pensions, or other rewards, they should, as I have elsewhere pointed
out, be treated as rewards for those members who are shown " to have
" expended the best years of their lives industriously and providently,
" and to have brought up their children well."

There is still another, and even a yet higher service which these
great Companies could render to their affiliated members. The chief of
the difficulties of the working man and his family in our populous centres
of traffic and labour is that of obtaining a comfortable dwelling within
his means. He is often compelled to live in filthy lodgings, at the
mercy of those from whom he must rent them, and exposed frequently
to boisterous and perhaps drunken fellow-occupiers of the house, over
which he has no control. Such a condition and its surroundings strike
at the root of that temperament of mind which would promote habits of
order and culture. Nothing appears to me more important than that
the town as well as the country labourer should feel that he has a home
into which he may at all times quietly return, and where he may gather
and preserve any books, furniture, or other articles for his comfort and
enjoyment. The same want, arid its accompanying evils, exists abroad.
In a book, treating elaborately of the state of the labourers in Paris and
other towns in France, I have just read : " Le loyer pour le travailleur

106

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Explanations
of Air. Hare
as to his evi-
dence.

" est souvont la cause du desordre dans le menage, surtout avec 1'eleva-
u tion exorbitanto do ces derniers temps. L'impossibilite de trouver un
"logement d'un prix possil)le, la rapacite et les pretentious de certains
" propru'taiivs, sont la cause souvent, tres-souvent, de decouragements
" incroyables, de haines iraplacables, et la base de miseres effrayantes et
" d'avilissements hontcux."

A portion of the accumulated funds of the Companies, and the pro-
duce of some of their present real property, as it could be advantageously
sold, might be gradually employed in the purchase of house property in
London, and in the immediate neighbourhood of the great centres of
labour, or on spots readily accessible therefrom. Any necessary altera-
tions and improvements in the property may be made, adapting it for the
habitation of the members of the Company and their families to whose
places of employment it affords convenient access. Of these properties
the Company should hold the fee, and enable their associate members
to purchase or take leases for any terms of years which they may agree
upon, payments, graduated or otherwise, being accepted from the
purchasers, prices and rents being fixed at a rate which shall be sufficient
fully to reimburse the Company. A house may be let as a whole or in
rooms or flats, as required by the tenant, and if he desires to extend or
to surrender his lease, he may do so at rates regulated by tables calculated
to secure the Company from loss, but without exacting profit. Or the
workman may remove to another situation or another town in which the
Company, if they have premises there, may enable him to exchange
his dwelling on suitable terms. In this disposition of property it
will be observed that I contemplate nothing in the way of charity.
I am regarding the Company as employing a portion of its wealth
in securing comfortable homes for its members, avoiding at the same
time any loss of capital, but seeking no accumulation of profit from the
transaction.

The highly endowed Companies, the objects, conditions, and destina-
tions whereof are the subject of this inquiry, may wisely and justly be
bought into harmony with their early history, and made the nucleus
or a co-operative union of far greater extent, and wider and more
beneficial influence, than any which has yet grown up, or been formed,
during the progress of modern civilization. They may be the means of
binding together the various sections of employers and workmen, and
directing their attention to objects in which they have a community of
interest, and which minister to the prosperity and well-being of all.

MEMORANDUM (B) BY MR. HARE.

I desire to explain that part of my former evidence which expressed
my belief that the obstacles imposed by what is called the Mortmain Act
to the devise of real estate for charitable or public purposes are a great
misfortune. It seems to me that there cannot be too much of the land
of the country devoted to public purposes, the State reserving to itself
the power of regulating such purposes, so that they shall not be other-
wise than beneficial, and placing the estates under the management of
agents appointed for prescribed districts, who, while securing for the
institutions for which the trusts are held the due produce and profit,
shall yet have regard to the general utility and benefit. The efforts and
interests of occupiers in all the works of cultivation and of improvement
might be promoted and carried out in every variety of form. Tenancies
not longer than for a life or lives, or a term of years of similar duration,
may be created by way of sale or lease, according as it may be deemed
best in the joint interest of the public and the purchaser or lessee. By

. LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 107

the word sale I mean that the lease may be granted free of rent, in con-
sideration of the sum paid by the lessee at its inception or by subsequent
instalments, if the lease be not made at the full rent at the time.
Where the management is by a public officer, as that of all lands held in
mortmain or on. perpetual trusts should be, the personal views, preposses-
sions, or prejudices of a private owner of agricultural land, often almost
inevitably antagonistic to any thorough encouragement or development
of the subordinate interests of tenants and occupiers, are entirely elimi-
nated, and inducements for unlimited expenditure of capital and labour
in improvements may be held out. If a private owner was asked by a
tenant to grant him a lease of a part of his estate for his life or for a term
of fifty or seventy years, with unrestricted powers of improvement, the
private proprietor, actuated by reasons with which most persons might
sympathize, would probably refuse such a concession. It would deprive
him of that authority and dominion over that portion of his estate, and
the occupiers might have power to deal Avith it in a manner that would
be unpalatable or offensive to him. A long lease, moreover, granted on
the payment of a gross sum to the owner of the fee, would be inconsistent
with most settlements of real property. These obstacles to the creation of
subordinate holdings of an independent character under private owner-
ship would have no existence in the case of the public estates. The
public would have no prejudice against parting with their authority
over such of its lands for the term agreed upon, and would be satisfied
and secure on the possession of the annual rent or of the equivalent
capital sum. Again, the tenant under public ownership might be enabled
at any time, under suitable terms, to extend or to surrender his lease or
commute his rent. Tables of value and duration might be settled
analogous to the terms on which insurances for life or pensions at specified
ages are arranged. No special arrangements of this kind are generally
possible with regard to interests in lands held under private owners.
The commercial facilities of dealing with land would be thus in-
definitely multiplied. The interposition of the State to prevent land
from being devised to public purposes, which has gone on for nearly 150
years, therefore appears to me a most absurd and mischievous policy.

THE EVIDENCE OF MR. LONGLEY, HER MAJESTY'S
COMMISSIONER OF CHARITIES.

MR. HENRY LONGLEY, the Charity Commissioner, was examined on Evidence of
the third day of the Commissioners' Sitting, the 22nd of March, 1882. Mr. Longley,

The CHAIRMAN.— I need hardly ask you whether you are a Charity her Majesty's
f^ . . Commissioner

Commissioner? of Charities.

I am.

How many years have you held office ?

Nearly eight years; I was appointed in 1874.

You have, in your official capacity, had dealings with various amongst
the City Companies ?

With some.

We understand the Companies are bound, under an Act of Parliament, •
to submit an account of their expenditure on charitable purposes yearly
to the Charity Commissioners ?

They are.

Has that Act been complied with ?

Yes, it has, with more regularity than is the case in most other chari-
ties. I have got a paper here which shows the dates of the latest
accounts which we have received from the Companies, which will show

108

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Longley testi-
fies that the
Companies are
exceedingly
liberal in their
administra-
tion of these
trusts.

All the Com-
panies have
rendered
proper
accounts.

that they are not far behindhand. The accounts appear to have been all
rendered for the year 1880, with only two or three exceptions, and a
considerable number for the year 1881 ; and when I say that they have
been rendered for the year 1881, that is really more than they are bound
to do, because they are not bound to return the accounts till the 25th of
March, 1882, so that this is what we should consider a very good state
of accounts.

I will put a more general question to you. Can you state your im-
pression of the manner in which the Companies, generally speaking,
have discharged their duties as trustees 1

I have only experience of a limited number of Companies ; and in
regard to those Companies I should say that they have been exceedingly
liberal in their administration of the trusts, and in many cases, which
are already known to the Commission, they have subsidized the trust
funds, in many instances very largely, out of their corporate income.
On the other hand, our experience is that their administration of the
trusts has been on a very generous scale as regards expenses, almost
lavish in some cases.

If there was money left to a Company, to the Wax Chandlers' Com-
pany or the Goldsmiths' Company, or any other Company, simply in
the name of the Company, without any trust attached, you would not
consider it was trust property at all ?

No.

MR. BURT. — I understand you to say that the Companies generally
have complied with the law in rendering their accounts 1

Yes.

There are exceptions, I suppose 1

All the Companies, I think, have rendered the accounts. The paper
that I have in my hand shows that every Company has rendered the
accounts. The Bowyers' Company appears to be behindhand, and the
Wool Winders' ; but it is doubtful whether they have more than one
charity each.

The CHAIRMAN. — With regard to the application of the Companies'
charities, are you aware how their trust income can be spent ; have you
got the figures before you ?

Yes, I have the figures.

Should we be accurate in taking it at 75,000^ for the relief of poor
members, 75,OOOZ. more for education, and 50,000?. for miscellaneous
charitable objects, making 200,OOOZ. in all ?

I am afraid I cannot verify those figures. I asked our Registrar of
Accounts, when I heard that I was to be examined, whether he could
get out the figures, but he said it would take a very long time. I have
no doubt that this information is quite as correct as any that we could
furnish.

Have you any knowledge of the details of that expenditure ; would
it come before you ?

Yes, we have all the accounts ; we can see how it is all spent if we
refer to the accounts ; and in the cases with which I have had personally
to do I am aware of a good deal of the detail.

First of all, with regard to the relief of the poor members, how is it
administered ; are there almshouses and pensions, or in what other form
is it administered?

I am not aware of any form other than almshouses and pensions in
•which it is administered, except that money grants are made in some
cases, but a very large proportion of it is administered in almshouses,
and a very large sum in pensions.

Do you consider that that system has worked satisfactorily upon the
whole ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 109

I have had no means of ascertaining how far it has met the wants Various Com-
of the poor of the Companies, because I do not know how many poor panies'anxiety
there are in each Company ; we hear hardly any complaints on that ^a* fh?lr
score ; the Companies are generally anxious that their alms-people should ghouj^ j,ave
have sufficient stipends, and in many cases they have made up the sufficient
payment from their own corporate funds. stipends.

We have had it stated that to the 200,OOOZ. which I mentioned just
now they add out of their corporate income 140,000?. more?

That I have no personal knowledge of, and if the accounts would not
show it, we should have no means of verifying it ; they might, but the
Companies are not bound to tell us all that.

With reference to the educational endowments, are you acquainted
with the Mercers' Company ?

Yes ; I have had a good deal to do with some of the charities of the
Mercers' Company.

They are trustees of St. Paul's School, and also of the Mercers' School 1

They are.

Are those schools largely endowed ?

Very largely. St. Paul's School has an income of about 12,0007. a Longley testi-
year, which is now administered by a scheme made by the Endowed ?es as to tne
School Commissioners, about the year 1874 or 1875, which has since V^QOOJ ^,er
been amended in some details by the Charity Commission. annum, that

Have you had an opportunity of examining those schemes in detail ] same is most

Yes, I have ; I have got the scheme here, and I have got the details, judiciously

Do you consider that the endowment is properly expended for the exPended-
purpose for which it is intended 1

Perhaps I had better state a few figures. The income being 12,0007.
a year, the scheme requires them to maintain a school, or rather two
departments of a school, for 1000 boys, and a school for 400 girls, both
of which are to be maintained within a short distance of London. The
annual charges prescribed by the scheme, that is to say, for the pay-
ment of the masters for the free boys, and exhibitions for the girls, and
for repairs, are 63407. ; besides that, the income would have to bear the
expense of examinations, management, and other expenses; then they
have to buy sites for these two schools, and to build the schools, which
would involve a very large appropriation of capital. Nothing has yet
been done in respect of the school for girls, because the governors arc
employed now in establishing the school for boys. I should say that
the school is subject to two governing bodies ; the Mercers' Company
are the estate trustees, and manage the property, and pay over the in-
come to the governing body specially appointed under the scheme.
The Charity Commissioners have sanctioned the expenditure of 41,0007.
upon a site near Hammersmith, close to the Metropolitan District Kail-
way, and they have sanctioned an expenditure of 91,0007. upon the
school buildings, and those buildings have been in progress about a year,
and, pending the establishment of that school, we understand that the
governors do not propose to do anything in respect of the girls' schools.
They are meeting this expenditure as far as they can out of the in-
come of the school ; but they will not be able to meet it all. So that
the endowment, so far as we are aware, is very judiciously applied at
present in carrying out the scheme, and probably, after the deductions
of capital are made, which are necessary to give full effect to the
scheme, there will not be any large surplus.

Are you aware that in many cases the Livery Companies consist of
members of particular families ]

I have seen it stated in a paper which the secretary of the Commission
has been good enough to furnish me with.

110 ROYAL COMMISSION.

For instance, in the Mercers' Company there are ten bear the name of
Wutney, nine Walker, seven Collier, seven Hodgson, seven Smith, five
1 **** Parker, five Sulton, and three Watson ; does not that rather convey that
mcnt'of^Ujo" *nc Companies, although essentially public bodies, arc composed to a
Moivors' Com- great extent of a limited number of private individuals — clans 1
pnny is aduiir- I should infer it from that statement in the case of the Mercers'
Company ; but the Mercers' Company is admirably administered.

Have many of them been dealt with by your schemes?

Yes, a good many. The most important one now being dealt with is
the Bancroft School under the Drapers' Company. There the expendi-
ture was very large in proportion to the results ; but the Drapers' Com-
pany are going to make a large addition to their school, and it will be
expended in the same manner as St. Paul's School.

Did you not tell us that the Drapers' Company had largely supple-
mented the funds under the control of the Charity Commission ?

I have no doubt that that is so.

Therefore are they not to have some credit ?

Certainly ; but the schemes are originated for the most part by our
Commission, which takes the cases in hand. In the Drapers' case lam
not sure how it was, whether we came to them or they came to us.

I must ask you whether it was not the fact that the Drapers' Company
applied to have a new scheme under the old charity, and under the
legacy left by Mr. Deputy Corney ?

Yes, I find that in 1870 the Company submitted a draft scheme to
the Endowed School Commission, after the Endowed Schools Act was
passed.

MB. JAMES.— Has it ever come to your knowledge, as has been some-
times stated, that members of the Court in the management of the
Longley states Company's property take leases to themselves at low rates and then

that he has sut,]et at high rates : have cases of that kind ever come to your

never known , , , . °

of any member knowledge?

of the Court of No, I have never heard of a case of that sort.

Has it come to your knowledge that pensions are paid to members

°f the Coilrfc or members of tlie Uvery ?

subletmg a -^°> ^ am no^ aware otherwise than that I have seen it so stated in the

higher rate, paper handed to me by the secretary of the Commission.

The Eoyal Let heed, then, be given to the testimony of the Inspector of Charities.

Commission Jt ^\\ show the working classes who are their true friends. Whether
n°lt than its" Firth an^ Beale, who are interested only in getting hold of them as
testimony supporters in their raids upon everything that is honest and good ; or
through the whether the Livery Companies, who ask them for nothing save to be
Inspectors of prudent and loving of their fellow-men, are most to be trusted. Her
h^Live8 a8 t0 Majesty's Inspectors of Charities are surely disinterested. They declare
Companies' the Charities of the Liveries to be faithfully and economically adminis-
Charities tered, so also that the Charity Commission has the supervision of all
being well and charities that should come under it, and that the Courts of Assistants are
honestly ad- one an(j ajj extremely anxious to bring their several schools and charities
The'lesson" under the Commissioners' cognizance in every instance where such sub-
working men mission is for the good of the institution. The Companies' enemies
should learn represent the exact contrary of this. It is to be hoped that the circu-
thcrefrom. lation of this volume, honestly intended to convey not one word save of
strictest truth, may serve as antidote to interested poison, and that right
may prevail.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. Ill

CHAPTER VIII.

Declaration and protest of the Grocers' - Company as to the Commission being
breach of the liberties of the subject — The Company's special memorandum —
Cites various decisions of the courts bearing on their properties — Mercers'
Company's declaration accompanying their returns — Evidence of Mr. Travers
Smith of Fishmongers' Company — Mr. Beale before the Commission, his close
connection with Firth and Warr — Beale as a writer and public agitator, his
hunting-grounds, and connection as assumed orator for Chelsea Clubs — He ad-
mits his agitation against the Companies — Particulars of incomes, &c., of the
various Livery Companies — Able character of the Dissent Report — The Dis-
sent Report — Protest of Mr. Alderman Cotton.

GENERALLY in sending in to the Commission their returns as to property,
incomes and expenditure, the Companies' through their respective clerks,
contented themselves with a general expression of their compliance as
a matter of pleasure and courtesy. The Grocers' Company, through Mr.
Euck, and the Mercers' Company through Mr. Watney, accompanied
theirs with admirable papers declaratory of their rights, and which apply
to all the Companies with equal force as to their own.

The Grocers' Company declare that they have answered fully all the Deciaratk>n
questions addressedto them by the City of London Livery Companies' Com- and protest of
missioners. They have done so in deference to her Majesty's Commission, the Grocers'
but they deem it their duty to record their earnest protest that an inquiry Company
by the Crown, without the authority of Parliament, into what has been ^
judicially declared to be private property, is without precedent, arbitrary, memorandum,
and a breach of the liberties of the subject. The judicial declaration above
referred to was made by Lord Langdale in the case of the Attorney-
General v. the Grocers'- Company, reported in the sixth volume of Mr.
Beavan's Eeports, page 526. The Master of the Eolls says (page 550),
speaking of the surplus revenue under Sir Wm. Laxton's devise, " This
" revenue, according to the construction which it appears to me ought
" to be put on this codicil, belongs as private property to the Company."

The same observation would apply to other estates devised to the
Company in terms similar in effect to those used by Sir Wm. Laxton,
and still more strongly to estates devised to the Company absolutely
without any condition, trust, or charge, or purchased, as in the case of
the site of the hall and garden, by free subscription among the members
of the fraternity. Even the small proportion of the Company's property
which is legally applicable to charitable purposes was only saved from
loss and destruction after the Great Eire by the private liberality of
individuals. It may fairly be said that the whole property of the Com-
pany was at that time redeemed from sequestration and sale by the
members of the Court at their own expense, and was thus preserved and
handed down for the benefit of the corporate body.

But while the Company respectfully insist upon the private character
of the whole, or a large portion of their property, they willingly recog-
nize, as they have ever done, a moral obligation to carry out to the

112 ROYAL COMMISSION.

utmost the intentions of their benefactors, with due regard to the altered
requirements of the time, and in a manner worthy of the public spirit
and liberality to which the acquisition and preservation of the property
are due.

As instances of the mode in which the Company deal with their trusts
may be mentioned Sir Win. Laxton's devise, already referred to, under
which, and a subsequent decree of charitable uses, the Company is bound
to expend 3007. a year out of the revenues of the devised estate on the
school and almshouses at Oundle. The actual expenditure is at present
30007. a year, more than three-fourths of the whole income. Large sums
have also been laid out on capital account, besides which the Company
is now expending 12,0007. on new school buildings, and there is a further
expenditure of about the same amount in contemplation.

Another case of a similar character is Bacchus' gift for exhibitions at
Oxford and Cambridge. The sxim charged for this purpose is 407. a
year, and the expenditure 5507 a year, exclusive of the exhibitions
given from Oundle School. The income of the estate is about 6707.
Expenditure under this head will be largely increased if the scheme now
under consideration for the establishment of valuable exhibitions or
travelling fellowships for the study of analytical chemistry and kindred
subjects, and sanitary science, is carried out.

Several of the Company's non-educational charities were redeemed
some years ago under the voluntary powers of the " Endowed Schools
Act, 1869," and the proceeds applied, under the authority of a Scheme,
in the building of a large Middle Class School. The Company have
added for this purpose about 90007. from their own funds, and contribute
at present over 10007. a year towards the working expenses.

One of the charities thus absorbed was Lady Middleton's gift of 207. a
year for necessitous clergymen's widows. The Company, with a desire
to respect and carry out the wishes of the founder where this can be
usefully done, even though the charity has ceased to exist legally,
perpetuate the name and wishes of Lady Middleton by giving between
5007. and 6007. a year for the purpose she contemplated.

The Company have acted upon similar principles in dealing with their
church patronage. For instance, in 1866 and 1869 they applied for and
obtained Estate Acts, under the powers of which the living of Allhallows
Staining, with a population of 200 and an income of 16007., has been
united to a neighbouring benefice, the sites of the church and curate's
house sold, and the proceeds applied in building and endowing two
district churches in the poorest parts of the East of London, and a third
district church will in due time be added. The Company have aided
the work by an expenditure out of their own funds of nearly 70007. on
parsonage-houses, parish rooms, organs, &c. They also contribute
towards the support of curates and church expenses. Full details of the
Company's expenditure for public and charitable objects, including their
connection with the London Hospital, will be found in the returns.

The Company was in its origin a social and benevolent fraternity. It
was never a trading Company. The original charter of Henry VI., A.D.
1428, incorporated the Company without any reference to trade and
without any conditions. This charter has ever since been in force,
except from 1683 to 1688, when it was suspended by proceedings under
a writ of Olio icarranto issued by the Crown. The charter was however
restored, and the Act of 2 William and Mary, sess. 1. cap. 8, declared
the judgment obtained upon the writ and all consequent proceedings to
have been illegal and arbitrary. A copy of the original of this
charter, together with a translation, will be found at the end of this
Preface.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 113

The Company was first legally entrusted with supervision of trade by
a patent of Henry VI., A.D. 1447. The power remained in force for
about 200 years, and was certainly not exercised after the Great Fire.
That event was most calamitous to the Company, and they did not
attempt to revive their powers of trade supervision, which had indeed
fallen into desuetude and were no longer suited to the circumstances of
the time ; but the Company was kept together and restored upon the
old lines by the exertions and liberality of the leading members, so as
" to become, as they once were " (to use the words of a solemn minute of
the Court of 1687), " a nursery of charities and a seminary of good
" citizens." It is hoped #nd believed that this character has been faith-
fully maintained down to the present time.

The Mercers' Company, in sending to the Royal Commission the Declaration
Returns asked for, desire to state, in the most formal manner, from th«
that their readiness to assist the Commissioners in their inquiries 7T e^
is due to the respect which they owe, and wish to pay, to the Crown, which accom-
from which the Commissioners derived their authority, and is not to be panied their
taken, now or hereafter, as an admission on the part of the Company returns,
that their private affairs may be inquired into, or their private corporate
property dealt with, otherwise than in due course of law.

The private property of the Company has been, for the most part,
held by them for centuries without adverse claim or question. It was
either purchased by the Company (in many instances from the Crown)
out of the savings of income, with contributions from members of the
Company, or with moneys derived from the sale of other private property,
or was bequeathed to them by deceased members, and has been handed
down through many generations of Mercers to the existing freemen of
the Company, by whom it is held by at least as good a title as the
estates of any private landowner in the kingdom, or of any joint stock
company or other voluntary association. The Mercers' Company have
always been anxious to carry out the numerous and complicated chari-
table trusts confided to them, in past times, and, as will appear from
the returns sent herewith, have fostered and increased them in no
niggardly spirit. They have also endeavoured to fulfil the duties cast
upon them as the owners of large estates.

They have always exercised their right to sell any parts of their
private freehold estates, and to deal with them in such manner as they
thought proper, without any interference, and they desire to protest in
the strongest and most emphatic manner against the supposition that
they hold their private property, as distinguished from their estates
which are held for charitable purposes, upon any trusts whatsoever.
They desire further to record their claim, that if a question should be
raised whether a particular property is subject to any trust, or is the
private property of the Company, every such question should be deter-
mined only by the courts of law of the realm.

The Company believe that they have given in these returns such
information as the Commissioners can fairly ask for, and for the reasons
given above, among others, they are not prepared to submit any sugges-
tions "for improving or altering the constitution of the Company, or
" the appropriation or administration of the property or revenues thereof."

Each and every one of the Companies, in declaring its undoubted and
unquestionable rights in regard to what is termed their corporate or
private property, asserting boldly, fearlessly, and uncompromisingly that
the same is at their own absolute disposal, are of accord with the evidence
given by Mr. Joseph Travers Smith, a senior member of the Court and
past Prime Warden of the Fishmongers' Company. In reply to Lord
Derby, Mr. Travers Smith stated, —

114 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Evidence of u Tfire maintain that our corporate property is at our own absolute

Joseph Tra- disposal, and that it would be the same if it were ten or twenty

vers bmitn, ,.r IJJA- i A.L n i* -r

Member of times or one hundred times as much. At the same time I may

the Court and add that we quite recognize that there is a moral duty attaching

Past Prime to the administration of that property, though not a legal one."

i^rlen °f th«° Could Lord Derby, who put the question eliciting this reply, and which
Cmnpan^de- *s the repty °f the whole body of the City Companies, — could the Duke
daring much of Bedford, or any other right-intending honest member of the Commission,
of their pro- return any other answer had a like question been put to them 1 There is
S t T D0t no^ a lawver °f standing in the whole kingdom who would dispute the
trust CandWmt right and absolute power of the Companies over these properties, and for
its co'ntrol by society's sake it is to be hoped there are but few of the Firths, Beales,
the Company Phillipses, and their conspiring secretary class, who would reply contrari-
ia absolute. wise<

Lord Derby, in further interrogating Mr. Travers Smith, Past Prime
Warden of the Fishmongers' Company, elicited from that gentleman the
following clear statement, which in its main features and principles of
action applies to most of the Companies : —

" Although we maintain that the property other than the trust property
is at our own absolute disposal, I think the position of the matter
is a little curious in this respect. The critics of the Company say
you are bound to apply the whole of the increment upon the
property which you receive for objects similar to those which are
the objects of the direct trusts. We say, on the other hand, that
it is at our absolute disposal ; but while that is so, the Companies
(or at least the Company I have the honour to represent) have
really been spending on charitable objects and objects of beneficence
and public utility very much more than the whole of the incre-
ment upon that very property ; and not only so, but have been
spending very much more than the increment not alone upon that
property, but upon the property which we claim to be at our own
disposal as corporate property, even including in that corporate
property such property as has been derived either from the fees or
gifts or benefactions of our own members. In the year 1700 the
total net income of the Fishmongers' Company was 2078?. ; in the
year 1750 it was 5797?. ; in the year 1800 it was 9728?. ; in the
year 1850 it was 17,041?. ; and in the year 1880 it had increased
to 38,500?. Now giving a few figures as indicative of the distribu-
tion of our funds in the last year that I have mentioned (and that
is the last year for which our accounts have been tabulated and
made up) the 38,500?. in the year 1881 was applied in this way.
In charitable and benevolent objects internal to the Company,
that is their own members, within a few pounds of 15,000/. during
the year ; by way of increment to one of the charities which has
been confided to us (that is St. Peter's Hospital and Alms-houses)
3400?. ; in external charities (these are votes to various public
charities and beneficent institutions) 4000?., making 22,400?.
applied to charities and benevolent objects out of an income of
38,500?. In addition to that we gave in that year 4000?. for
technical education, and we gave to trade objects 1020?. The
expenses of the entertainments and hospitalities of the Company
were about (not quite, but nearly) 5500?. ; so that in the year 1881,
the income of the Company having been 2078?. at the beginning
of last century, and we only having received trust property that
would pay an income of about 1200?. since the beginning of the
last century, we have spent, and that is not a greater proportion
than has been in accordance with the universal tradition of the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 115

Company over a long scries of years, 22,400/. in direct charitable
and beneficent objects, besides 4000Z. on one particular class —
educational objects; and over 1000/. (between 1000Z. and 2000Z.)
on trade objects and the prosecution of offenders under the Acts
relative to the sale of fish, and assisting trade exhibitions and other
matters of that sort. \Ve are applying not only the whole incre-
ment of any property that could have been treated as affected by a
trust of any sort or kind, but I may say something like ten times
the amount for charitable and beneficent objects, and that the
proportion that we spend either on hospitality, or entertainment, or
in a merely ornamental way is comparatively small."

In presenting the evidence of Mr. James Beale it is hardly needed Mr. James
to remark that he has figured from first to last throughout this agitation Beale before
as Mr. Firth's chief lieutenant. What his part was in the " private and Jj^00^8"
confidential " circulars, issued by the conspirators from the office of the ciose C0nnec-
Commission, it is not for the writer to surmise. Any man can arrive at tion with
a fair conclusion on this point, never doubting but that he and his chief Firtn and
were not lacking in driving a nail wherever hammer-power was needed. Warr-
Secretary Warr, the disinterested, pure-minded official of the Commission,
would doubtless be ever ready at hand with aid in devising little schemes
to impart an air of impartiality to the record, and it may not be too
much to presume that the patriot Beale himself would not be backward
in framing such questions to witnesses as would, according to his view,
tell disadvantageously against the Companies. Be all this as it may, we
have Mr. Firth's lieutenant before the Commission on the fourth day of
its sitting.

It will be seen that this worthy agitator is, according to his own Beale as a
admission, a sort of political Jack-of- all-trades, a public lecturer wherever writer and
an audience could be collected, and an abuser of the Companies in the j£^Jc ag^"
Weekly Dispatch and the Echo ; head-cook of a charming association huntino-_
known as the Liberation Society, whose purpose is, in their own words, grounds and
" to devolute the property of the Church ;" presiding genius of a host of connection as
clubs in Chelsea, having for their main object the looking after the as **nine(i
electors in Mr. Firth's happy, hunting-grounds. Mr. Beale's labours with Onerous
these clubs are clearly Herculean. He states in his evidence that he has Clubs in
to look after a club in the King's Road having the euphonious title of Chelsea,
the Eleusis Club. His fatherly care is also given to a similar institution
in Hammersmith, called the Hammersmith Club, and another at Kensal
Town known as the Cobden Club. Here is a nice little array of duties
for this factotum of purity ! Well may Mr. Firth show keenness as to
the balances in hand with the various Companies ! Granted " hotch-
potch " to be brought about, there is field enough here for the absorption
of not a little of anything available. Inquiry made among Mr. Firth's
constituency has elicited that amongst the members of these various
societies Beale is known as " Gabber Beale," and that the clubs are
composed of working men in each locality, or rather of gangs of favoured
partners, ready at all times to promote the designs of the chief reformer
of men and things.

Lord Derby, with his usual clearness of perception, observed to
Mr. Beale, when under examination, " that the resolutions presented to
the Commission purported to be from the working-classes of the metro-
polis." " Now," said his Lordship, " if I rightly xinderstand you,
though it may be quite possible that these clubs do represent the general
opinion of the working classes, yet, as a matter of fact, they only represent
some few hundreds of persons in their borough" Gabber Beale, not a
little disconcerted at Lord Derby's telling remark, was further queried
thus by the chairman, Lord Derby. " Have you any evidence that tho

i 2

110

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Beale admits
his writings
and agitation
against the
Companies.

opinions expressed in those resolutions and suggestions handed to the
Commission are those of the working classes generally, or of any large
portion of them 1 " The gabber here came sadly to grief. All he could
say was, " I have lectured at all their clubs throughout the Metropolis
for years past, and in every case they universally assent to the ideas there
expressed." Sir Richard Cross here delicately inquired of the witness
whether the clubs referred to were not all upon one side, to which he,
faltering, gave the assenting yes ! Here we have an unique admission
as to the value of these pretended voices of the working classes. In
Chelsea, at all events, they simply use pretended endorsements of what-
ever the chief agitators put before them as means of furthering their own
purposes.

MR. JAMES BEALE * came under examination on the fourth day of the
Commissioners' sitting.

THE CHAIRMAN : I think we need hardly ask you whether you have
taken considerable interest in the subject with which this Commission
lias to deal ?

I have.

I believe as a member of the St. James's vestry you moved a resolu-
tion some years ago asking for an inquiry into the state of these
Companies ?

I did.

And was a memorial presented in consequence to the Secretary of
State ?

It was.

SIR KICHARD CROSS. — Was it sent to me 1

Yes, and its receipt was simply acknowledged.

The CHAIRMAN. — I believe you also prepared a statement for the dele-
gates appointed by the Metropolitan vestries ?

I did, and I hand in a copy of it.

I think you are also the present chairman of the Metropolitan Muni-
cipal Association, and a member of the London Municipal Reform
League ?

Yes.

Will you tell the Commission what is the constitution and the object
of those bodies 1

Those refer to larger questions than those which are before this Com-
mission. They are for the reform of the local government of the
Metropolis by the creation of one municipality on a representative basis.

You have, I believe, under various signatures written largely in the
press on the subject of these guilds ?

I have.

What are the signatures under which you have written 1

"Nemesis"2 in the Weekly Dispatch and "Father Jean" in the
Echo.

We may take it, I presume, that you have formed an opinion as to
the reforms which you consider desirable, and that you are prepared to
suggest some plan for carrying into effect those reforms ?

1 See tlie Grocers', Goldsmiths', Merchant Taylors', and Clotlnvorkers' Memorials
or Statements infra as to this gentleman's evidence.

2 A collection of the letters signed " Nemesis " in the Weekly Dispatch was placed
at the disposal of the Commission by Mr. Firth, and was examined with the authori-
ties in the office of the Commission. The writer appeared to be acquainted with (1)
Mr. Firth's work, " Municipal London," (2) with " Herbert on the Companies," and
(3) with the Return of the Companies' Charities presented to Parliament on the
motion of Lord R. Montagu in 1868, but he had evidently not consulted the re-
ports of the Charity Commissioners, nor the wills of the benefactors of the Com-
panies*

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 117

I am.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON. — What is the Liberation Society working
for?

They first deal with the objects that I have referred to, but they re-
fer, mainly, to that which the Church may claim for Church purposes.

Is it mainly directed against the Church 1

I would not say it was directed mainly against the Church, but
against the devolution of property to the Church where they think it is
rich enough.

The CHAIRMAN. — What are these Chelsea Clubs, the combined com-
mittee of which passed those resolutions ?

They are political clubs formed by working men in the several divi-
sions of the borough of Chelsea. There is one in the King's Koad,
called the " Eleusis Club ;" there is another at Hammersmith, called the
"Hammersmith Club;" and another at Kensal Town called the
" Cobden Club." Those clubs are composed of a number of working
men in each place.

I only put the question to you because I observe in the first paragraph
they say that : " It is desirable that the working classes of the Metro-
" polis should present to the Commissioners the following suggestions."
Now, if I rightly understand you, though it may be quite possible that
those clubs do represent the general opinion of the working classes, as a
matter of fact they only represent some few hundreds of persons in
their borough 1

So far as that is concerned, that is so ; but they are federated as one
club throughout the Metropolis, and a copy of that has been sent to
each, and you will, no doubt, receive the same resolutions from each.

Have you any evidence that the opinions expressed in these resolu-
tions are also those of the working classes generally, or of any large
portion of them ?

I must give a personal answer. I have lectured at all their clubs
throughout the Metropolis for years past, and in every case they uni~
versally assent to the ideas there expressed. "We have never had an
amendment upon this question, or upon the London Government ques-
tion, carried.

MR. FIRTH. — Has there not been a federation of all the working
men's clubs throughout London ?

Yes, there has.

SIR EICHARD CROSS. — As I understand you, these are political clubs ?

They are.

Are they all upon one side ?

Yes.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON. — Are you able to give us the number of
members of any one of these clubs ?

The "Eleusis" is 1000 strong.

What is the smallest number of any one of the clubs ?

The Hammersmith Club has 460 members ; that is the smallest, I
think. They are composed of the most intelligent working men of the
district in all cases.

The CHAIRMAN. — In these resolutions it is proposed that on the crea-
tion of a municipality for London, the whole of the funds of the guilds
should be handed over to that body for the benefit of the people of the
Metropolis ; is it meant by that that the property should be handed
over to the absolute discretion of the new municipal body, or that it
should be handed over for certain purposes limited and defined by
Parliament ?

Of which those persons will form a part.

118

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Particulars as
to Incorpora-
tion, Liveries'
numbers, Cor-
porate income
and Trust In-
come of the
various Com-
panies.

Your idea is that the funds should, in the first place, be thrown into
one mass ; that I understand to be your object ?

Yes.

That the total capital should be vested in such a municipality, if it
exists, or in commissioners, if the municipality does not exist.

.Mi;. TELL. — Would you tell us what constitutes the membership of
those clubs which have drawn up the resolutions which you have pre-
sented to the Commission ?

Certain monthly subscriptions.

The compass of this volume is strictly to expose the machinations of the
Companies' enemies and to demonstrate the great moral victory achieved
by the Livery Companies in, presence of the Commission. Never was
a more unprincipled attack made on rights and properties, and never were
men designing evil more thoroughly vanquished. It is impossible to be-
lieve that any Government, in the face of such exposures as are brought
out in course of this Inquiry, would attempt to tamper with the rights and
privileges of the Companies, proved as they have been in every case and
feature. The public had no idea that such irreproachable dispensations
of large incomes was possible, therefore, as a national example, the Com-
mission has been productive of great good. It is not possible, neither
is it needed, in this volume to detail the nature of the various Com-
panies' properties, incomes, and expenditures. The following, however,
is a condensed tabular view of all.

The dates of incorporation, the Corporate income stated separately
from the Trust income, and the members of each Livery are thus stated
to the Commission by the respective Companies in their formal returns : —

The following are known as the GREAT COMPANIES.

Incor- No. of Livery, Corporate Trust

Name of Company. porated. 1882. income. income.

Mercers' a!393 ... 97 ... 47,341 ... 35,417

Grocers' £1428 ... 178 ... 37,736 ... 500

Drapers' c!364 ... 237 ... 50,141 ... 28,513

Fishmongers' d!272 ... 452 ... 46,913 ... 3,800

Goldsmiths' e!327 ... 143 ... 43,505 ... 10,792

Skinners' /1327 ... 150 ... '18,977 ... 9,950

Merchant Taylors' ... #1326 ... 188 ... 31,243 ... 12,068

Haberdashers' M448 ... 373 ... 9,032 ... 20,000

Salters' z'1394 ... 119 ... 18,892 ... 2,148

Ironmongers' ;1464 ... 46 ... 9,625 ... 12,822

Vintners' M363 ... 193 ... 9,365 ... 1,522

Clothworkers' Z1528 ... 132 ... 40,458 ... 10,000

308 £363,228 £147,532

(a) This Company existed as a fraternity in the reign of Henry II. In 1192 the
Hospital of St. Thomas Aeons was founded, and the fraternity of Mercers constituted
patrons. Henry and Roger Fitz Alwyn, the two first Mayors of London in 1210 and
1214, were apparently Mercers, although the Drapers claim the former, (b) The
Grocers were originally called 'Pepperers, and are first mentioned in 1180. In 1345
the Pepperers, Canevacers, and Spicers formed themselves into the " Fraternity of St.
Anthony." In 1373 they assumed the title of Grocers', (c) The Gilda Parariorum
existed in 1180. The earliest ordinances were made in 1322, and in 1405 this Com-
pany appointed the Keeper of Blackwell Hall, established in 1397, for the sale of
woollen cloth, (d) The first charter extant is dated 1364, but the Company maintain
that its existence prior to the reign of Henry II. can be established, (e) This Com-
pany is mentioned in 1180, and in 1300 it is recognized by statute. (f) The Skinners'
appear at a very early period to have migrated from Dowgate Hill to St. Mary Axe,
aud thence to St. Mary Spital, returning in the reign of Henry III. to " Copped
Hall," the site of their present hall. (<j) la 1267 a dispute arose between this Com-
pany and the Goldsmiths', and in 1299 Edward I. granted a licence to adopt the name
of "'Taylors' aud Linen Armourers'. " (A) Originally a branch of the Mercers', and

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION.

119

at one time associated with the Feltmakers'. From the City records it appears the
first ordinances were made in 1372. (*') The fraternity of Brethren and Sisters,
which existed at an early period at Allhallows, Bread Street, appears to have been
identical with this guild, (j) From records of the Company, this mystery was
established as a guild 100 years at least before incorporation, (k) A Fraternity or
Company of the mystery of Vintners, known as the " Wine Tunners of Gascoigne,"
existed at a very early period. (I) The Fullers were incorporated in 1480, and the
Sheermen iu 1507. These crafts arose out of an association subsidiary to the ancient
Guild of Tellarii, or woollen weavers, and in 1528 were united and reincorporated
under the name of Clothworkers.

The following are designated the
acknowledges them on strictest par

Incor-

Name of Company. porated.

Apothecaries' al 617

Armourers' &1453

Bakers' 1509

Barbers' 1461

Basketmakers" c —

Blacksmiths' d!325

Bowyers' <?1621

Brewers' /1445

Broderers' gl561

Butchers' M606

Carpenters' t'1477

Clockmakers' 1631

Coachmakers' 1677

Cooks' 1488

Coopers' .' yiSOl

Cordwainers' 1439

Curriers' M606

Cutlers' 1415

Distillers' —

Dyers' 1471

Fanmakers' 1709

Farriers' Z*1356

Feltmakers' ml 604

Fletchers' n —

Founders' o!614

Framework Knitters'. ^1657

Fruiterers' 1605

Girdlers' 1327

Glass Sellers' 1664

Glaziers' 1638

Glovers' —

Gold and Silver Wire

Drawers' 1693

Gunmakers' g!637

Homers' ?'1638

Innholders' ....". s!663

Joiners' 1570

Leathers ellers' £1440

Loriners' wl711

Masons' 01677

Musicians' 1472

Needlemakers' 1656

Painters' 101467

Pattenmakers' . . 1682

MINOR COMPANIES, though the writer
with their wealthier brethren.

Trust
income.

£500
60
320
600

15,482

632

940

127

180

4,700

1,600

Corporate

No. of Livery.

income.

... 50 ...

£3,398

... 64 ...

8,026

... 187 ...

1,591

... 92 ...

1,120

... 28 ...

... 63 ...

684

... 29 ...

550

... 49 ...

3,157

... 44 ...

no return

... 139 ...

1,389

... 108 ...

10,378

... 51 ...

1,169

... 106 ...

1,179

... 69 ...

2,380

... 139 ...

2,420

... 100 ...

6,154

... 93 ...

1,245

... 89 ...

5,337

... 28 ...

... 66 ...

6,000

... 82 ...

250

... f ...

240

... 59 ...

172

... 16 ...

150

... 98 ...

1,853

... 35 ...

180

... 87 ...

467

... 69 ...

2,932

... 43 ...

100

... 39 ...

260

... 14 ...

150

26
7

117

386

107

115

return.

1,000

190

130

1,374
90
40

2,565

100

1,327

1,312

16,395

1,267

400

255

800

286

220
2,333

.. 2,300
14

120 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Incor- Corporate Trust

Name of Company. porated. No. of Livery. income. income.

Pewterers' z!473 ... G9 ... 3,610 ... 240

Plaisterers' 1501 ... 48 ... 867 ... 33

Playing-card Makers'.. 1628 ... 50 ... 50 ...

Plumbers' #1611 ... 40 ... 882 ... 18

Poulterers' *1504 ... 65 ... 620 ... 430

Saddlers' a!272 ... 84 ... 10,243 ... 1,000

Scriveners' b!617 ... 31 ... 846 ... 10

Shipwrights' c!605 ... 171 ... 833 ...

Spectacle-makers' ... 1629 ... 356 ... 1,087 ... 45

Stationers' d!556 ... 260 ... 3,170 ... 1,576

Tallowchandlers' e!462 ... 101 ... no return ... 220

Tinplate Workers' ... 1682 ... 68 ... do. ... 37

Turners' 1604 ... 193 ... 718

Tylers and Bricklayers' 1568 ... 73 ... 664 ... 170

Upholders' £1626 ... 33 ... 333 ... 20

Waxchandlers' g!483 ... 27 ... 875 ... 230

Weavers' 1100-35 ... 77 ... no return ... 360

Wheelwright 1670 ... 92 ... 319

Woolmen... h 22 300 —

5,031 £113,575 £37,528

The returns state eighty-eight, the number on the City register not given,
(a) Associated with the Grocers' prior to 1617. (i) A recognized guild at the
time of Edward II. (<?) Exists by prescription, and not under Charter, (d) United
to the Spurriers' in 1571. (e) The Charter recites that this was an ancient fraternity
in the City. (/) The records and accounts of this Company date from 1418.
(g) This mystery was in existence in 1528. (K) Fined in 1180 as an adulterine guild
not duly licensed hy the king, (i) Existed about 1350. (j) Existed for a consider-
able period before incorporation, as shown by the Company's archives. (&) Contri-
buted five marks to Edward III. in carrying out wars with France. (/) In 1375
this Company elected two members to the Common Council, but in 1384 the old
custom of election by the wards was revived. (I*) Erected into a mystery by the
Court of Mayor and Aldermen in 1356. (m) Originally united to the Haberdashers'
Company. («) No Charter, exists by prescription, livery obtained before Henry VII.
(o) Existed prior to 1365. (p) The sixty-fifth in order of precedence of the City
Companies, (q) Ordinances of 1670 approved by Lord Keeper, and Chief Justices of
Queen's Bench and Common Pleas, (r) Classed amongst the forty-eight Companies
in reign of Edward III. (s) Known as " Hostillars " in reign of Henry VI.
(t) First mentioned in 1372. («) Ordinances date bnck to 1245. (y) Earliest
accounts date from 1620. (to) Existed as a fraternity in reign of Edward III.
(ar) Earliest record dated 1348. (y) Ordinances dated 1365. (z) Existed hy pre-
scription in 1345. (a) Supposed to have existed in Anglo-Saxon times, (b) Records
extend back to 1374. (c) Existed as a fraternity in 1428. (d) A brotherhood or
society of test-writers is believed to have existed a century before incorporation,
(e) A Charter is said to have been granted by Henry VI. in 1426. (f) Existed between
1460-65. (g) Mentioned in 1371. (h) Ordinances confirmed by authorities in 1587.
No Charter, exists by prescription.

Able charac- It is too generally overlooked that the conclusions arrived at in the

ter of the Dis- matter of this Commission are of value only as those of a portion only of its

sent Report. mernbers, and these before known as unfriendly to the Companies. One

import^c'e member in particular has for years been a chief instigator of agitation

consequent on against them, and may be said to have placed himself in the position of

tho Warr public prosecutor in the case. The other members have addressed her

conspiracy. Majesty with their Dissent Keport, and it is within the mark to state that

the same is in every way an abler document than that which Mr. Warr,

Secretary of the Commission, drafted. What less could possibly emanate

from the Companies' enemy, who as it appears without authority used the

names of Lord Derby and his colleagues as parties combining in an

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 121

illegal and unwarranted conspiracy against the Companies ! The audacious
act annuls any effect of the Report itself, which is now with fairness
looked upon as little more than a partisan document of Mr. Warr. It is
with this new light shed upon the matter, after the Public Eecord may be
said to have been closed and sealed, that the "Dissent " Report justly
merits the increased importance attaching to it.

"DISSENT" REPORT.

TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.

May it please Your Majesty,

WE, the undersigned Commissioners appointed by Your Majesty to
investigate the affairs of the Livery Companies of the City of London,
humbly present to Your Majesty the following Report.

We regret that, as the result of an inquiry in every stage of which all
Your Majesty's Commissioners have cordially co-operated, it should be
necessary for us to record our dissent from the conclusions arrived at by dissent from
our colleagues. We have, however, carefully considered their Report, the concln-
and we find ourselves unable to agree with it in several important par- sions of tne
ticulars. majority.

Under these circumstances we conceive that we shall best discharge Brief state-
our duty to Your Majesty by briefly stating the conclusions which we ment of.the
have ourselves formed with regard to the several heads of Your of°^S1<
Majesty's Commission. minority.

These heads relate (1) to the foundation and object of the Livery Heads of
Companies of the City of London ; (2) to the constitution of these Commission.
Companies, and the privileges enjoyed by those who are members of
them ; (3) to the salaries paid by the Companies to their officers and
servants, and the mode in which these persons are appointed ; (4) to
the sources of their corporate and trust income, the capital value of
their property, their administration of it, and the mode in which the
income arising from it is expended ; (5) to the question of an alteration
in the constitution of the Companies should any three or more of the
Commissioners consider an alteration " expedient and necessary."

1. As regards the circumstances under which the City Companies Foundation
were founded, we are of opinion that at the time when Your Majesty an(i obJect-
was pleased to issue this Commission some misapprehension prevailed.
It was supposed that the Companies had till recent times consisted of
members of the trades the names of which they bear,1 that the objects
of their foundation had been the organization of these trades, and that

1 The authority on the subject which has been most often quoted is the Eeport
of the Municipal Commission appointed in 1834. The following account is there
given of the companies: — •" They were, in their original conformation, not so much
' trading societies as trade societies, instituted for the purpose of protecting the con-
' sumer or the employer against the incompetency or fraud of the dealer or the
' artizan, and equally with the intent of securing a maintenance to the workman
' trained to the art, according to the notion of early times, by preventing his being
' undersold in a labour market by an unlimited number of competitors. Further-
' more, the companies acted as domestic tribunals, adjudicating, or rather arbitrating,
' between master and man, and settling disputes; thus diminishing hostile litigation
' and promoting amity and goodwill.

" They were also in the nature of benefit societies, from which the workman, in re-
' turn for the contributions which he had made when in health and vigour to the
' common stock of the guild, might be relieved in sickness or when disabled by the
' infirmities of age. This character speedily attracted donations for other charitable
' purposes from benevolent persons who could not find any better trustees than the
' ruling members of these communities; and hence arose the numerous charitable
'gifts and foundations now entrusted to their care.

" They also possessed the character of modern clubs. They were institutions in
' ' which members of the same class and their families assembled in social intercourse."

122

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Misconcep-
tions as to
the origin of
the Com.
panics.

Early guilds.

Localization
of trades in
London in
early times.

Ordinances
of the guilds.

Inns of Court
and Chan-
cery similar
bodies.
Charters.

their present condition, which is that of societies having for the most
part only a nominal connection with these trades, where such still exist —
and many are known to have become obsolete, or to have disappeared
from London — is one different from their former condition. The re-
searches of archaeologists and the passages in the returns of the Com-
panies relating to their early history l seem to point to a different
conclusion.

The companies of London prove to have sprung from a number of
guilds, which were associations of neighbours for the purposes of mutual
assistance. Such associations were very numerous in the Middle Ages,
both in town and country, and they appear to have abounded in London
at a very early period. A " frith guild " and a " knighten guild "
seem to have existed in London in Anglo-Saxon times,2 and at the
time of the Norman Conquest there were probably many other bodies of
a like nature in London. Their main objects were the relief of poverty
and the performance of masses for the dead.

The trades of London appear to have had in early times their recog-
nized quarters in the City, and owing to this localization they formed
themselves into guilds, of which the principal objects were those above
mentioned.3 These guilds, however, also undertook the regulation
of the trades to which the members belonged. They appointed over-
seers to inspect the wares produced or sold, and also umpires to adjudi-
cate in cases of disputes between masters and workmen. They generally
had halls, at which meetings of the principal members took place for
purposes of inspection, arbitration, and the consideration of claims to
charitable relief, and at these halls banquets were frequently given.4
They were purely voluntary associations, and required no licence from
the State.

" Ordinances " were framed for the internal regulation of the guilds at
the time of their formation by the ' most influential members. Such
ordinances were (1) religious; (2) social and charitable; (3) industrial.
Examples of the first class were rules for the attendance of the mem-
bers at the services of the church, for the promotion of pilgrimages, and
for the celebration of masses for the dead ; examples of the second,
ordinances relating to common meals and the relief of poor brethren and
sisters ; examples of the third, regulations as to the hours of labour,
the processes of manufacture, the wages of workmen, and technical
education.

The Inns of Court and Chancery and Sergeants' Inn were probably
originally bodies in some respects similar to the guilds, though not
corporate bodies.8

Charters were granted by Edward III. or Eichard II. to many of the
Companies. Such grants were made for valuable consideration. Suc-
ceding sovereigns renewed the charters down to the time of the accession
of the House of Hanover. The sum paid by the Companies to the

1 See the Essay of Dr. Brentano, and the " Original Ordinances of more than 100
Early English Guilds," edited by Mr. Toulmin Smith (Early English Text Society).
See also the chapters on the Companies in Mr. Loftie's History of London, vol. I.
pp. 120 — 225, and the returns (Part I.) and supplementary papers of the Mercers',
Grocers', Goldsmiths', and Clothworkers' Companies.

2 See Loftie's! History of London, vol. I. p. 165, and the passages in the first and
third volumes of Stubbs' Constitutional History, which have reference to the early
guilds of London.

* See Loftie's History of London, vol. I. pp. 165 sqq.

4 See the ordinances in Mr. Toulmin Smith's "Early Guilds," and also the
returns (Part I.) of many of the Companies. See also Hallam, Middle Ages, I.,
349, 350.

8 The Inns of the Temple were founded respectively in 1340 and 1560, Barnard's

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 123

national exchequer in respect of the original and inspeximus charters Inspeximus
seems to have been very considerable.1 charters.

The terms of the charters are in most cases obviously founded on the Effect of
ordinances. They recognize the guilds as existing, " administered," to charters,
quote the Avords of the Bishop of Chester, " by their own officers, and
" administering their own property in the usual way, the aldermen of
" the guilds holding the estates when the guilds possessed estates
" direct from the King." 2 The hospitals and Inns of Court of London
and many provincial guilds received their first charters about the time
of the incorporation of the London Companies, and inspeximus^charters
afterwards in the same Avay at the commencement of each reign.

At the time of their incorporation the then existing members formed Byelaws.
" byelaws " to control the details of their organization.

On their incorporation the Companies of London, like all incorporated Effect of
bodies, became amenable to the processes of scire facias and quo warranto ; incorporation
but there is nothirig in their history from the time of their incorporation
to the present day to Avarrant the supposition that they could ever have
been legally dissolved. From the time when the State recognized their
existence, the only obligation of the governing bodies, Avhich succeeded
the " aldermen " or head men, has been to carry out, so far as has been
practicable having regard to change of times, the terms of the charters
and byelaAvs, and to apply the trust funds to the purposes for which
they Avere bequeathed. The corporate property of the Companies, as
distinguished from that Avhich they hold as trustees for charitable pur-
poses, has always been in the eye of the laAV their own, just as much as
if the Companies Avere private individuals.

A licence in mortmain was contained in most of the charters, and Custom of
some of the charters of inspeximus contain lists of the lands held by London as
the companies at the time they Avere granted, and expressly recognize j m01
the title of the companies thereto ; 3 but licences of mortmain were not of
much importance as regards the Companies of the City of London, for
by the immemorial custom of the City " free burgage " lands, ie. lands
held, as stated, " direct from, the CroAvn," could be devised to corpora-
tions Avithout any limitation as to value. At the time of their incor-
poration, and for centuries aftenvards, land Avas throughout England the
principal kind of property, and it Avas only natural that, having the
advantage of this custom of the City, the Companies should soon become,
as they in fact did become, large holders of real property Avithin the
Avails of London.4

Their constitution Avas always aristocratic. The administrators, Atho Aristocratic
are generally named in the first charters, Avere the principal capitalists constitution,
and employers of labour, or else distinguished citizens not connected

Inn in 1445, Clement's Inn in 1478, Clifford's Inn in 1345, Furnival's Inn in 1563,
Gray's Inn in 1357, Lincoln's Inn in 1370, Lyon's Inn in 1420, New Inn in 1485,
Serjeant's Inn in 1429 and 1656, Staple Inn in 1415, Thavies' Inn in 1519. Thus
they were founded at about the same time as the Companies of London. The Lord
Chancellor stated, however, in his evidence that he did not consider the Guilds and
the Inns of Court in pari conditione (page 189).

1 The Companies also contributed large sums to the national exchequer for the
Scotch Wars of Henry VIII. ; as a "benevolence" under Mary; for the Spanish
War in the time of Elizabeth ; aud also during the periods of the Rebellion, the
Commonwealth, and the Restoration. In some cases these contributions were loans
lent on the security of the Crown lands ; but the probability is that very little of the
money was ever returned.

8 Stubbs' Constitutional History, vol. I. Account of London.

1 See the charter granted to the Drapers' Company by James I., and that granted
by the same King to the Vintners' Company. (Drapers' returns, Vintners' returns.)

* See the case of Attorney-General c. Fishmongers' Company (Preston's Charity)
decided by Lord Cottenham in 1834. 2 Beav., 151.

124

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Companies
of—

(1.) Mer-
chants,
(2.) Trades-
men,

(3.) Manu-
facturers.

Patrimony.

Powers of
search.

Monopolies.

Cessation of
connection
with trades
at the eud of
the 16th
century.

Cessation at
about the
same period
of connection
with religion.

with commerce or manufactures, and by the terms of the charters these
boards had complete control over the associations. Some of these, such
as the Mercers' and Grocers' Companies, appears to have consisted, to a
great extent, of merchants and wholesale dealers ; others, such as the
Fishmongers' Company, and the other Companies deriving their names
from trades, of shopkeepers and their apprentices ; others, such as the
Goldsmiths' Company, the Clothworkers' Company, and the other com-
panies deriving their names from " arts and mysteries," of master manu-
facturers and artisans. But the names of the companies are misleading,
for the reasons that (1), from time immemorial the privileges of mem-
bership of a London Company have been hereditary, one mode of admis-
sion having always been by patrimony, which causes the right to the
freedom to descend to all the lineal descendants, male and female l of
every freeman ; (2), from time immemorial a system of apprenticeship
has entered into the constitution of the Companies, under which mem-
bers of the Companies, irrespective of whether they were or were not
members of the trades, the names of which were borne by the Com-
panies, were privileged to receive apprentices. These reasons have
caused the Companies to consist largely of non-craftsmen from the earliest
times, and the proportion of non-craftsmen seems always to have been
particularly large among the administrators or governing bodies.2

The charters, particularly the later ones, generally extend the area of
the trade control assumed by the Companies in their original state as
guilds. Under some the Companies acquire power to prevent persons
from carrying on their callings without belonging to a Company, and
powers of searching for and destroying defective wares within a radius
of several miles from St. Paul's. It is needless to say that monopolies
and powers of search of this description are contrary to law, and that the
Companies never really received from the Crown either of these privileges.
From the time of their incorporation, however, down to a period which
is difficult exactly to fix, they exercised them within the City and its
liberties ; never, probably in the more extended area over which by
virtue of some of the more recent charters they acquired a nominal
control.3

Their decay as trade organizations had certainly commenced at the
outset of the sixteenth century ; and probably by the end of it they
had practically ceased to be of any use for industrial purposes.4

The period of the cesser of the connection of the Companies with the
trade and manufactures of London is approximately that of the Reforma-
tion, and as Catholicism was of the essence of their religious rules, at
the time when they ceased to have any control over the trades and in-
dustries from which they took their names, they also ceased to be in
any real sense religious fraternities. Thus, of their three original

1 The admission of women still continues in some companies, e.g. in the Cloth
workers' Company.

8 See the statement nmle by the Clothworkers' Company (Clothworkers' return),
that of the five persons named as master and wardens in the Company's Charter of
15GO, only one was a clothworker ; and that in still earlier times the governing body
contained scarcely any clothworkers. See also the statement of the Drapers' Com-
pany (Drapers' return), that in 1415 the Company was not confined to drapers; and
that of the Skinners' Company (Skinners' return), that in 1445 there was only o::e
skinner by trade a member.

s The expenses of the searches appear to have been defrayed principally out of the
fines imposed upon convicted tradesmen and manufacturers. There is no evidence
that the Companies ever acquired any property clothed with any trust for the promo-
tion of trade or manufactures.

4 See the Liber Horn, edited by Mr. Riley; the " Rcmembrancia " of the Cor-
poration of London; and the opening passage of Mr. Froude's English History,
vol. I. p. 50.

LONDON CITY LIVEUY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 125

functions, two, those of common worship and association for commercial
purposes, became obsolete about four centuries ago. Their remaining
function, that of hospitality and chanty, has since this period been the
only one which it lias been possible for them to discharge. It appears 1
to us to be important to insist on this side of the case. We think that
one of the results of this Commission has been to prove very clearly
that for the last 400 years the Companies of London have been mainly
what they are at the present day, viz., associations identified in name
with trade and manufactures ; but whose real objects have been rather
hospitality and benevolence. They have certainly received charter after
charter from Your Majesty's Royal predecessors at periods when such
associations could not possibly have been called into existence for any
other purposes.

The Companies are, at the present day, possessed of a large corporate Corporate
and trust estate, the principal element in which is a considerable amount and trust
of land let on building leases in the City of London. With respect estate-
to that portion of it which is corporate property, the Companies have in proteaf; Of
their returns, while giving full information as to the situation and rental the Com-
of the property, protested 2 against this part of the inquiry as illegal, panies.
It is obvious that the Companies are perfectly justified in making this
protest, for their corporate property is as much their own, and with
as full a right of disposition in the eye of the laAV, as that of any private
individual, and the Crown has no more right to inquire into the mode
in which it was acquired, and the way in which the income arising from
it is spent, than it has to make similar inquiries with respect to the
estate or income of a landed gentleman or merchant.

The returns, however, of the Companies, the Reports of the Charity Evidence in
Commissions appointed between 1818 and 1837, the Reports of Your ^rtehturns
Majesty's present Inspectors of Charities, and the proceedings which jj^portj!, Of
have taken place in Chancery in respect of the informations filed by H.M. In-
Attorney-Generals against the Companies contain jointly a considerable spectora of
store of information on the subject of the nature and origin of the Chanties,
corporate estate of the London Companies. Of such information the
following is a summary : —

1 . There can be little doubt that some of the first property acquired Sites of halls
by the Companies must have consisted of the sites of their original Pr°bably
halls. The land was probably bought and the halls built out of con- Purcha'ed-
tributions made for the purpose by existing members. The sites of

some (not by any means of all)3 of their original almshouses were probably
similarly acquired.

2. There is a strong probability that a large amount of the corporate Custom of
savings of the different Companies, i.e. monies arising from fees and Cit7 witn
fines as hereinafter explained, was in the earliest times invested in the respect
purchase of building land in the City. Such purchases would of course lands."1
have been impossible, apart from the custom of the City, which dispensed

with the necessity of a licence in mortmain in the case of land held in

1 See the return of the Grocers' Company (Part I., Return F.) in which is included
a minute of the court, dated August 18, 1687, containing no allusion to trade, but a
resolution to make the Company " what it once was (in allusion to serious losses re-
cently sustained), a nursery of charities and seminary of good citizens." It is signi-
ficant also that Mr. Herbert's History of the Companies of London, which is perhaps
the standard work of authority on the subject, ends at the Restoration, and contains
— though it is the result of much research into the archives of the guilds — very few
allusions to their connection with their trades. See also Waltham and Austin's case
(8 Coke 125a) and Davenant and Hurdis (11 Coke 86a), from which it is obvious that
as cnrly as the sixteenth century their trade privileges could be successfully disputed
in courts of law.

2 See the returns of the Companies. 3 Many were founded by benefactors.

126

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Investment
in land of
corporate
savings.

Firo of
London.

The then
existing
members,
who rebuilt
the halls and
house pro-
perty, the
second
founders of
the Com-
panies.

Lands in
London
acquired by
purchase
from the
Crown.

free burgage. The amount of land, in respect of which the Companies
have obtained licences in mortmain, seems to be comparatively small.
On the contrary, tlio amount purchased under the custom outside the
licences seems to have been large, and we think it probable that much
of this was paid for out of the accumulations of the contributions of
then existing members, or members very recently deceased, to the
common purse.1

3. The Fire of London for a time ruined the City Companies. Their
halls, alnishouses, and schools, and almost all their house property in the
City was destroyed. At this time the charities of which the Companies
were trustees, were not nearly so numerous as at present ; but they were
still even then both numerous and opulent, and the income which sup-
ported them consisted almost entirely of rents and rent-charges. Fire
insurance was unknown at the time, and the expense of repairing the
ravages of the fire was borne solely by the Companies, without State or
municipal aid. There is no doubt that the then existing members made
large contribiitions out of their private means for this purpose. The
principal persons connected with the Companies were determined that
their schools and alnishouses should not be closed, and to prevent this
they subscribed a very large sum. These persons may be regarded as
the second founders of the Companies, which must have become ex-
tinct, along with all their great charities, without their assistance. The
present income, both corporate and trust, of the Companies, is really the
interest of the capital which was thus invested. At the time when the
house property of the Companies was rebuilt they had long ceased to
have any connection with the trades which they originally, to some ex-
tent, represented, and were precisely what they are now — private asso-
ciations having for their main objects charity and hospitality. The
Companies did not recover from the effects of the fire, to which must
be added the impoverished condition produced by State exactions, till
the middle of the last or even the commencement of the present
century^2

4. The lands of the City Companies, or rather the rent-charges issuing
thereout, which were confiscated by the State at the time of the Re-
formation as being held to superstitious uses, were purchased back from
the Crown in the time of Edward VI. The purchase-money was probably
to a great extent subscribed by then existing members out of their own
pockets. In any case it is clear law that all such property is the absolute
property of the purchasers, with as unlimited a power of disposition as if
it belonged to private individuals.3 A very large amount of the City
house property of the Companies was thus acquired.

1 See the returns of the Companies, the Reports of the first Charity Commis-
sioners, and the Reports of Her Majesty's present Inspectors of Charities.

2 See particularly the information given by the Mercers' and Grocers' Companies
with respect to their poverty during the period above mentioned. See also Mr.
Hare's account of the Mercers' Company's Charities, and the preface to Mr. Herbert's
work.

3 This has been repeatedly held in Chancery. See Lord Cottenham's judgment in
Attorney-General v. Fishmongers' Company (Preston's Charity), 2 Beav. 151. See
also the returns of the Goldsmiths' Company, (Part V.), in which the court say, " It

will be seen that a great, if not the largest, part of the property held by the Gold-
smiths' Company (i.e. the portions of their estate which had been confiscated as
' held to superstitious uses) was acquired by purchase from the Crown. It is held by
'as good a title as any property in the kingdom, and it appears to us — and if pro-
' perly considered would, we believe, appear to law-makers as well as to lawyers—
' that if Parliament were to dispossess us of any portion of our property, or to in-
terfere with the appropriation of its revenues without compensation, a principle of
law would be attacked, by the violation of which the property of every landowner iu
the kingdom would be rendered insecure."

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 127

5. The Ulster estate of the City Companies was also acquired by pur- Ulster estate
chase from the Crown, in the reign of James I. The money with which p^chase ^
it was bought consisted of the subscriptions of existing members. At from the
the time of the purchase there can be no doubt that the Companies were Crown,
constituted precisely as they are at present, and there is no pretence for
suggesting that the land was conveyed subject to any express or implied

trust, or that it passed to the Companies otherwise than as their absolute
property with as unlimited power of disposition as if it had been con-
veyed to private individuals.1

6. After the Reports of the Charity Commissions, which sat between Proceedings
1818 and 1837, a number of informations were filed by the Attorney- in Chancery.
General against the Companies, mainly, it would appear, at the instance

of the parochial authorities of the City, who laid claim to the increment Companies
of certain rents as being charitable income available for the relief of the generally
poor. The result of the litigation was that the Companies succeeded in successful-
almost every case in demonstrating their clear legal right to deal with the
increment as in every respect their own.2

Since Your Majesty's present Inspectors of Charities have reported Recent cases,
there have been two cases in Chancery which have attracted some attention
— the Merchant Taylors' Company v. the Attorney- General (Donkin's Donkin's and
Charity),3 and the Attorney-General v. the Wax Chandlers' Company Kendall's
(Kendall's Charity).4 In the former case the Merchant Taylors' Com- charities,
pany were plaintiffs. On Mr. Hare, one of Your Majesty's Inspectors of
Charities, mentioning to the court of the Company that he had some doubt
as to the increment of the rents left under the will being corporate
income, the Company at once took the best available legal opinion, and
finding that counsel agreed with Mr. Hare, they instituted a suit claiming
a declaration that the whole rent of Donkin's estate was trust as opposed
to corporate income and subject to the specific payments mentioned in
Donkin's will. This claim was granted in the Court of First Instance
by Lord Romilly, then Master of the Kolls, and in the Court of Appeal
this ruling was affirmed, the Lord Chancellor, however, Lord Hatherley,
describing the case " as one of very great nicety," in which he arrived at
a conclusion " with considerable hesitation."5 The information against
the Wax Chandler's Company was not, it is true, a friendly suit, but the
case was one of extreme difficulty, and the decision of the House of Lords
declaring the increment to belong to the charity as opposed to the Com-
pany has been much canvassed.

We think it clearly appears from the history of this litigation, which Results of
commenced in 1837, and has only just ended, (1) that the courts of the litigation.
Companies, as might be expected from bodies of honourable men, have
had their titles carefully investigated in all doubtful cases ; (2) that
it is certain that the law officers of the Crown would at the present time
direct few, if any, proceedings in Chancery, if they Avcre granted inspec-
tion of all the title deeds of the Companies.

We desire to add: (1) that the reports of the First Charity Commissioners Favourable
are very favourable to the Companies. The points made use of at their pe.po,r ^,of (l]
suggestion in the informations were of an abstruse and technical kind, Comixus-1""^
arising on the construction of obscurely expressed wills, and the Com- sioners, (2)
missioners never imputed to the Companies anything worse than an present In-
erroneous interpretation of difficult language. They speak also in the specters of
highest terms of the liberality of the Companies as regards their charities :

1 See the supplemental statements of the Fishmongers', Ironmongers', and Cloth-
workers' Companies.

" See the returns of the Companies and Mr. Hare's reports.

a L.R. 11 Eq. 35, 6 Ch. 512. * L.R. 6 App. C. 1.

5 See Memorandum of Merchant Taylors' Company.

128

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Moral as well
as legal
claim to com-
plete control
of corporate
property.

Constitution
of the Com-
panies well
ascertained
at the time
when the
Commission
was issued.

Observance
of charters
and byelaws.

Privileges of
freemen and
liverymen.

(2) that the Reports of Your Majesty's present Inspectors of Charities
are perhaps oven more favourable, and show that the courts were between
the years 1860 and 1865, as the returns show that they are at the present
time, excellent bodies of trustees, who spend far more than they arc bound
to spend on the charities which they administer.1

We have thought it right to lay the above facts before Your Majesty
and before the public, because the position of the Companies of the
City has been in our opinion greatly misunderstood, and because we con-
ceive that the result of this inquiry has been to establish a moral no Ics.s
than a clear legal right on the part of the bodies which have been the
subject of it to be allowed to retain the complete control of their cor-
porate or private property.

Some misconception also appears to us to prevail as to the attitude
assumed by the Companies towards the Municipal Commission appointed
by Your Majesty's Royal predecessor King William IV. in 1834. Many
of the Companies gave the Commissioners a full account of their
charters, byelaws, and general constitution, but declined to answer
questions put by the Commissioners relating to their corporate, i.e., as we
have explained, their private property. Such questions were clearly
ultra vires for the reasons above given,2 and the refusal of the Companies
was perfectly justifiable. Some of the Companies refused altogether to
answer the questions of the Commissioners, and they were, in our opinion,
justified in so doing, as there was no pretence for regarding them as
within the purview of a " Municipal Commission," for the reason that
these bodies are not at law " municipal corporations," nor in any sense an
integral part of the municipality of the City of London.3

2. The second part of your Majesty's Commission relates to the con-
stitution of the Companies of the City and the privileges enjoyed by the
members. The organization of the Companies is really a matter of public
knowledge. Their charters and byelaws were carefully examined by the
Municipal Commissioners appointed in 1834, and are set out at length
in the valuable appendix to that Report, from which it is obvious that
the courts or governing bodies have always striven to abide by the spirit
and even the letter, wherever it is possible, of these instruments. Of
course they contain much that is archaic and impossible nowadays to
carry out. The same careful observance of their charters and byelaws,
in so far as they affect the Companies as associations for the promotion of
charity and hospitality, is visible in those parts of the returns received
by us which are addressed to this subject.

As to privileges, the Companies consist partly of mere freemen, who are
as a rule artisans, partly of liverymen, who are members for the most
part of the middle class, and who pay a considerable fee to the common
purse on " taking out their livery."

1 Mr. Hare says (Report on Grocers' Company's Charities) : ' There can be no
doubt that in the case of these ancient, wealthy, and liberal bodies the funds are
practically secure."
3 See supra, p. 4.

3 Amongst others Sir W. Follctt, Sir J. Scarlett (afterwards Lord Abinger), and
Sir F. Pollock (afterwards Chief Baron Pollock), so advised. The following is an
extract from the opinion written by Sir F. Pollock on a case submitted to him by the
Grocers' Company : — " I am of opinion that the authority purporting to be given (to
the Commission) of calling for all charters and papers is not legal ; nor am I aware
that the Crown can confer upon the Commissioners any means of compelling the
attendance of witnesses or the production of papers. I think the Grocers' Com-
pany is not a municipal corporation — it has nothing to do directly with the govern-
ment or protection of any city, town, or place, — and I think the influence of its
proceedings upon the election of either the magistrates or the members of the City
of London does not make it a municipal corporation." — See Supplemental Return
of Grocers' Company.

LONDON CITY L1VEBY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 129

It is certain that there are 10,000, and there may very possibly be
15,000 freemen, members of the working classes, who mostly pursue
their callings in London. The only privilege which they enjoy is a
claim to charitable relief in case they or their widows or orphan daughters
fall into poverty or other undeserved misfortune. The relief of poor
members, their widows and orphans, was undoubtedly one of the chief
objects of the foundation of the Companies, and it is regarded by all the
courts as a principal duty. Not only the trust incomes, but also the
private incomes of the Companies are available for this purpose, with the
result that many poor members are thereby prevented from becoming a
charge on the parochial rates.

Misfortune is not confined to the artisan class, and liverymen, of whom
there are 7000, their widows and orphans, are as much entitled as free-
men or freowomen to relief out of the Companies' funds ; but it is a rule
in, as we believe, all the Companies that a liveryman must always give up
his livery, his fine being returned to him, at the time when his petition
is sent in.

The relief consists in admission to the almshouses or in pensions, Almshouses.
those paid to destitute liverymen or their relations being of greater value Pensions,
than those paid to freemen and freewomen.

Great pains appear to be taken by the Companies to prevent imposition,
and we believe that their internal charity relieves in a delicate manner
much undeserved misfortune.1

A place upon the court of one of the more prominent Companies is a Courts.
position of some dignity and influence, but it is not reached till after
many years of membership, nor without considerable expense in the
payment of fees ; (1) on entrance ; (2) on "call" to the livery ; and (3)
on promotion to the court and to office, which is always taken by a new
member of a court.2 Members of the courts are the hosts, and have a
place at all the entertainments of the Companies ; but the sum spent on
the entertainments to which a liveryman of one of the opulent Com-
panies is invited often represents little more than the interest of his livery
fine ; while there are many Companies which have absolutely no cor- Numbers of
porate income, except such as arises from the accumulations of the con- liverymen
tributions of past and present members. We think it probable that of receive
the 7000 liverymen, about half receive nothing in any way from inherited n°tning fr°m
funds, though their contributions in fines and fees amount to a very con- fun(js. •
siderable sum.

The three modes of admission — patrimony, apprenticeship, and re- Modes of
demption — are of great antiquity, and are essential features in the con- admission,
stitution of the Companies of the City of London. The Reports of your
Majesty's Inspectors of Charities make it impossible to doubt that the
courts, which consist of persons who have entered the Companies by these
means, are admirable boards of trustees, and this circumstance, coupled
with the entire satisfaction with the proceedings of the courts which the
liverymen at large show, appears to prove that this constitution works
well in practice.

3. The third part of your Majesty's Commission relates to the salaries Officers and
of the officers and servants of the Companies of London, and the mode servants,
in which such persons are appointed. The returns show that the stipends Paid out of
and salaries of the Companies' officers are paid almost wholly out of the
private income of the Companies.3 This circumstance would, in our

1 See the evidence of Sir Frederick Bramwcll, F.R.S., one of the representatives
of the Goldsmiths' Company.

2 These fees sometimes amount to 200/., or even 300'. S*e the return*.

3 There are many small sums payable under the wills of belief ictor-; to the

130

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Court fees.

Corporate
and trust

Origin of
corporate
estate.

All private
property.

Evidence of
the Lord
Chancellor.

Letter from
Mercers'
Company
with respect
to private
expenditure.

opinion, justify us in passing the matter over. But, as our colleagues
have not adopted this course, we think it right to state that the few really
highly-paid officials who are in the employment of the Companies hold
positions of importance, and are professional men of ability, Avho could
easily have found equally remunerative occupations. With respect to
" court fees," i.e. the payments which are made to members of the
governing bodies of the Companies for their attendance at the meetings
which are held for business purposes, these too l are taken almost entirely
out of the private income of the Companies. In several of the com-
panies no fees are paid, in many fees only of a nominal amount, and in
the cases in which fees of more than a nominal amount are paid there is
usually a considerable amount of important business transacted at the
meetings.

4. The fourth part of your Majesty's Commission relates to the sources
of the corporate and trust income of the Companies, the capital value of
their property, their administration of it, and the mode in which the
income arising from it is expended.

As to the origin of the corporate or private estate of the Companies,
we beg to refer to the previous part of this Report. The corporate
estate consists of (1) the Companies' halls and a largo amount of house
property in the City of London purchased by the companies Avith their
own private funds in the market in the ordinary way ; (2) a large
amount of house property in the City of London purchased as private
property from the Crown ; (3) rents of houses or ground rents in the
City of London on which there are in some cases fixed or proportionate
charges for the support of charities, such rents being clearly as a matter
of law their private property ; (4) an estate in Ulster purchased as
private property from the Crown ; (5) a considerable sum invested in
the funds and other securities representing, (1) the price of lands, the
private property of the Companies, which have been sold for the purposes
of public improvements, (2) accumulations of fees paid to the common
purse by present or past members ; (6) a considerable amount of plate,
almost all presented by past or present members. This corporate estate
is, in our opinion, clearly in the strictest sense of the term the private
property of the Companies, as they have themselves stated in their
returns, and we are glad to say that our views have received confirmation
from a legal authority of the highest rank, the present Lord Chancellor,
who did us the honour to come before us as a member of a deputation
representing the City and Guilds of London Technical Institute.2

With respect to the way in which the income arising from this private
property is expended, we cannot do better than quote the following
passage from a letter addressed to us by the Mercers' Company, ths first
of the " great " Companies of London in order of civic precedence. " As
" regards the mode in which the Company's income is expended, the Com-
" pany trust that the same sense of the duties attaching to the possession

officers and servants for the performance of duties connected with the administration
of the charities. The total amount of these sums is, however, insignificant, com-
pared with the payments made to the stuff out of the private income of the Com-
panies.

1 Apart from fome small legacies for the superintendence of certain charities.

2 See the evidence of the Lord Chancellor (Lord Selbourne). "I rather de-
cline," says his Lordship, "to contemplate anything which may be done in iho
" way of redistribution of the Companies' own (i.e. their private or corporate)
"funds." " The City Companies, assuming them to be (as I believe them to be in
"law) absolute and perfect masters of their own (i.e. their private or corporate) pro-
" perfy . . . ." " the funds which 1 call their own property icere derived from their
" own subscriptions and gifts from their own members and others, and were intended
" to be for their absolute use."

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 131

' of property which has hitherto guided them in the administration
' of their own will continue to do so ; and they venture to think that
' in this respect they have no reason to fear a comparison with the most
' liberal among the wealthy nobility and gentry of the realm. But, con-
' sidering this point to be one affecting themselves only, they decline to
' notice either the censure or the commendation which may have been
' expressed by others in reference to it." 1

These remarks appear to be very just ; but we cannot but think that
the returns of the Companies, with respect to their private expenditure on
public and benevolent objects, will, when laid before the public, be found benevolent
to merit commendation rather than censure. There prove to be several objects,
companies which devote half their private income to such objects, and
the proportion of the private incomes of most of the Companies which is
thus spent is very considerable.

Moreover, we consider that in the selection of the public and bene- Judicious
volent objects which they support, the Companies show remarkable selection °*
judgment. Their first thought appears to be of the charities which they sv
administer as trustees, and which in the seventeenth century they saved Support of
from destruction. Many of these are at present in debt to them to a k™^^16'
large extent, and have been converted from poor into comparatively rich
foundations.* They also largely support education in all its branches. Support of
They have founded several schools, and have recently formed the above- education
mentioned City and Guilds of London Technical Institute, which has ^rities 01
for its object the promotion of that most important object, technical London,
education, in London and the provinces. They also, as is well known,
contribute largely to the charities of London.

As to the trust estate of the Companies, it supports upwards of 1000 Trust estate,
charities, and your Majesty's Inspectors appear to be of opinion that no
charities in England are better administered.3

As regards both these estates, not only did the financial difficulties above panjeg'^ye
alluded to continue up to a comparatively recent date, but the income oniv recently
of the Companies probably did not become considerable till about fifty become rich,
years ago, when a large number of building leases in the City fell in,
and it became possible for the guilds to raise the ground rents of their
City property so as to participate in its increased value. „,,. T . ,

The Irish estate of the Companies, in the purchase of which they cstate haa
sank in the reign of James II. an amount of their private capital which only recently
for the time was extremely large, did not become really remunerative become re-
till an even later period.

Nothing can be more admirable than the conduct of the London Com- Admirable
panies with respect to these Ulster lands.4 They found them a desert, tne Qom.
and by their care and munificence they have made them one of the most panics with

reference to

1 See appendix to return of Mercers' Company.

2 See the Reports of H.M. Inspectors of Charities.

3 See the Reports of H.M. Inspectors of Chanties passim.

4 The supplementary " Statement " of the Ironmongers' Company cites (1)
a Petition to Parliament, dated 1641, in which it is set forth that at that date
150.000L had been expended by the Irish Society in the " plantation " of the
Colony ; (2) a grant to the Company of the manor of Lizard by Charles II., in
1663, in which it is recited that the king takes into consideration " the vast sums of
"money the society, i.e. the Irish Society, and the several Companies of London had
" laid out and disbursed in their building and planting." It appears also from this
statement that not only the corporations, but the individuals composing them, con-
tributed money for these purposes. "In 1630 Paul .Canning, who was then a mem-
ber of the Ironmongers' Company, and their agent in Ireland, sold his estate in
England for 2000/. , and spent it in planting and stocking the Company's cstate, and
also at his own charge built a church."

K 2

1:32

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Increase of

amount of

corporate

property

devoted to

public

objects.

Universities.

Schools.

prosperous parts of the United Kingdom.1 Indeed, they may be said
to have founded at their own expense the loyal province of Ulster, a
service to the Crown perhaps without a parallel, except the service
rendered by the Honourable East India Company.2

In times past, when their incomes were small, the chief Companies
always devoted a substantial portion of them to public objects, and their
expenditure upon such objects appears to have grown in proportion to the
growth of their revenues. Thus in 1822, the Goldsmiths' Company,
whose income was not then large, founded six exhibitions of 20Z. a year,
three tenable at Oxford, three at Cambridge. The Company has since
then gradually increased the number and value of its exhibitions, till at
the present time it has seventy-five exhibitions, each of the value of
501. a year, tenable at the two Universities. We believe that, if the
matter were inquired into, many examples of the same steady increase
in their annual contributions to public objects would be found in the
recent history of the London Companies. The Fishmongers, Grocers,
Ironmongers, Clothworkers, and several of the minor Companies have simi-
larly increased their exhibitions, or have founded exhibitions out of their
private means. Indeed, the Companies largely subsidize in this respect
the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and also University and King's
College, London, two bodies which appeared before us by deputations.

They also support, to a considerable extent, out of their private in-
come between thirty and forty schools, some classical schools, e.g. St.
Paul's,3 Merchant Taylors' Schools,4 Tunbridge School,5 Aldenham

(') See the supplementary " Statement " of the Fishmongers' Company " The
Company's books show that from the year 1820, when the estate fell into the
Company's hands, down to the year 1881, the Company have expended large sums
in road-making, irrigation, the construction of river and canal banks, the supply
of building and other materials, labour, grants and allowances to tenants, planting,
the building of cottages, mills, and dispensaries, the maintenance and support of
seven schools, wherein excellent practical education is given to more than 500 chil-
dren of the tenantry and labourers on the estate, towards the erection and mainte-
nance of places of worship, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Roman Catholic, in grants
towards the support of their ministers, and in casual relief and pensions. The follow-
ing is an approximate statement of the amounts expended under the several heads
since 1820 : —

£
about 28,558

26,413

33,722
20,632
33,528
21,292

24,849

£189.024

5 At present, according to the evidence taken by the Bessborough Commission, the
rents of the Companies' Irish lands are strictly fair. An able account of the estates
recently published in the Times newspaper is most favourable to the Companies. The
' Commissioner " of the paper states : " The Companies are devoting themselves to
'judicious improvements" . . . . " Taking the period since 1831, when the Mercers
took over their estates, they have spent upon them considerably more than half the
income. This is a great deal more than is done or can generally be afforded by
' private owners." .... " Since 1853 the Salters' Company has expended in im-
' provements 34,776£., donations to schools, &c., 22,0832." . . . . " Since coming
' into possession the Skinners' Company has laid out annually in improvements
'47307., donations to schools, &c., 1000Z." .... " Ballykelly has been made by
' the Fishmongers' Company a model village, which might contrast favourably with
'any in England."

•MiniMiv. :' ^' -'•

For roads, irrigation, river, and canal banks ....

„ building materials supplied, labour thereon, grants, and
allowances to tenants

„ cottages, dispensaries, mills, reclamations, town parks,
farming societies ........

„ trees, woods, and plantations . . .

,, schools .

,, places of religious worship and donations to miuiste;s

„ relief, pensions, and donations to the sick, aged, and desti-
tute on the Company's estate

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 133

School,1 and Great Crosby School f others, middle class schools, such as

those admirable institutions, Bancroft's Hospital,! the Aske Schools,4 and

the Grocers' Middle Class School at Hackney Downs. These schools

are distributed over fourteen or fifteen counties, and not less than

12,000 scholars are educated at them. Mr. Matthew Arnold, \v ho has Middle-class

had much experience as one of your Majesty's Inspectors of Schools, and education.

who has interested himself greatly in the promotion of "middle class "

education, has stated to us his opinion that the Companies of London

have done much useful service in this respect. We have also received

a favourable account of these schools from the Secretary of the Cambridge

Local Examination Board.6

On Merchant Taylors' School, a school without endowment, the Mer- Merchant
chant Taylors' Company proves to have expended in recent years, out of qa710-|8'
its private income, a sum of no less than 140,0007.

To the support given by the Companies of London to Technical Technical
Education we have already alluded ; and to the City and Guilds of Education.
London Technical Institute, a body which sent a deputation before us,
consisting of the Lord Chancellor (Lord Selborne), Sir F. Bramwell,
F.R.S., and the late Mr. Spottiswoode, then President of the Koyal
Society, accompanied by the three secretaries, Mr. Watney,6 Mr. Sawyer,7
and Mr. Owen Koberts,8 gentlemen who have done much to promote
the objects of the undertaking.

This body was founded in 1878 by a committee sitting at Mercers' Committee
Hall, and composed of Lord Selborne, Sir F. Bramwell, F.K.S., Sir °^°™on
Sydney Waterlow, and other members of the principal Companies, to- technical
gether with representatives of the City of London. In the autumn of education,
this year the committee communicated with and received reports on 1878.
the subject of technical education from six gentlemen of great scientific
or practical knowledge of the question, viz. Sir William Armstrong, Reports to
F.K.S., Mr. G. T. C. Bartley, Lieut.-Colonel Donnelly, Captain Douglas committee.
Galton, F.K.S., Professor Huxley, F.E.S., and Mr. H. Trueman
Wood.

All the reports agreed in suggesting the establishment in London Suggestions,
of a Central Institution or Technical University for training technical CO Central
teachers and providing instruction for advanced students in applied /^f^J^'
art and science. The reports also for the most part recommended the Schools,
establishment of elementary schools of science and art in London and
the chief towns, and the encouragement of technical study by means of
laboratories, scholarships, and courses of lectures.

Professor Huxley's report stated that " a complete system of technical Professor
" education should be directed towards the following objects, viz. : — ?pxley'f t
"1. The diffusion, among artisans and others occupied in trades and system' of °
' manufactures, of sound instruction in those kinds of theoretical and technical
' practical knowledge which bear upon the different branches of industry, education."
' whether manufactures or arts.

" 2. Adequate provision for the training and supply of teachers quali-
1 fied to give such instruction ; and for the establishment of schools or
' isolated classes, to which the industrial population may have ready
' access ; and, further, for a proper system of examinations whereby the
' work done in the schools and classes may be tested.

1 Brewers' Company. 2 Merchant Taylors' Company.

3 Drapers' Company. 4 Haberdashers' Company.

5 The Rev. G. F. Browne, who reports that " they are considered as good as any
"schools of the kind, and that one of them (Bancroft's Hospital), which he has
" himself several times examined, is exceptionally good."

6 Clerk to the Mercers' Company.

7 Clerk to the Drapers' Company. » Clerk to the Clothworkers' Company.

lot

ROYAL COMMISSION.

1878. Vote
by certain
Companies of
12.000J. a
year out of
their private
incomes to
technical
education
and forma-
tion of " City
and Guilds
of London
Technical
Institute."

1879.
Cowper

Street
Schools.

Examina-
tions.

King's
College.
University
College.

1880.

Subscription
for Central
Institute.

" 3. Tho organization of arrangements for effecting the apprenticeship
" of scholars of merit in the branches of industry for which they show
" aptitude ; for enabling such scholars to continue their studies beyond the
" ordinary school age, by means of exhibitions ; and for opening to tho
" rest of them a career as teachers or as original workers in applied
" science." i

In the autumn of 1878, the Mercers', Drapers', Fishmongers', Gold-
smiths', Salters'. Ironmongers', Clothworkers', Armourers', Cordwaincrs',
Coopers', Plasterers', and Needlemakers' Companies agreed to provide
about 12,000/. a year out of their private funds for these purposes, and
" the City and Guilds of London Institute, for the advancement of
" technical education," was provisionally constituted with the following
objects, viz. (1) the foundation of a central institute in London for
technical education, (2) the establishment of, or assistance to, trade
schools in London and the provinces, (3) technological examinations,
(4) grants in aid of existing institutions having for their object technical
education.

In the year 1879 the institute was incorporated. In this year the
Council commenced negotiations for the purchase of a site for the Central
Institute, established (1) technical classes in connection with the Middle
Class Schools, Cowper Street, Finsbury, (2) a department of applied fine
art at the Lambeth School of Art, and took over 2 the examinations in
technological subjects which had hitherto been carried on by the Society
of Arts. It also subscribed to several existing institutions, such as the
British Horological Institute, Clerkenwell ; the London School of Wood
Carving ; the Mining Association of Devon and Cornwall ; the Notting-
ham Trade and Science Schools ; the Artisans' Institute, St. Martin's
Lane ; the Birkbeck Institute Building Fund ; and the Lancashire and
Cheshire Union of Mechanics' Institutes' Technical Education Fund ;
and added to the stipends of the professors of mechanical and chemical
technology at University College, London, and founded a professorship
of applied Art and a professorship of Metallurgy at King's College,
London.

During the year 1880 the Corporation continued its negotiations for a
site in South Kensington for tho Central Institute, and obtained an
estimate of the cost of a building suited, as regards class-rooms, work-
shops, and laboratories, to the technical teaching of (1) chemistry,
(2) physics, (3) mechanics, (4) art. The estimated cost of such a build-
ing was 76,000^. A building fund was formed, and four Companies, the
Fishmongers', Goldsmiths', Clothworkers', and Cordwainers' Companies,

1 Mr. Huxley adds : " Those who are acquainted with the systems of technical
" education which have been developed in Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, Austria,
" and other continental countries during the last fifty years, and which are at pre-
" sent carried out on a very large scale, with the aid of State or municipal funds, in
" all those countries, will perceive that the project which I have submitted to the
" Committee aims at the organization in this country of a scheme of technical edu-
" cation essentially similar in principle to that carried out in the 'Gewerbe Schulen,'
" but more especially the ' Gewerbliche Fortbildungs Schulen,' of which numbers
" exist in every German State (even the smallest), but modified in practical working
" so that it may adapt itself to the social conditions and the existing educational ar-
" rangements of our own people." . . . " Switzerland, with about two-thirds the popu-
" latiou of London, and incomparably less wealth, supports a multitude of such
"schools, with the magnificent " Polytechuicou " of Zurich as their crown. The con-
" dition of England in these matters is simply scandalous."

2 In this year thirty -eight such examinations were held, among other places at
Belfast, Birmingham, Bolton, Crewe, Cambornc, Gateshead, Huddersfield, Hulme,
Merthyr Tydvil, Nottingham, Newcastle, Oldham, Penzance, Swansea, and Wigan.
The scheme included a system of registration for qualified teachers in technology,
under which sixty-three classes were established during the year.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 135

agreed to subscribe upwards of 30,OOOZ. to this fund. It was also Finsbury
resolved to erect a technical college in Finsbury at an expense of 20,000?., c<
as an institution intermediate between the Cowper Street Schools and the
Central Institution.1

During this year the effect of the technological examinations of the Effect of

Institute in the provinces was seen in the interest awakened in the technologica
P i . -, i . p -i examinations

subject of technical education among manufacturers and the members jn tj,e

of mechanics' institutes in Leeds, Bradford, Huddersfield, Xottingham, provinces.
Belfast, and other places. The manufacturers in several instances made
arrangements for the instruction of the artisans in their employment, and
the mechanics' institutes engaged teachers with the assistance of the
Institute.2 The number of students examined increased from 200 in
1879 to upwards of 800 in 1880.3 The income of the Institute was
materially increased this year by the accession of new companies, and by
several of the original Companies adding to their subscriptions.

In 1881 a Koyal Commission was appointed "to inquire into the 1881.
" instruction of the industrial classes of certain foreign countries in tech-
" nical and other subjects for the purpose of comparison with that of the
"corresponding classes of this country, and into the influence of such
" instruction on manufactures and other industries at home and abroad."
The appointment of this important Commission, which has just published
its Report, was to a great extent brought about by the exertions of the
London Companies.

During this year the foundation-stone of the Central Institution in Central
South Kensington was laid by his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, Institution,
that of Finsbury Technical College by his Royal Highness the lamented '

Duke of Albany. The sum to be expended on the former was estimated
at 70,OOOZ., that on the latter at 35,000?. The number of students at the
London colleges, and the number of candidates for diplomas in the tech-
nological examinations of the Institute largely increased.

1 " It is anticipated that in the general scheme of the Institute's work, the Fins-
" bury College will occupy an intermediate place between technical and middle class
" schools, such as the Cowper Street Schools and the Central Institution, receiving
" pupils from the schools and sending on the most advanced to the Central College at
" Kensington." Report of Council of City and Guilds of London Technical Institute,
presented March, 1881. The Council consists of Lord Selborne (Chairman), Sir
Sydney Waterlow, Bart., M.P. (Treasurer), Messrs. Watney, Sawyer, and Owen
Roberts (Secretaries), the Lord Mayor, the President of the Royal Society, the Presi-
dent of the Chemical Society, the President of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the
Chairman of the Council of the Society of Arts, and delegates from the Corporation
and the Companies.

2 " Among other signs of the interest shown in the technological examinations as
" means of promoting technical education in the provinces, are the suggestions re-
"specting them, which from time to time your Council receive from trades' associa-
" tions and other bodies." Thus, in the Report of the Linen Merchants' Association,
Belfast, the following notice occurs : — " Your Council, with the view of further ex-
" tending technical education in connection with the manufacture of linen, propose
" communicating with the City and Guilds of London Institute, requesting that
" ' bleaching, printing, and dyeing of linen goods may be placed on their list of
" subjects.' " Report of Council, March, 1881.

3 The subjects examined in were alkali manufacture, blowpipe analysis, brewing,
calico bleaching, dyeing, and printing, carriage building, cloth manufacture, cotton
manufacture, electro-metallurgy, flax, fuel, gas manufacture, goldsmiths' and silver-
smiths' work, iron manufacture, lace, mechanical engineering, mechanical preparation
and dressing of ores, mine surveying, manufacture of oils, colours, and varnishes, oils
(illuminating and lubricating), paper manufacture, photography, pottery, and porce-
lain, printing, silk dyeing, silk manufacture, steel manufacture, sugar manufacture,
tanning leather, telegraphy, watchmaking, and wool dyeing. The students came
from Ballymena, Batley, Belfast, Birmingham, Bolton, Bristol, Burslem, Bury, Cam-
busbarron, Cheltenham, Chester, Coatbridge, Crewe, Cullbackey, Dewsbury, Dukin-
field, Gateshead, Halifax, Huddersfield, Kenmare, Macclesfield, Ncwcastle-on-Tvne,
Nottingham, Oldham, Rochdale, Todmordcn, Widncs, Wigan, &o.

136

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Recognition
in r;/-
scheme.

1S82.

Applications
from pro-
vincial
towns.

Bradford
Technical
College.

1883, 1884.

Steady
progress.

Finsbury
College.

Central
Institute.

Income.

Building
fund.

Royal
College of
Music.

The subject of technical instruction was also for the first time recog-
nized this year by the Chancery Division of your Majesty's High Court
of Justice in the formation of a cy-pres scheme.

During 1882 the work of the Institute steadily progressed. The
report for the year, which is signed by Lord Selborne, as chairman of
the Institute, states ; "In reviewing the three great divisions of the
' Institute's operations, (1) the establishment in the metropolis of a central
' institution, and of other schools for technical instruction ; (2) the exami-
' nation of candidates in technology, and the encouragement by means of
' grants to teachers, of technical instruction, as supplementary to the State-
' aided teaching of pure science ; and (3) the subvention in the great manu-
' factuving centres of technical colleges affiliated to the Institute, your
' Council have every reason to be satisfied with the advance that has been
made in eacli division of their work." During this year the Council
received applications for grants in aid of technical schools at Nottingham,
Manchester, Middlesborough, Sheffield, Leicester, Bolton, Bradford, and
several other provincial towns. Some of these applications were enter-
tained, the promise being in every case " conditional on a sufficient sum
" of money being subscribed from local sources for the erection and main-
" tenance of an efficient school." During this year also a technical college,
towards the building and endowment of which the Clothworkers' Company
largely contributed, was opened at Bradford.

From this time to the present the Institute has continued to make
steady progress. Finsbury College is now built with a splendid apparatus
of physical and chemical laboratories, and affords technical instruction to
upAvards of a thousand students. The lists of candidates and of subjects
in the technological examinations have increased fourfold. Finally, the
Central Institute, which is in Exhibition Road, South Kensington, is
built, and will shortly be opened. All the great Companies and most of
the minor Companies have associated themselves with the Institute, which
has an income of 25,000/. a year arising from the private funds of the
Companies, and has raised, in addition, from the same source, for the
buildings above mentioned, upwards of 100,000/.

The contributions of the several Companies during the period over
which the inquiry has extended are to be found in the Returns. We
are informed that between 1881 and 1884 they have contributed about
120,OOOZ. to the funds of the Technical Institute.

The Companies of London have thus founded in England a system
of technical education, a service to the State which it is difficult to
over-value, and an undertaking strictly in accordance with their original
constitution.1

The Companies have recently contributed 13,000/. to the Royal College
of Music. The Court of the Fishmongers' Company bore the brunt
of the labour of organization in respect of the " International Fisheries'
" Exhibition," held with so much success last year, and this and other

1 Professor Huxley, speaking at a distribution of prizes to the students at Finsbury

Technical College in December, 1883, said, " I am perfectly certain that you have

" now in this system of technological examinations, iu the higher schools of technical

" instruction, such as the Fiusbury College, and in this central institution, of which

" the body already exists, and of which the soul is in such a fair state of prepara-

" tion that it may be said ' mens agitat molem,' unquestionably and indubitably the

' nucleus of a vatt growth of similar organizations. I have not the smallest doubt

that in place of two or three high schools of technical instruction there will soon be

scores in different parts of these islands, and that you will have in this Central

Institute a great uniting point for the whole of this vast network, through which the

information and the discipline which are needful for carrying the industry of this

country to perfection will be distributed into every locality in which such industries

are carried on."

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 137

Companies made a large contribution to the expenses. They have also Fisheries'
made a considerable contribution to the " International Health Ex- Exhibition.
" hibition " which is now being held. The Grocers' Company nas
recently founded a scholarship for " scientific research."

5. The fifth part of Your Majesty's Commission requires us " to con- Suggestions
"sider and report" to Your Majesty "what measures, if any, are ex- as to reform.
" pedient and necessary for improving or altering the constitution of the
" Companies or the appropriation or administration of the property or
" revenues thereof." As regards this part of Your Majesty's Commission,
we beg to report to Your Majesty as follows : —

1. The only person of importance who appeared before its to sug- Mr. Hare's
gest a scheme for reorganizing the Companies of London, was Your scheme.
Majesty's Senior Inspector of Charities, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hare's
scheme, we say it with respect, appeared to all the Commissioners
impracticable.

2. We refer as regards the corporate or private property, and cor- The Com -
porate or private income of the Companies to (1 ) the law of the land p0"ate
on the subject as explained to us by the Lord Chancellor, according to property
which this property and this income is as absolutely the Companies' own absohitely
as the property or income of any private person ; (2) the circumstances Private-
under which this property was acquired as stated in the above historical
survey, and also in the evidence of the Lord Chancellor, viz. partly Law.

by purchases made out of the private incomes of the Companies, partly
by gifts " intended (in Lord Selborne's words) to be for the absolute History.
" use " 1 of the Companies ; (3) to the public spirit shown by the Com-
panies of London in past times, and at the present time, in the good
\ise which they have made of their private incomes, in past times in Public spirit,
saving their charities from bankruptcy, and in the colonization of Ulster,
at the present time in. their support of useful objects, and in particular
in the establishment by them of Technical Education, a movement which Technical
has revived in the only way possible at the present day the connection Education,
of the guilds of London with the arts and manufactures which they
formerly represented, and which they will shortly be. supporting by
means of the Central Institute and its affiliated schools throughout the
whole of the United Kingdom.

Their property being at law the Companies' own, the product partly
of their own savings, partly of absolute gifts to them, and the income
from it being in great part spent for the public good, we join with
the Lord Chancellor in " declining to contemplate " any State inter-'
ference with this property or Avith the Companies in their administration
of the income arising from it.

As regards the trust property of the Companies and the charities of Trust estate,
which they are the managers, and Avhich are as above stated upwards
of one thousand in number, we refer to the facts that (1) their
existence at the present day, that is to say, the existence of several
great and many small schools, and of eleemosynary charities, in the
benefits of which almost every county in England participates, is due to
the liberality and public spirit shown by the Companies of London in
past times ; (2) the reports of the early Charity Commissions and those
of Your Majesty's present inspectors of charities show that the same
liberality and public spirit still exists among the members of the courts
of the Companies of London.

This part of the Companies' property is also under the control of Control of

(1) the Chancery Division of Your Majesty's High Courts of Justice ; W Chancery

(2) the Charity Commission, and we are not aware that any dissatisfaction ivision

1 See the evidence of the Lord Chancellor (Lord Sclborne).

138

ROYAL COMMISSION.

(2) Charity
Commission.

Failure of
tho case
against tho
Companies.

No move-
ment against
the City or
the Com-
panies.

Suggestions
of the
majority.
Restraint of
alienation.

Serjeants'
Inn.

Doctors'
Commons.

Provincial
Companies.

Limitation of
trusts to
fifty years.

Appointment
of a Commis-

Reorganiza-
tion imprac-
ticable.

exists as to tlio schemes framed cither by the Court or by the Commission.
Neither the general reform of the law of trusts nor the reorganization of
tho Charity Commission is a matter within the scope of the Commission
with which we have been entrusted by Your Majesty.

3. It is only right that we should state that if the inquiry in which
we have been engaged is to be regarded as a proceeding between our
colleague, the honourable and learned Member for Chelsea, acting as
a Government prosecutor, and the Companies of the City of London, the
prosecution has failed, and the Companies have been successful. They
easily defeated Mr. Firth as regards every part of the case set up by him
in his work called " Municipal London," and a motion by Mr. Firth, in
favour of disestablishing and disendowing the Companies, was rejected
in our deliberations by a majority of ten to two. The gentlemen who
appeared before the Commission to support Mr. Firth's views were, in our
opinion, examined by us ultra vires, as they could not be "judged," we
say it with respect, to be " competent, by reason of their situation, know-
ledge, and experience, to afford correct information on the subjects of
"the inquiry" within the meaning of the terms of Your Majesty's Com-
mission.

4. So far as we can judge, no movement, whatever exists in London
either against the City or against the Livery Companies, and our honour-
able and learned colleague, Mr. Firth, and the few persons who arc
associated with him, have never been appointed by the citizens of Lon-
don to act as their representatives as regards either so-called " Municipal
" Reform " or any other matters.

5. As to the suggestions made by our colleagues in the principal
report — •

(1.) We consider that their recommendation with respect to " restraint
" of alienation " is invidious and unnecessary. No one supposes that
the courts of the London Companies are likely to sell and divide
their corporate property even if it were practicable for them to do so,
which is itself doubtful, considering that they contain certainly 20,000,
more probably 30,000, members, of whom two-thirds are poor persons.
Moreover two bodies, not exactly, it is true, " in pari conditione," but
of similar constitution, viz. Serjeants' Inn and Doctors' Commons, have
actually sold arid divided their corporate estates, yet it has never been
proposed to apply " restraint of alienation " to the Inns of Court and cf
Chancery in general. Also nothing can be more unfair than to place the
Companies of London under a disability which is not to be imposed
upon the Companies of Bristol, Newcastle-on-Tyne, and the other pro-
vincial towns in which mediaeval guilds survive.

(2.) We consider that the proposal to limit the validity of the numerous
charitable trusts administered by the Companies to a period of 50 years
from their foundation is unjustifiable and inexpedient. There appears to
tis to be no pretence for treating the charities of the London Companies
in any exceptional way, and we are of opinion that the number of new
charities would seriously decrease if the law were that the trusts de-
clared by the founders were liable to be pronounced obsolete at the close
of so short a period.

(3.) We do not agree with our colleagues as to the necessity for ap-
pointing a Royal Commission for the purposes of the reorganization of
the constitution of the Companies, and the permanent allocation of a part
of their corporate incomes to " objects of acknowledged public utility."
We think, some of us speaking from experience as members of the courts
of Companies, that the former purpose is impracticable, as, if their con-
stitutions were much modified the London Companies might cease to be

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 139

what they now are, in the words of the Grocers' excellent minute,1 Superiority
"nurseries of charities and seminaries of good citizens." We also think or sFon-
that "objects of acknowledged public utility" are more likely to be pro- **|^a
nioted by the spontaneous action of the courts than by schemes forced
upon the Companies by a Commission.

(4.) Any person having the slightest knowledge of the London Com-
panies must be aware that patrimony is the very essence of their consti- Patrimony.
tution. But for the hereditary nature of the privileges which they confer,
they would probably have long ago ceased to exist, and few new members
would now join them.2

(o.) We do not regard the question of the Parliamentary Franchise of Parlia-
the liverymen as within the scope of Your Majesty's Commission. mentary

(6.) We agree with our colleagues in their recommendation with re- S1^,1}. Jf?'
^ ,'. ,, ° , ,. ,. <• ,1 ?i • . ji • i j. Publication

spect to the publication of the Companies accounts, and we think the Of accounts.

Companies have done right in themselves proposing that they should Succession
pay Succession Duty. Duty.

The proceedings of this Commission have, we regret to say, been at- Publication
tended with some interference from without, and an incorrect account of _ 1]
the recommendations of our colleagues has appeared in a morning news-
paper. The scheme suggested in this account was one which no con-
siderable number of Your Majesty's Commissioners would ever have
sanctioned.

(Signed) RICHARD ASSHETON CROSS.

N. M. DE ROTHSCHILD.

W. J. E. COTTON.

I sign this report subject and without prejudice to the protest against
the report of the majority of the Commission which I have previously
made, but I am unable to agree with the passages relating to the
Technical Education movement, of which I do not approve. I also
dissent from the above paragraph relating to the publication of accounts.

3rd June, 1884. W. J. R. COTTON.

The following able document is an additional protest by MR. ALDERMAN
COTTON : —

TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.

May it please Your Majesty,

Eeing unable to agree with the report of the Commissioners protest
appointed by Your Majesty to investigate the affairs of the Livery against
Companies of the City of London, I beg most humbly to be allowed to report,
present to Your Majesty a protest against the same, upon the following
grounds.

1. That no evidence has been produced against the honour, honesty, or jq-0 ev;fionce
integrity of the Livery Companies ; it is true that opinions have been against
expressed against them, but no facts have been before the Commission Companies.

1 See supra, pnge 125.

2 The feeling of the members of the Companies with regard to patrimony was well
expressed by the Lord Chancellor (Lord Selborne) at the laying of the foundation *
stone of Finsbury College in 1881. " He never had any other feeling than one of

' pride and satisfaction respecting his connection with the guild of the Mercers'
' Company. . . . His ancestors for four generations had been so connected before him,
' and he had no reason to be nshained of anything which any of them had ever done
' in that or other relations of life, and that teas a part of his inheritance which he
'should always gre ally value."

140

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Ilecommeu-
dation
should be
preseuted to

>!ll-

panies as
" sugges-
tions" only.

Parliamen-
tary inter-
ference un-
necessary in
" restraint of
alienation."
Livery
franchise
representa-
tive, and
ought not to
be abolished.

Common
Hall ought
not to be
abolished,
uses set out.

Interference
by Parlia-
ment with
Companies'
private
property
spoliation.

Public
audits not
justifiable.

Members
of the
Companies
never were
exclusively
of craft.

Description
of what the
Companies
really are.

which in any way affect (heir high character, and the estimation in which
they have always been deservedly held by the public.

2. Many opinions have been given to the Commission as to the manner
in whii-h the funds of the Companies should be used. I think the pur-
poses of this Commission will be answered if their recommendations were
presented to the Livery Companies as " suggestions." This would make
the Commission far more fruitful than any arbitrary Act, as the
Companies have always shown themselves ready to appreciate and to give
effect to any practicable suggestions tending to increase their public
usefulness, and would leave the management of the properties to those
who thoroughly understand it. The appointment of any new body or
bodies must result in many blunders, much waste, and much cost.

3. That the suggested interference by Parliament through the House
of Lords, or otherwise, in "restraint of alienation " must be unnecessary,
as the experience of centuries shows that no Company has ever con-
templated or suggested the realization of its property for the purposes
of dividend or division.

4. That the Parliamentary franchise enjoyed by liverymen is held by
men, some of humble and some of the highest position, thus forming
a constituency as representative as any in the realm. It numbers over
7000 members, who obtain their privileges irrespective of their political
opinions. The abolition of the livery vote would not of necessity dis-
enfranchise the man, as the large majority have votes through other
holdings in addition to that given them by their livery, and as no one
can enjoy two votes, the one which they may use is decided by the re-
vising barrister. Admission to freedom only does not confer any Parlia-
mentary Franchise.

5. The Common Hall is attended by the most active citizens, who
take an interest in municipal affairs, it annually selects two aldermen
who are returned to the Court of Aldermen to elect one as Lord Mayor,
it also elects the sheriffs and some of the high officers of the Corporation.
Common Halls can also be called together to discuss any question of
public interest or emergency, and should not be abolished.

6. That interference by Parliament with the private property of the
Livery Companies must be an act of oppression and spoliation, although
disguised under the terms of " restraint of alienation " or "allocated to
the support of objects of acknowledged public utility," and that no new
Commission could possibly manage the affairs of the Companies so
successfully, usefully, or more honestly than the present members who
represent a long line of illustrious ancestors.

7. That no public audit or other outside interference with the
private accounts of the property of the Companies is necessary or justifi-
able, the lands and the properties of the Companies having been ac-
quired either by purchase, the money for this purpose being derived from
the accumulations of fees paid by, or fines inflicted upon, their members,
or by gifts and legacies, also from members of their own body.

8. That the returns made to the Commission show exclusively that
the members of the Livery Companies were never exclusively of the trade
the name of which was borne by their Company, and that for about 400
years the larger proportion of the members have not pretended to follow
the crafts of their Companies, hence any forced devolution of their funds
in aid of such trades would be a gross injustice. It cannot be pre-
tended that any Company was established solely to promote the interest
of the trade whose name it bears.

9. The Livery Companies are not to be classed with friendly or be-
nevolent societies, with monastic institutions, or with political or other
clubs. They are institutions peculiar to themselves, approaching most

LONDON CITY LIYEEY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 141

nearly to the masonic body, being composed always of members of the
highest honour. They are and always have been foremost in promoting
education, charitable and kindly acts, and other worthy eleemosynary
objects. It is only possible to become a member of a Livery Company
by patrimony, by apprenticeship, or by redemption (which last means by
purchase or gift). Redemption is allowed by vote of the Court only after
strict investigation as to the character and position of the applicant.
Freemen and liverymen, even if they become members at the age of 21
years, would not be placed upon the Court in some Companies for
at least 15 years, and in the majority for a much longer period. They
are only admitted on payment of a large fine and after a second inves-
tigation as before. The average duration of the life of members in the
Court is 12 to 14 years, during which time and for this period of their
life only they enjoy the full advantages of the Company. To attain this
position and to serve the offices of wardens and master is the ambition of
all men connected with any Company, and I unhesitatingly affirm that the
Livery Companies have exercised in the past, and do in the present, a
very good and important moral influence not only upon citizens and city
life, but upon public life generally.

10. The available annual corporate or non-trust income of the Livery
Companies, without taking any allowance in respect of halls and other . ^ ^ an(j
buildings used by the Company, or the plate, furniture, and other property expenditure,
not producing income, may fairly be estimated at about 510,000£. This
sum is to be enjoyed by about 7000 liverymen and 13,000 freemen, who
in time, when qualified, become liverymen, making a total of about
20,000- Their annual expenditure may be estimated as follows: —

1. Education - 50,000 1. The statistics prove that the Livery

(about) Companies require no recommendation from

the Commission to promote this. The
suggestions therefore of those who have ap-
peared before it are simply unnecessary and
superfluous in this respect.

2. Eleemosynary") 2. These, notwithstanding the ideas ex-

gifts, pen- > 30,000 pressed by a few persons to the contrary,
sions, &c. ) cannot tend to pauperize the recipients ; on

(about) the contrary, they are productive of great

comfort, chiefly helping those who are abso-
lutely reduced by a sudden or great calamity,
and who, but for the aid thus rendered, would
become paupers. Beyond this the charities
of the Companies, joined to other private
and individual charity, tend to maintain the
peace of the nation by helping those who
cannot help themselves, while saving their
self respect, and also assist the rates by
keeping a large number from applying for
parochial aid. These remarks apply equally
to pensions. Assistance is never given to
other than really deserving cases, and then •
only after full inquiry.

3. Hospitals and "^ 3. These donations speak for themselves,

general > 70,000 and are an invaluable benefit to the institu-

charity ) tions to whom grants are made. Without

(about) the aid of the Companies many of the

Carried forward - 150.000

1-42 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Brought forward - 150,000

Metropolitan hospitals, benevolent and
charitable institutions would have to seriously
curtail their usefulness, and probably some
might have to close their doors. The
amount spent for general charity goes in
support of an immense variety of objects —
poor boxes of the Metropolitan police
courts, homes, refuges, orphan asylums,
hospitals, missionary societies of all denomi-
nations, all the Mansion House funds,
gardens and recreation grounds for the
people, scientific objects, &c.

Salaries, wages, ) fif) AQA 4. These are not excessive, when the
&c. j ' qualifications required by the holders of the

(about) offices and the character of the work done are

considered. Before men are appointed to an
office in any Company they are subjected to
a strict examination as to their capacities
and integrity. There are always many candi-
dates who are subjected to a severe contest,
and have to win an election before appoint-
ment, the most efficient being always selected.
The Clerk is the only high-salaried officer
in every Company.

5. Hospitalities - 75,000 5. The hospitalities of the Livery Com-

(about) panics do much good by bringing all classes

together, who otherwise in these days of
suburban residence would never meet. At
all dinners the guests, not members, far
exceed those belonging to the Company,
frequently including Eoyalty and the dis-
tinguished men of the day. In addition to
this, the Livery and their friends enjoy one
or more dinners per annum, according to
the custom and position of the Company to
which they belong.

6. Fees - - 40,000 6. The annual fees paid to individual

(about) members of the Livery Companies (which

represent this total) are paid only for actual
attendance and in consideration of the time
spent in the transaction of the affairs of the
Company, which varies from one to five
or more hours. These fees do not amount
in any Company to more, and in some to
less, than those given by Bank, Insurance,
Co-operative, and other trading Companies
for the same or even less services. Divi-
dends are entirely unknown.

7. Kates and ~) oA QAA 7. This completely refutes the statement

taxes ) ' that the Livery Companies do not contribute

(about) some share towards the State and local

Government expenses.
Carried forward - 355,000

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION.

143

75,000

IJrougLt forward - 355,000

8. Kents of alms-

houses and
schools,
household
expenses,
and expenses
in relation
to livings

(about)

9. Sums expend-

ed in Ulster
in support
of churches
and schools
of all deno-
minations.

(about)

10. Improvement

of estates in
England and
Ireland,
maintenance
of halls, &c;
(about)

8. The household expenses are by no
means excessive. The other items are
reasonable, and necessary, and productive of
great good.

9. This requires no comment.

10,000

70,000

£510,000

10. These are necessary to maintain the
properties and work of the Companies,
and no objection can reasonably be made
thereto. It must also be borne in mind
that the position of the halls in their
different localities has tended to improve
and maintain the respectability of the
district in which they are placed.

11. It cannot be of any real importance whether the Courts of the
Livery Companies be composed of 10, 20, 30, or 40 members, when
their surroundings and social positions are considered. It must be remem-
bered that every liveryman aspires to attain the Court of his Company,
and that to enable a fair proportion of the livery to do this, it is abso-
lutely necessary that the Courts be large in number. It may also be
pointed out that each member has paid a sum according to the status of
his Company for his seat, and that he does not reach this till he is far
advanced in life, that some die before and some soon after their election
on the Court before they have received even a return of the fines and
fees paid by them to their Company.

12. "What is called colourable apprenticeship is no wrong, it being one
of the modes of admission, and enables a man of moderate means to
obtain for his son a position in the Company, which otherwise he would
not have been able to do, and which may be to his advantage in after
life. It must be remembered that this has been the custom of centuries.

13. The administrative control of charitable and all trust estates has
long since passed away from the Livery Companies, and they are only
now administered by them under the order1 and approval of the Charity
Commissioners at cost and trouble to themselves, and undoubted
advantage to the trusts.

14. It is true that only 1500 of the livery out of a total of about
20,000 liverymen and freemen are members of the Courts of the Com-
panies at any one time, but each qualified liveryman and freeman in
rotation, if life allowed, would become a member. The whole of the
remaining 18,500 members have a vested interest in the properties of the
Companies, and enjoy advantages and privileges as such. There is no
evidence and not even a suggestion of any contemplated payment of any
dividend or any misappropriation or division of the funds, and nothing

Number of
members of
court not
important.

Colourable
apprentice-
ship no
wrong.

Charitable
and trust
estates
under con-
trol of
Charity
Commission.
As ,to in-
terest of all
members in
property of
Company.

144

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Members of
Companies
are satisfied
with present
adminis-
tration.

Liverymen
do not pay
annual
subscription.

Summary of
the position
of Com-
panies.

of the sort could legally take place without tlio consent of each and
every member, be ho livery man or lie he freeman.

15. The present administration may be said to be in almost thorough
accord with the feelings of every member of the Companies ; the only
two adverse opinions given before the Commission were contradictory,
one being of opinion that his Company did too much, the other that his
did too little.

16. It has been stated that the liverymen only pay II. a year for their
privileges. They do not pay any annual subscription (except quarterage
in some Companies, which amounts from a few pence to a few shillings
per annum), but each pays down on admission suras varying from 150?.
to 2001. in the more important, and from 15/. to 50?. in the lesser Com-
panies, for which he practically receives no return until he is admitted
on the Court, when a further sum of from 251. to 250/., according to the
position of the Company, has to bo paid. All admissions being very
carefully made as stated in paragraph 9 of this protest, it follows that but
very few are admitted in any one year, and thus the united payments for
admission may only amount on an average to the sum mentioned. I beg
to enter a most emphatic protest against the partisan spirit which has
prompted the publication of misleading statements.

17. Finally, I respectfully submit to your Majesty that the Livery
Companies are middle-class institutions, and have always been well,
honourably, and honestly managed (against this assertion no evidence has
been adduced) ; and any attempt to destroy them will seriously affect the
middle class of the City of London and the Metropolis, and, possibly,
hereafter, through them, the whole of this class throughout the realm ;
it would be one more advance towards centralization, which, if established,
will ultimately divide the people of this country into two classes, the
highest and the lowest, or aristocracy and serf ; a state of affairs which,
by preventing union in a common cause, led to the subjection of Poland
to Eussia. That they pay all rates, taxes, &c., ordinarily paid by land-
lords and tenants, including income tax on all moneys annually received
by them. That the pensions, gratuities, and doles, which, are curiously
objected to by some parties, as previously stated, save the rates, by keep-
ing the recipients from applying for parochial relief, as by so doing they
would forfeit all claim to any gift from their company. Almost every
object brought before the Commission as worthy of being assisted from or
through the funds of the Livery Companies, such as education (general
and technical), hospitals, public playgrounds, accidents of moment, in
short, everything that charity, philosophic, or scientific bodies can
suggest, has from time to time been profusely assisted by the Livery
Companies. Their income, as stated in paragraph 10 of this protest, may
be estimated at 510,000?. per annum, out of which under 35 per cent, is
spent on the members, including in this amount 60,000?. for salaries, wages,
&c., a position which I humbly venture to think very few bodies of men
in similar circumstances could improve, leaving 335,000?., of which
70,000?. is applied towards the improvement of estates in England and
Ireland, and in the maintenance of halls, &c., 30,000?. in payment of
rates, taxes, &c , the balance being applied in supporting good, useful, and
charitable objects. That the agitation against the Livery Companies is
but small, and must be so as their work, constitution, and uses must be
seen, felt, and known to be appreciated, and this every man in the king-
dom can now do upon a reference to their returns. To upset the existing
order of things by the appointment of new and most probably more
expensive bodies of management, would, independently of the great
injustice done to the rights of property, produce, as very many pretended
reforms in the past have done, no better, and most likely far worse results.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 145

Xo public bodies of importance (not even those who appeared before tho
Commission) have advocated or sought for a distribution of the properties of
the Companies. They have very naturally expressed a hope that they might,
in the event of any distribution, be allowed to share, in order that what
they must lose under the altered position of the Livery Companies might
in some way be made good. The Livery Companies have no money in
hand, the whole of their balances being applied, as has been previously
shown, to works of acknowledged public utility and goodness. The
Charity Commission have in all cases reported most favourably of the
Companies, showing that they are most excellent trustees, who spend a
much larger amount than they are bound to do on all the charities they
administer ; and I would also humbly beg to call your Majesty's gracious
attention to the fact that nearly all important civil actions attacking the
private properties of the Companies have been decided in their favour.
Any interference with the property of the Livery Companies must tend
to create mistrust and destroy confidence iu all benefit and other societies
which tend to inculcate habits of saving and thrift.

Much has been said about the power of the Parliament to take pos-
session of the properties of the Livery Companies. I do not doubt
its power, but I do its right to commit a gross injustice and wrong.

18. Lastly, may it please your Majesty to allow me humbly to call Attention
your gracious attention to the protest against the abstraction of the ca"*~d. to
private properties of the Livery Companies which accompanied each comtMmios
return to the Commission.

(Signed) W. J. R. COTTON.

April 10th, 1884.

146 KOYAL COMMISSION.

CHAPTER IX.

Mr. Thwaites' noble bequest to the Clothworkers' Company — Attempt to seize same
a warning of what may be expected in the early future — Bequests to her
Majesty and the late Earl of Beaconsfield — The Royal Commission a result of
a change in the political constitution of the City of London representation —
Extreme views held by a majority of the Royal Commission — Perversion of facts
in regard to the status of the Companies resulting from the Great Fire of
London — The term " public " wrongly applied to the Companies — The term
" corporation " explained — The Livery Companies " public " only in the same
sense as the railways and banks — Penal clause of the ancient Guilds— The
historic development of the City Companies — Unanimity of the spoilers ; their
various pretexts favourable to the communists — Sacrifices submitted to in
olden times to satisfy the rapacity of royal plunderers — Recapitulation of
some of the many infamous charges brought against the Companies — Speech
of Sir Hardinge Giflard referring to the falsities of the Companies' enemies,
their attacks on property-rights, and a recent unworthy utterance of a Cabinet
Minister — Alderman Fowler's great services to the cause of the Companies —
The Spectacle Makers' and Armourers' Companies instances of the high charac-
ter and nobility of heart of all the so-called " Minor Companies " — Matters
introduced into the Commission Inquiry having reference to the several estates
in Ireland the property of certain of the Companies, and the using the
occasion for an attempt to secure lowering of rents — The Ironmongers'
with Salters' Companies' administration of their respective properties — Sir
Thomas Nelson's admirable statements of the Liveries' case before the
Commission

Thwaites' ^ET no man hug himself to the belief that length of time is needed

noble bequest for maturity of a period ere the confiscator will seek devised property as

to the Cloth- prey. Take the case of good Brother Thwaites, of the Clothworkers'

workers' Com- Company, whose death hut as yesterday, though affording a happy

zed°by Phillip's instance that the spirit which prompted the offerings of the brethren to

as that of a the common stock of the Guilds is not even yet extinct, tells with

lunatic ; the trumpet-tongue that the vampire of despoil will fix his claw on property

attempt to of eyen most recent devise. So lately as 1831 Mr. Thwaites was in the

warnint^of flesh; he loved his old company, he had eaten many good dinners and

what niay be had much happy intercourse with his brethren of the Clothworkers'

expected in Company, and when he passed away from the world it was found that his

the early wju recorded that he endowed his Company with no less a sum than twenty

future. thousand pounds, and, as specified in his own last will and testament, " to

" be laid out in the way that may tend to make the said society comfort-

" able." Of course for any man to leave the world, and with the last move

ment of his lips bear witness to the goodness of those who had gone before

him by following their example, was the surest way to secure the exaspera-

tion and vindictiveness of the Firth class. Accordingly Mr. Thwaites was

denounced before the Commission by Mr. Phillips in the strongest

language, and his gift to the Clothworkers' Company stigmatized as " a

lunatic bequest." Thoughtful men will dwell on this case and all that

appertains to it. The donor of the money to his Company passed away

from his brethren but as yesterday, and yet we see it coolly recommended

that his will shall be worse than disregarded, and that the enemy shall

enter into possession. Applied to wills of past ages, the principle is less

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 147

startling, though none the less opposed to every principle of law and
justice.

There is an instance of a bequest of a large sum of money within recent Bequests to
years to her Majesty the Queen. It is also matter of notoriety that a lady, her Majesty
'in admiration of Lord Beaconsfield's devotion to the interests of his J?Beaconi^
country, bequeathed him a considerable sum. What would be said of the ^e^f
Duke of Bedford and Lord Derby, or other persons in high position,
publicly recommending that these bequests should be set aside and the
moneys drawn off into other channels ? Or supposing Mr. Gladstone to
fall under such love and like admiration as to become a legatee after the
manner of Lord Beaconsfield (and although such event has not yet shown
itself, it may come to pass), would it be tolerated to seize on Mr. Glad-
stone's legacy and hand it over to Mr. Firth's Liberation or other political
societies in Chelsea "? These are no far-fetched cases, they are precisely
what is proposed under the Commission, but which it is hoped the
people of a law-abiding country will never support or sanction.

Let my Lord of Derby and his Grace of Bedford look to their ways
in this matter, remembering,

" With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." — Matt. vii. 2.

Her Majesty and Lord Beaconsfi eld's legacies are as yet a little too
green for the spoilers. Give such a shade more of maturity, though
both are now somewhat approaching to the age of Mr. Thwaites' be-
quest, when deemed ready for freebooting diversion. Even Mr. Firth
and his comrades have not yet got so far as to meddle under half a
century. There must be some ripeness to cover up such class of pillage.

It has been the aim of the writer to place everything in connection Tllo jjoyai
with the inquiry into these old Companies before his readers in a strictly Commission
fair and true light. In concluding the remarkable history, it is well to the result of a
take a short review of the whole case so far as the main facts are con- change in the
cerned. Chiefly should it be borne in mind that all seemed smooth with gt°jt^ion of "he
the Companies until the general election of 1880. The party it brought city of Lon-
back came on the stage of power with very pronounced associates. These don represen-
rcmembered that the City of London had somewhat changed its representa- tation. Ex-
tion, and we find Mr. Gladstone announcing that the time had come " to in- j^jj1^ V™m •
quire into the Livery Companies of the City of London." Forthwith the jority of the
Commission started into life, and with its birth came new light, as Commission,
evidenced in the names of the Commissioners. There were to be twelve
altogether, nine of whom were of the dominant political party, and three,
i.e. Firth, Bart, and James, were unmistakably the openly avowed enemies
of the most pronounced class. These were the men selected to sit in judg-
ment on the Companies, and to decide whether they Avere guilty or not of
the charges preferred against them by Firth and Beale, crimes openly
asserted as of a character warranting their treatment as criminals. Firth,
be it ever remembered, as the most prominent of their accusers, is placed on
the judgment-seat. Lord Coleridge, though he be Lord Chief Justice, is
neverthless one of the gentlemen forming the band of Serjeants who but
recently sold the property of their Guild, and divided the proceeds among
themselves ; he also was selected as a fitting one to place in the seat of
justice in the case offering such a marvel of wealth as was hung before
the eyes of the spoilers. It is almost beyond the assurance of even the most
utterly conscience-void, that the class of men known to represent the Com-
panies should have been marked out for preventitive of property-dividing
such as the law Serjeants had just perpetrated. There was no ground
for believing that the gentlemen forming the Liveries Management
Courts were of a class thus to fill their pockets. They had the
characters and honour of long lines of honourable predecessors to protect

L 2

148

ROYAL COMMISSION.

London.

and imitate. The Commission need not have insulted them by the
unwarranted assumption that they Avere of the realization class. The
Lord Chief Justice, with highest respect be it written, may possibly from
experience have felt the temptation, hence possibly the insertion of
suggested restraint action.

Perversion of Of all the subterfuge absurd shifts of the section of the Commission
facts in regard nlost in union with Mr. Firth and his confederates, none is more out-
of the 8Com- rageous than its dealing with the Companies in regard to their position
panies result- after the great fire of London in 1666, and which would have entirely
ing from the ruined any but the good beaver-habited men such as have ever handled
Great Fire of these properties. It is admitted that " very large sums " were raised by
the private subscriptions of the members, and this at a time when the
status of the Companies was identical with what it is to-day. See how
the wily and seemingly communistic members of the Commission twist
this to suit their own purposes. They are pleased to insult the common
sense of Englishmen by saying, " Even assuming that the Companies
were actually founded anew at this period, the second foundation took
place a long time ago, and they are public bodies. Slippery as eels,
there is no tying down the Firth conspirators to anything save a steady
purpose to plunder the Companies. Five centuries ago they are said to
nave been " public bodies ; " then we are told that three centuries ago
they received lands upon " moral trusts ;" and further it is admitted
that two centuries ago they were largely re-endowed from private
sources. The cunning section of the Commission, open enemies of the
Companies, admit the two first facts, inasmuch as they seem to serve for
material on which Mr. Warr could manufacture a Report. But even
the existence of the third and all-important fact is utterly ignored by
Mr. Conspirator Warr in dictating the document he places before the
world as the " Report of the Commission." Had not Lord Sherbrooke
beforehand paved the way by announcing the Cromwellian doctrine of
the all-potentiality of Parliament, the Commission would never have
insulted the country by telling them, as is done in this case, that the
most recent endowment of the Companies from private sources happened
" a long time ago," and therefore they are free to be pillaged. Was
ever anything more monstrous ? Lapse of time we can all understand
may operate to turn a bad title into a good one ; but how length of
possession can turn a good title into a bad one is a doctrine serving only
for Firths and Bealites, and men of their genius.

Nothing can be more misguiding than the adoption of the term
" public " to the City Companies. Are not the London and North-
Western Railway and the London Joint Stock Bank termed " public
Companies " 1 Is not every one of the many thousands of Joint Stock
Companies with which London swarms " public " 1 Where is the man
" corporation" wno would say that he has any right in the world in the properties of
explained. such concerns beyond the right of purchasing and holding the shares
Companies any one may think proper to sell him in any or either such corporations,
public only in It is, moreover, asserted that the Guilds became a State Department by
the same virtue of their charters of incorporation. It fits in with the views of the
sense as the communist portion of the Commission to enforce this view, but it is
entirely ruled out, as are all their other theories, by the actual facts. A
corporation is after all nothing more than an individual termed for
special needs " a corporation ;" in clearer language, is permitted to en-
dow, as the case may happen, either a number of persons, or it may be
the holder from time to time of a particular office, with all and the
same legal rights as one individual person would hold and possess were
he never to die. Now as this undying one, who of course is a creature
of the law, cannot affix the signature of a human being, the law per-

The term
" public "
wrongly ap-
plied to the
Companies.
The term

railways and
banks.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 11-9

mils him to use a seal. So far as property is concerned, this embody-
ment under a seal can do just whatever he please as to property. He
cm buy and sell, he may become rich, or he may fall into poverty ; he
can do anything which a real human being in the flesh can do, so far as
property is concerned, but he is prevented holding land unless through
an authorization to do so by a licence in mortmain. It will be seen
that a charter granted any of the old Guilds, if accompanied by mort-
main licence, enabled the recipients to acquire and manage property as
they willed. The City Companies, it is proved, paid in every instance
heavily for this privilege ; but there is no ground, or even the smallest
reason, to found or set up the ridiculous theory as that any such Charter
welds the Guild thus incorporated into any such peculiar union with the
State, or that it manufactures it into what the Firths and Beales, for
their own purposes, are pleased to style "a public body." None of the
City Livery Companies are public bodies, save in the sense pretended
by their spoilers as a note of preparation for the act of robbery.

It would be well in these modern clays to observe some of the penal
clauses enforced by the ancient Guilds against members — such, for
instance, as the following : —

" If ony man be of good state and use hym to ly long in bed, and at Penal clause
"rising of his bed he will not work ne wyn his sustenance and keep his °f*he ancient
" house, and go to the tavern, to the wyne, to the ale, to wrastling, to s'
" schetyns, and in this manner fallith poor and left his cattel in his
" defaut for succour and trust to be holpen by the fraternity, that man
" shall never have good ne help of Companie, neither in his lyfe ne at
" his death, but he shall be put off for evermore of the Companie."

The history of the various City Livery Companies as developed The historic
through the Commissioners' Report shows how by degrees the old development
burgher spirit yielded and the so-called guild merchant vanished, and °f the Cl.ty
the Corporation of London appeared on the scene as the results of the
power of the craftsmen. This transfer of civic power was brought to
completion about the middle of the fourteenth century. In was in
Edward II.'s reign that all who desired to be free of the City were
obliged to join a Guild, and it was in the following reign that the right
of election of aldermen was transferred from the wards and vested in the
Companies. This arrangement did not last long, for in 1384 the former
constitution of the City was restored to it. Originally the Companies
had no public duties whatever. They were nothing more than private
organizations for some centuries after their foundations, i.e. they served
as club, benefit society, and trade union in one. The jMO^'-public duties
they had for a brief period discharged in the Middle Ages ceased of action
in the days of the Plantagenets, and yet the majority of the Commis-
sioners have the effrontery to advance this as an argument for now robbing
them of their properties. All they have to say is, they were public
bodies some 500 years ago, therefore they are public bodies now and
fitting objects of despoil.

These same valuable historical contributions furnished by the Com- TheCompanies'
panics point out that the brief civic supremacy of the Companies ^£0^;^^
terminated some five centuries since, and their regulations of trades came jn Oi<ien times ;
to an end in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Early in the seven- their continu-
teenth century, the powers of monopoly and search contained in their anftf as suc)l
charters were in more than one instance declared illegal by the judges, until Prescnfc-
and they one and all fell back into their former condition of voluntary
associations of individuals united for purposes jointly social and benevo-
lent. It must, however, be borne in mind that when they passed away
from the exercise of influencing public affairs, they applied themselves
more than before to their original formation and object of their first con-

150 KOYAL COMMISSION.

dition, i.e. the management and use of their properties for certain pur-
poses. Their properties were private ; it is private property at this
time, as it was then, and ever has been. All asserted endeavours to dis-
prove this are mere pretence ; there has been no attempt to overturn this
solemn truth. It is dealt with only by Lord Sherbrooke's declaration that
" Parliament is omnipotent." Neither the Duke of Bedford nor Lord Derby
seem to have endorsed this settling sort of argument, as it is not advanced
in the Report signed by those noblemen. One alternative only remained.
This Avas the endeavour that the corporate estates of the Companies
was not private property at all, and this course, adopted by a portion
of the Commissioners, broke down most signally.

Unanimity of No unanimity existed with the despoiling portion of the Commission
the spoilers, as to the sense in which the Company's property is said to be " public."
their various gome declared it to belong to the whole community, and which they term
vourableto'the " ^ie State," others assign it to Londoners only, while a third as loudly
communists, assert it as belonging to trade. All of the stealing section are of one
accord in that it must be wrested away from its present possessors. A
general scramble is to be the after-outcome. But even these miserable
constructions are put forward only now and again as it seems to serve
the turn of the communists. Generally they rely on the assertion that
the properties of the Companies were granted them by the State upon
what is morally a trust for the relief of poverty and the promotion of
education. It is shown in these pages that the greatest of English
lawyers have over and over again decided against this theory. " But,"
say they, "the Commissioners do not consider themselves bound by
them in framing their report." The pretext that the properties of the
Companies having been, granted them by the State for the relief of
poverty, &c., is said by the communistic portion of the Commission
to have been a trust created in the reign of Edward VI. At the
Reformation, as already shown, the Companies held part of their lands
subject to " superstitious uses." Those lands were vested by statute in
the Crown and redeemed by the Companies in the year 1550. Con-
tinually in the course of the Report of a section of the Commissioners
it is declared that this redemption was allowed by the Crown on what
they style a representation from the Companies that the rents would be
devoted to charitable purposes.

Sacrifices sub- ft js hardly possible of belief that this so-termed "representation,"

•ntimesst described by the Avould-be spoilers as "a Return to Commissioners

satisfy the ra- appointed by Edward VI." was actually and really presented to Queen

pacity of their Elizabeth thirty-seven years after the redemption had been made, and icas

rojal utterly and entirely unconnected ivith, and had not the smallest reference

plunderers. to, that transaction. This is not all. Far from being "suffered" or

" allowed " at the request or upon the representation of the Companies,

it is proved beyond all disputation that the redemption in question was

actually forced upon them ly the Grown for the purpose of extort in>j

money. These Companies, Avhose loyalty was appreciated or contemned

as it best suited the occasion and purposes of the spoilers of old, were

forced to pay an exorbitant price, wrung from them in true Shylock

manner and to be forthcoming in eight days. According to old Stowe,

and his authority will rule over any Firth or Beale testimony, they

had to sell their own lest lands at a great sacrifice to satisfy the rapacity

of the royal vendor. In these few words is conveyed the only true

history of the moral trust created by the re-grant of King Edward.

Thieves and knaves may twist it as they may, such is its only true

meaning.

Any one desirous of forming a correct estimate of the infamy of the
charges so continuously urged against the Livery Companies, is enabled

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 151

to judge of the conspiracy through its descending to any and the

meanest description of slanders"; a recapitulation of certain of these is

needed for this purpose such, for instance, as the following in Mr.

Phillips's article in the New Quarterly Magazine, viz.: — "Not a five-

' pound note is voted by a single one of the eighty odd Companies which

1 is not ostentatiously advertised in every popular newspaper. Little do

1 the public think that this show of charity covers a maladministration of

1 trusts and a reckless disregard of charitable intentions such as find no

1 parallel. TJie fact is, that in many cases these votes of money to charit-

11 able imrposcs are neither more nor less than conscience money.'1

It hardly need be said there is not one single syllable of truth in this
charge. None of the Companies ever advertised a donation made by
them. Some of these donations no doubt get into the public papers,
but, in nine cases out of ten, it would be found that the advertisement
has come from the charitable institution benefited, and most probably
mentioned with a view to stimulate and encourage the charity of
others.

As to the maladministration of trusts, charged by the author, there is
not the shadow of a pretence for the accusation. The whole passage
contains a calumnious charge, for which there is no foundation — a charge
which no public wiiter of any standing would have made without having
ascertained that there were sufficient grounds for it.

The whole evidence adduced before the Commission proves the utter
falsity of the charge. No maladministration of trusts was attempted to
be set up, much less proved, against either of the Companies, and yet
this mendacious writer has the daring to assert that " The Companies'
" maladministration of trusts and reckless disregard of charitable inten-
" tions are such as find no parallel."

Further the prosecutors in the case openly and publicly asserted and
reiterated that —

" The conduct of the Companies has been such in their trusts as, if they
" had been private individuals, would have subjected them to have been
" treated as criminals," or, to use language if possible only a trifle plainer,
they were public thieves. That —

The vast sums they hold and which were designed for 'charitable pur-
poses, were being wantonly wasted in weekly feasts and orgies of unbounded
wastefulness. That —

Large salaries and moneys in shape of attendance fees on courts and
committees are rewards paid to members of the courts; and that, in further
addition to these —

Moneys are on occasion of such feasts placed underneath the plates of
dining members.

That relatives of members of the courts are " educated in the Companies}
" schools and there accommodated with exhibitions in the Universities free
" of expense."

Will it be credited that Mr. Phillips, one of the men who had more
than a hand in penning these gross vilifications, when under examination
before the Commission, responded as follows to the Lord Chief Justice of
England : —

LORD COLERIDGE, who, with evident desire to know how the witness
would justify himself in regard to his many unfounded accusations,
asked, —

Let me ask you one question. I do not know whether you would
admit that it may be very possible for a system to be bad without the
men who come in to administer it being themselves dishonourable
or bad ?

Never in my life by one tcord that I have ever written have I

152

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Kpoo.-h of Sir
Hanlinge
Giffard, refer-
ring to the

falsities of the

Companies'
enemies, their
attacks on

recent utter-
ance of a
Cabinet

fi<!i</C!*t<'<1 any dishonour to any single member of these Companies. They
have learned to administer the property in this way ; they think it is
no harm so to do ; they contend that it is theirs, and that being so they
are acting as any other honest men would do having such views.

It is open to the suggestion that this is not the best way of managing
the property without suggesting that the people who manage it are not
honest ?

I have never suggested that they are not honest. They contend that it
is their own property to do what they like with.

SIB HARDiNGE GiFFARD, M.P., late Solicitor-General, addressing a
body of gentlemen, members of the Livery Companies, recently on the
subject of their rights, forcibly expressed himself thus : — " It was obvious
when people took a deep interest in a subject, whether it AV;IS

.£ r .... . L , ., .. , , „ d ., .. ,

scientific or political, or whether it had reference to the questions of

trade and commerce, it was not unnatural that those Avho took

tjie same view of things should unite for the purpose of dis-

cussing, favouring, and maturing a subject in which they were so

deeply interested. And he believed the energy of the sort which

might be seen exhibited very conspicuously in Pall Mall and its

neighbourhood exhibited itself in earlier times in the City of London,

when persons thought it was important for the country to cultivate and

foster foreign trade and domestic trade. That he believed to be the

history of the City Companies. It was not true to say that they were

entrusted, in the sense in which a lawyer would understand the word,

with a trust which they were to carry out. They, like other men,

regarded life as comprehending various duties, and, amongst others, tha

duties of social intercourse and good fellowship one with the other. He

was speaking amongst those who were able to answer for themselves,

and who were able to understand whether it was correct to de-

scribe civic festivals as scenes of gluttony and drunkenness. He was

aware that in certain minds — well, he would not say that — but in

certain tongues — it was impossible to speak of a City festival without

words of reproach and invective. They did not eat, they 'guttled.'

They did not drink, they 'guzzled,' and the guzzling was supposed

to carry with it an argument that they ought not to be permitted

to eat and drink like ordinary mortals. The interests of the time

rendered calumnies, which might be passed by with contempt at

another period, matters for serious consideration. Of course, the rich

and the poor, the existence of misery in this world besides great riches

and wealth, and comfort, and luxuries, were topics which from the

earliest history of mankind had been played upon by demagogue after

demagogue for the purposes of setting one man against another ; and in

this country that string had been harped upon over and over again,

unfortunately sometimes to the destruction of the broad industry,

sometimes to the destruction of the municipality. But he believed it

was novel in the history of this country to hear a Cabinet Minister

discoursing on that string. To his mind, it was utterly unexampled

in the history of the country to have had observations of the character

to which 'he referred directed against the owners of property by

a person who by an hypothesis was entrusted by her Majesty to govern

her country in the light of the law and of the constitution. They had

nothing to do there with politics — in the sense of party politics. Upon

these they had as much right to form their own individual opinions as

any other people. But there were some principles which ran through social

life and which were necessary to the existence of society, and amongst

these was the recognition of the rights of private property. He knew itwas

one of the familiar expedients of some to attempt to divide society by

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 153

suggesting to each particular unit in turn that the one which was to be Speech of Sir
sacrificed was exceptional. It was said, for instance, nobody made the *f*Tdu}8e
land. No, nobody made his breeches — he meant no possessor of them.
But he bought them and paid for them, and that was the kind of title
which people had to their land — just the same title as they had to the
clothes they wore. And in the same way one might go through every
article of property which persons had a right to maintain as their own.
It was a desirable thing that they should understand that that which
was an attack upon one owner of property was an attack upon the
owners of property all round. Let them not make the mistake of being
divided and destroyed. Let the land-owner, the fund-OAvner, the owner
of these interests in companies — City companies and other companies —
— whether they existed for the purpose of trade, or whether they existed
for the purpose of science or entomology, or any other purpose whatever,
he did not care — those which people had got together by their own
exertions, and which had been devoted to objects which were not
unlawful, they were their own, and let them stand by them. The City
of London had exhibited a slight indication of leaning towards one
particular party in politics in recent years, and if this had not been the
case, they would probably have heard very little of these agitations. If
the City Companies had always been faithful to one political belief, he
thought they might have defied the assaults of the honourable and
learned member for Chelsea. But they could not then have exhibited
a determination to exercise their own judgment, and to maintain that
which used to be considered one of the cardinal principles of English-
men, that they had a right to their own opinions ; and it was one of the
cardinal opinions of the gospel of the future, that the triumphant
political party, whichever it should be, should never forget or forgive
what had been done against it ; and that if they were driven out of
power, they should take care that those who had assisted in driving them
out of power should suffer for their wickedness in having exhibited that
degree of independence. He was speaking in a hall which was, perhaps,
not very old, but which represented those who had gone before for
many centuries, and he could not forbear saying what he had said in
defence of those who had as much right to retain their property and
privileges as those great owners of either landed or funded property,
against whom at present the crusade had not been preached. And he
thought it was very significant of the attacks to which he was referring,
that at present they did not find that there was any notion of distributing
for the benefit of the poor the property which belonged, for instance, he
would say, to the Reform Club. Suppose he were to enter into an
inquiry as to the first principles upon which the Reform Club was
founded, and ascertain whether those who belonged to it now were
actually in harmony with those who founded it. It would be a very
interesting inquiry ; and suppose he entered upon it for the benefit of the
poor. Well, he did not want to be uncharitable, but this was not the
first time that those who did certain actions ostensibly for the benefit of
the poor had been called to account. That they should take from one
man what belonged to him and give it to another, because they did it
for the good of the poor, was one of those very ingenious expedients
which had from time to time, in the harids of novelists, served to excuse .
Robin Hood, Jack Shepperd, and other gentlemen known to fame ; and
he was afraid their careers were not followed by the applause of the
listening country. They must recognize their own rights, and that was
what he wanted to insist upon — and not only their own rights, but,
standing shoulder to shoulder, they must resist this spirit of spoliation ;
they would thus succeed against those who were trafficking with the

154 KOYAL COMMISSION.

S pecch of Sir passions of the multitude, not only for the benefit of the poor, but for
Hardinge the purpose of obtaining'political power. If the Saddlers' Company and
Giffard. the other Companies, and all who were interested in maintaining the

rights of property, would join together against a principle which would
deprive every man of that which justly belonged to them, the country
would be saved from a storm with which it was threatened, and they
would be able to transmit to their successors and descendants that
inheritance which the courage, the industry, the perseverance and the
genius of those who had gone before had created for them, and they
would not upon the miserable bribe to be allowed to retain it for their
own lives, forfeit so great an inheritance."

The Merchant None of the Companies presented a bolder front to the Commission,

Taylors' bold or dealt in a more masterly way with the questions forming matters for

remonstrance inquiry) than did the Merchant Taylors. Messrs. Firth, Beale and Co.,

declaratio^of me^ w^ more than their match in Mr. Fenning, the honoured Master of

rights. this grand old Guild. In a statement given in extensio at page 265 in

this volume, he denounces the whole gang in no measured terms,

although at the time of its dictation Mr. Warr had not developed the

conspiracy in all its wickedness. Mr. Fenning knew well the class of

men who had so unceasingly slandered the Companies, and he spared

them not. He refers to Mr. Beale as Firth's great oratorical lieutenant,

and as having eulogized himself in these words : "I have lectured at all

" the working-class clubs throughout the Metropolis for years past, and

" in every case they universally assent to the ideas I have expressed."

Mr.Fenning.of Mr. Fenning thus addressed the Commission : — The Eoyal Corn-
Merchant Tay- missioners to inquire into the condition of Livery Companies
lor s , spirited having sent to the Merchant Taylors' Company, for their perusal,
Koyal Com. & the evidence taken on the first eight days of their inquiry, the
mission. Company deem it to be their duty, no less than their right, to point

out substantial mis-statements of fact, and erroneous conclusions drawn
from them, which two of the witnesses have laid before the Com-
missioners.

The charges against the Company have not been stated with an ex-
plicitness such as might reasonably have been expected in so serious an
inquiry, but they are to be found rather in a multitude of insinuations
spread over some twenty pages, which, however, so far as they are
capable of taking any form, seem to take the following : —

1. That the Merchant Taylors' Company have appropriated moneys of

which they were trustees ;

2. That they have also misconducted themselves in their capacities of

landlords,

3. And as governors of their school ; and this conduct is rendered all

the more heinous, as in so acting they are doing violence to the
rights of the London poor.

Each of these charges will be met and answered in turn. It may,
however, be convenient here to dispose of the question whether the poor
have any, and what, special claim on the funds of the Merchant Taylors'
Company.

It is obvious that the purpose of some of the witnesses is to represent
the Lively Companies as corporations created by the poor, and for the
special benefit of the poor ; as being the recipients of wealth accumulated
from yearly contributions levied upon the poor freeman in former cen-
turies. This representation, the Merchant Taylors' Company have here
to submit, has no historical foundation. These guilds in their initiation
were promoted, and during their continuance have been fostered, by the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 155

middle as distinct from cither of the other two classes ; individual mem-
bers may have ascended from a lower to a higher class in society, but
the guilds themselves have continued to be, as they are now, middle-
class institutions.

The only way in which the poor can now in any sense be said to be
connected with this Company is as recipients of their bounty, and as
enjoying the funds which have been accumulated heretofore by the
middle as distinct from the poorer classes.

Their relations with the Company may be either those of beneficiaries
of a trust created for them by men of the middle class, in which capa-
city they may be honestly said to have received the whole, if not more
than the whole, of what is due to them ; or they may be considered as
the recipients of a bounty which the Company, in recognition of the
duties of the rich towards the poor, have voluntarily and spontaneously
made to thani, but in neither case can these voluntary benefactions be
allowed to ripen into a legal claim upon the funds of the Company.

As has been before stated, the allegation that the Company must be
considered as the heirs of the accumulated contributions of the poor in
former times has really no historic foundation. That the Company used,
under the name of " quarterage," to levy contributions upon the whole
of their members, including the freeman, who were generally of the
poorer class, is perfectly true, as will be seen from the 13th Ordinance;
but it is also equally certain, that so long as any portion of these con-
tributions were so raised from the poor, the whole, and not only the
proportionate part which had been derived from the freemen, was ex-
pended upon the poor ; and so far from the Company being in possession
of any accumulations derived from such a source, they are annually
out of pocket by the transaction, as, while the wholesome custom of
contribution has been discontinued, the Company's disbursements under
this head continue.

Wealth, in the hands of a man or of a guild, may be coveted under
the beneficent plea of using it for the alleviation of poorer men's burdens,
but the security for property would be lost if poverty was a justifying
plea for confiscation.

Mr. Beale speaks in a certain sense ex cathedrd ; he is, in the opinion
of one at least of the Royal Commissioners, the leading author upon
municipal matters, and, from his unique collection of literature upon the
subject, he is not only justly thought to be in possession of the means of
acquiring accurate information, but also, when he gives it, it is usually
received as such: he lectures also to the working classes upon this sub-
ject; and as the audiences, he says, are crowded, and are reported by him
to be so unanimous as to " assent universally to the ideas there expressed,"
it is a satisfaction to feel that, in stopping error here, it is stopped at the
fountain-head.

In the second place, the Commissioners themselves appear to have
accepted, to some extent, his assistance, if not guidance, by giving him
peculiar facilities for prosecuting his inquiries into the affairs of the City
Companies with a view to framing his indictment against them ; and the
man entrusted with such a task should be proved, not only to be honest,
which, in Mr. Beale's case needs no demonstration, but accurate, which
Mr. Beale certainly is not. •

It is a natural sequence with any attacks on property that the Irish trodifced *into
tenants of such Companies as hold the Irish estates should come before the Com-
the Commission with statements and witnesses demonstrating that they mission In-
should either have such lands presented to them, or that they should <ll"ry having
enjoy same at a nominal rent. A cloud of witnesses came over for the the6several°
purpose, and it need hardly be stated all were ready with any amount of estates in Ire-

156 ROYAL COMMISSION.

land, the pro- information on the subject. Clearing tlio fog away from this vast
portyofcer- surrounding, it is simply that the enemies of tho Companies en-
C^mpanies. devoured to show that their various estates in Ireland are Trust
The using the Estates, that the purchase-money was not taken from the funds
occasion for of the various Companies, and also that the tenants have been
an attempt to rack-rented. These endeavours were each and all signally de-
*w"otrcntT feated beforc tho Commission. The Salters' Company met the state-
ments with a short but distinctively clear denial proof, thus : " The con-
" veyance of the estate to the Companies was absolute and without any
" covenant of trust. The Companies at first declined to have any deal-
" ing with the property, but were ultimately persuaded, by representations
"on the part of the Government, that the undertaking would conduce to
" their profit. There is no doubt but that the Companies provided all
"the money; and the amount was raised, partly from their corporate
" funds, and partly from loans from individual members of the Company.
"These loans were in process of repayment from the corporate funds of
" the Company several years afterwards. As to the estates being rack-
" rented, the rents of the Salters' Company have always been in the
" aggregate, under the Government valuation. Tenants' right interests
"are readily saleable."

The Iron- The Ironmongers' Company, in common with each of the Companies

mongers' Com- who had ventured in these Irish holdings, made similar unmistakable
Rn ^ntdtlts showing. Every member of the Ironmongers' Company was " ordered to
" pay his proportion, and further ordered that the proportions of those
" unable to pay should be taken up at interest and the Company to bear
"the same." " There is," adds the Ironmongers' Company in its admir-
ably clear statement, " no evidence that money was raised from any but
"members of such of the Companies as joined in the undertaking, and
" the money so raised was paid, not to the Crown, but to the Chamberlain
" of the City, for the purposes of the Plantation." The Ironmongers'
Company moreover shows that on the 13th of September, 1615, a licence
in mortmain was granted by James I. to the twelve Companies respect-
ing their Irish estates, wherein one of the reasons for granting such licence
is, " That the Companies may in future reap some gain and benefit of
''their great travails and expenses taken and bestowed thereon."

On the point of alleged hardships to the Companies' Irish tenantry, it
is conclusively shown that there has been more than forbearance in every
case, meeting with the usual result. The action of the Ironmongers'
Company is identical with that of the other Companies with their Irish
property holdings. The Company states that "In 1764, in consequence
" of a report to the Company of the hardships with which the tithe was
"exacted from free tenants, the Company redeemed it for 1115/., and ex-
" tinguished it solely in the tenants' interest." Moreover " The tenants
" for many years were supplied by the Company with lime at a nominal
" price, and with timber, slates, roofing and draining tiles, also with large
" quantities of quick for fences, and young trees for shelter, besides grants
" of money for iron gates and pumps ; and the Company make a con-
" siderable outlay on the construction and upkeep of roads, bridges, and
"fences, altogether averaging upwards of 6251. a year, in addition to an
" annual expenditure of 400/. on schools, churches, charities, and exhibi-
" tions, and clergy of various denominations. The Company also sub-
Scribed 200/. towards the preliminary expenses of the Derry Central
" Eailway, and guarantee 51. per cent interest on 50001. of the stock for
" twenty-three years if necessary, and are now paying it, and they gave
" the land required for the railway without charges, and this amounted to
" forty acres."

The Salters' Company, as indeed every other of the Companies interested

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 157

in their Irish properties, are attacked as hard-hearted, grinding landlords, The Salters'
but with the same absence of justifiable cause. The Baiters' Company £°^?*jsat*j[
show that their " rental for agricultural holdings is about ten per cent. tio^ Qf _
" below the Government valuation ; that they consider individual ap- porties in
" plications for relief, and determine such on their respective merits. This Ireland.
" decision has been acted on, and in several instances remission of rent
" has been granted, and pecuniary assistance afforded to needy tenants."

It is a pleasure to the writer of the Livery Companies' Vindication to The City So-
embody in the volume the following admirable document from Sir T. J. llc'^°lf' Sir T'
Nelson, the City Solicitor, and which first appeared in the columns of the t^e cit
City Press : — Companies.

I have occupied my leisure in making myself thoroughly acquainted
with the contents of the first volume of the report of the Livery
Companies' Commissioners, presented to Parliament last session. The
questions involved in that report are of such vast interest to the citizens
of London and the public generally that I may be of service in drawing
attention to the subject.

The attack upon the Corporation of London and its property, as also
upon the ancient guilds and their property, appears to emanate from three
gentlemen — Mr. Beale, Mr. Firth, and Mr. J. E. Phillips, and they have
for their common purpose the obtaining possession of the property of
the City and of the Companies, and its application to other purposes
than those to which it is now devoted.

In the prosecution of this design they have made the most groundless
charges of dishonour and corruption against the Corporation of London
and the Companies, and have disseminated this broadcast amongst the
people, that a desire to plunder the Companies might be evoked and
stimulated by indignation at their proceedings, and by the hope of
obtaining possession of some of their wealth in the general scramble at
' its dispersion. Mr. Firth's contribution to this truthful literature is well
known by his "Municipal London," and occasional letters to the public
press. Mr. Eeale has for years pandered to the worst passions of the
masses in the columns of the Weekly Dispatch as " Nemesis," and as
"Father Jean" in the Echo, and Mr. J. R. Phillips, who is now the
police magistrate at "West Ham, as " Censor " in the columns of the
Weekly Dispatch, and also in magazine articles in the British Quarterly,
and Frazer. These two latter gentlemen both appeared before the Com-
mission " to support the views of Mr. Firth," and by one extract from
the writings of one of the triumvirate, Mr. Phillips, the public shall
judge whether I have overstated their proceedings. He says, "The
conduct of the Companies has been such, in their trusts, as, if they had
been private individuals, would have subjected them to be treated as
criminals." This same gentleman, who is not a penniless adventurer, but
a person of position, in his evidence before the Commissioners actually
stated that the Companies had deliberately understated their incomes at
700,OOOZ. a year, and that it ought to be 1,020,000?., and that he had
arrived at this result by an examination of the rate-books ! When
pressed by Sir Sydney Waterlow that the rate-books were no evidence
whatever of what the income of property is to the freeholder, as nine-
ton ths or any other proportion may belong to the leaseholders, who may
either have a term of years or a perpetually renewable lease — as in the
case of much of the City estates — he had not the manliness to with-
draw his offensive imputation upon the honour of men as respectable as
himself.

What is the judgment of the Commissioners on these accusations ?

158 KOYAL COMMISSION.

The City So. Xho majority are silent, but -what do tlic minority say in their report ?
J Neisot i " **' ^ *s on^ rlSht wo should state that if the inquiry in which wo
the City Livery navo keen engaged is to be regarded as a proceeding between our colleague,
Companies. the honourable and learned Member for Chelsea, acting as a Government
prosecutor, and the Companies of the City of London, the prosecution has
failed and the Companies have been successful. They easily defeated Mr.
Firth as regards every part of the case set up by him in his work called
" Municipal London," and a motion by Mr. Firth in favour of disestablish-
ment and disendowing the Companies, was rejected in our deliberations
by a majority of ten to two." The gentlemen who appeared before the
Commission to support Mr. Firth's views were, in our opinion, examined
by us ultra vires, as they could not be 'judged' — we say it with respect
— to be ' competent by reason of their situation, knowledge, and experi-
ence, to afford correct information on the subjects of the inquiry,' within
the meaning of the terms of your Majesty's Commission."

A severer condemnation of the three discomfited accusers could not
proceed from the mouth of judges, and it should teach the public to
receive with caution any further allegations proceeding from such
unreliable sources. The dissentient Commissioners further say on the
general subject : " We have thought it right to lay the above facts
before your Majesty and before the public, because the position of the
Companies of the City has been, in our opinion, greatly misunderstood,
and because AVC conceive that the result of this inquiry has been to
establish a moral no less than a clear legal right on the part of the
bodies which have been the subject of it to be allowed to retain the
complete control of their Corporate or private property." And, again,
" their Corporate property is as much their own, and with as full a right
of disposition in the eye of the law as that of any private individual ;
and the Crown has no more right to inquire into the mode in which it
was acquired, and the way in which the income arising from it is spent,
than it has to make similar inquiries with respect to the estate or income
of a landed gentleman or merchant."

This report of the minority is so exhaustive, so complete, and so
unanswerable a statement of the whole subject that it ought to be
reproduced in extenso, and copies of it should be distributed broadcast
throughout the land, so that the misstatements which have been so in-
dustriously made about the guilds may be corrected. It would, indeed,
be a wise thing on the part of the Companies with their ample resources
to apply part of them to the literary instruction of the masses. Nothing is
easier than to appeal to human passions by attacking existing institutions in
the columns of the cheap weekly newspapers which the working classes read
on their leisure day, Sunday. Whether it be the Throne, the Church,
the House of Lords, the Corporation, or the Companies, as long as you are
not hampered by considerations of truthfulness, you can always make
some running ; Grub Street always exists. There ought to be an anti-
dote provided for this, if the guilds value the continuance of their
existence. They have an excellent case ; no less a person than the
highest legal authority in the kingdom, Earl Selborne, the Lord Chan-
cellor, has told the Commissioners that the Companies " are absolute and
perfect masters of their own property ; in point of law the City Companies
are absolutely entitled to their property in the same manner and as fully
as a private owner would be, and under no trust 'whatever. They are
ancient institutions, the funds which I call their own property were
derived, as far as my knowledge extends, from their own subscriptions
and gifts by their own members and others, intended to be for their
absolute use, and, although I do not think the present generation ought

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 159

to put these gifts into their pockets, yet, on the other hand, I cannot The City ?o.
admit for a moment that they are upon the footing of public trusts." licitor, Sir T.

This was but cold comfort for the Commissioners to hear from the head *:
of the law, a member of the " Ministry of Destruction," which had issued
the Commission, and so the Commissioners submitted a case to the very
learned equity lawyers, Mr. Horace Davey, Q.C., M.P., and Mr. Vaughan
Hawkins, and they put a subtle bait into their case, suggested by Mr.
Beal, that the Companies' Charters might, perhaps, all be illegal and
void, because they purported to create monopolies, and granted powers
of search in violation of Magna Charta ; but the learned counsel could
not assist them to that ingenious method of extinguishing the Livery
Companies. Indeed, I venture gravely to doubt whether any Charter
contains powers that are illegal. Certain it is, that it appears in the
records of my Company (the Weavers') that the Courts of this land
upheld again and again their powers and control over the trade as long
as silk weaving was a London industry, and these powers were renewed
by Charter as late as the reign of Queen Anne. I have every respect for
my contemporaries, but, to put it no higher, as good judges lived in
times past as we have Avith us now. Mr. Horace Davey, indeed, who
was called in "to curse, remained to bless." He told the Commissioners
that in his "opinion the Commission will not be justified in recom-
mending that the Corporate property of the Companies should be taken
from them by the State. I think that such an act of the legislature
would be an act of confiscation, and would not unreasonably shake the
confidence of the owners of property in the security of rights of property.
It must be remembered that the estates of these Companies have been
recognized and held by the courts of law to be as much their property,
with a full right of disposition, as the property of individuals." Who
can doubt it? What did the owners of Doctors' Commons do with
their property 1 What the owners of Serjeants' Inn with theirs 1 Can
it be supposed that learned lawyers, including, in the latter case, all the
common-law judges, would be parties to putting in their pockets the
proceeds arising from the sale of property not their own 1 Yet in both
these cases the property was sold and divided amongst the present life
possessors, who must have taken out more than they put in, a precedent
which the Lord Chancellor, as we have seen, entirely disapproves being
followed by the Livery Companies. It is to bo observed, in the case of
both Doctors' Commons and Serjeants' Inn, the institution came to an
end, not because there might not be further doctors of civil law and
Serjeants at law, but because the exclusive privileges of both had
ceased.

Oddly enough, this same reason is put forward by Mr. Davey, and
Ins advice is followed by the majority of the Commissioners in recom-
mending that the greater part of the Companies' property should bo
taken from them ; and Mr. Vaughan Hawkins, in support of his learned
leader, says, " I should not recommend that the property of any person
should be taken from them by the State, but the State may perhaps be
justified in interfering when the law is defective to secure that property
shall be applied to the purposes for which it is really intended." But
that is just the question : — is the property of the Livery Companies
applied to a purpose for which it was not intended 1 What do the dis-
senting Commissioners find as a fact on that subject? " We think that
one of the results of this Commission has been to prove very clearly
that for the last 400 years the Companies of London have been mainly
what they are at the present day, viz. associations identified in name
with trade and manufactures, but whose real objects have been rather
hospitality and benevolence. They have certainly received Charter after

1GO KOYAL COMMISSION.

The City So- Charter from your Majesty's royal predecessors at periods when Rich
lint..!-. Sir T. associations could not possibly have been called into existence for any
iheChLive" ot'ier P»rpose3-" So tnat tno Commission is actually deprived of any
Companies^17 reason for its recommendations, and there remains the ugly fact that
it is a pure case of proposed spoliation, or, as Sir F. Bramwell cleverly
put it to Lord Coleridge, in answer to a question from his Lordship,
whether he would maintain the same principles if the Companies owned
half England : " It docs not appear to me that the fact I have got
something which is doubly coveted makes it doubly the property of
somebody who would like to get it," and it is reduced after all to the
naked question of coveting. Some of the Companies are rich, and their
riches are coveted. The majority of the Commissioners, seeing
no case hail been established against the Companies, and feeling the
pinch of the difficulty they were in, and the Duke of Bedford and the
Earl of Derby, perhaps, having some doubt about the retention of their
own vast estates, have actually taken refuge in the following reasons
for their recommendation : " that the Companies were originally a muni-
cipal committee of trade and manufacture ; that on their incorporation
by the Plantagenet monarchs they became a State department for the
superintendence of the trade and manufactures of London," of which
proposition there is not a tittle of proof ; and then comes this remarkable
reason, " that it is not improbable that certain of the Companies' title
deeds which, were destroyed in the fire would, if preserved, have dis-
closed trusts." If we once give way to imagination, we may imagine
anything, even to the extent that the Duke of Bedford holds the church
lands of Woburn and Tavistock on a secret trust for the Church, and
ought to account accordingly from the date of the dissolution of the
monasteries. I cannot conceive that any one thing can condemn the
proceedings of the majority of the Commissioners in the eyes of all
reasoning and honest men, than such a suggestion as they have made
about a lost trust. How Sir Sydney Waterlow, than whom no man
assisted more by his questions and his knowledge (being himself a
Stationer and a Clothworker) to bring out the truth, could have signed
this report, and not that of the minority, will be a cause of inexplicable
astonishment to all who will undergo the labour of reading the evidence,
as I have done.

Lord Coleridge, indeed, seems to have a little reason of his own, and
he puts this question (No. 117) to the fuvt witness (Mr. Hare), one of
the charity inspectors : " It is^obvious to lawyers, and I have no doubt you
will agree with me, that those Companies could not hold a shilling of pro-
perty without the artificial aid of the law ? " To which Mr. Hare, bowing at
once to so great an authority as the Lord Chief Justice of England,
answered without hesitation, " Certainly not." But the Lord Chief
Justice, when approaching a still higher authority, the Lord Chancellor,
is more guarded in his language, and, with the same sentiment evidently
in his head, he says (1686) : "I should like to ask the Lord Chancellor
whether he draws any distinction between an ordinary natural person
and a person like a corporation created by law 1 " To which the Lord
Chancellor answers : " There is that distinction undoubtedly, and it is
not very easy to measure precisely the influence it might have upon one's
judgment ; but I assume that Lord Coleridge would not be of opinion
that if a club, for example, were incorporated, its nature would be
substantially changed, or (I should think) that a joint stock company is
to be regarded as public because it is incorporated." What is then the
value of Lord Coleridge's suggestion that the holding of property by the
Companies is protected by the artificial aid of the law 1 If he means
State for law, that protection is common to all property, whether of

LONDON CITY LIVE BY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 161

persons or of corporations ; if he means that by being incorporated they The City So-
can hold property directly in their own name, that is a small matter. jic^°[' Sir ^
How do the Freemasons hold their property, the clubs theirs, numberless t]^e Livery
religious, benevolent, and political associations theirs ? In the names of Companies,
trustees. Does the Commission suggest that the property should be
taken away from these bodies because they are unincorporated ? and, if
not, is it a reason that it should be taken away from the Companies
because they are incorporated? The Freemasons, indeed, may well
tremble. They have as little to do with actual masonry as the Grocers'
Company have with the trade whose name they bear ; and if the cessa-
tion is good cause for annihilation in the one case, so it must be in the
other. I have one comment more only to make upon the report of the
majority of the Commission ; they say, " that some of our number
regard patrimony as an antiquated and unsatisfactory qualification for
membership." "Well, "antiquated" it certainly is; but it is to be
hoped that that will be able to be said of it for all time. By this
qualification the Earl of Derby, the Chairman of the Commission, suc-
ceeded to his estates ; and there is only the difference between my succeed-
ing to the Weavers' Company through my father, and Lord Derby
succeeding to Knowsley and his father's vast estates at Liverpool, that
I got a small part and he gets the whole. Unlike some noblemen on
succeeding to their patrimonial estates, the Companies of the City of
London have not squandered their inheritance, but it has been their
pride and their praise to have fostered and increased it.

Sir, I have occupied much of your space, but bear with me a little
whilst I turn to the Companies. In one point only have they come
worsted from the conflict — viz. their contention that they are not part
of the City of London, and that the Corporation has no jurisdiction
over them. The facts and the law were too strong for them. They are
the planets, of which the Corporation is the sun, and without the sun
they cannot exist. At one time they were absolutely the body politic,
sharing with the Lord Mayor, the Aldermen and the Sheriffs, the rule of
the City. The Charter of Edward II. prescribes that they " the com-
monalty," shall elect the Chamberlain, the Common Serjeant, the Town
Clerk, the Bridgemaster, the ale conners, and the auditors. In com-
paratively modern times the Act of George I. restricted their elections to .
the Mayor, the Sheriffs, the Chamberlain, the Bridgemasters, and the
auditors, but the elimination from this election of two of the officers of
the City could not alter the fact that the Liverymen of the Companies
alone are the " commonalty " who assemble in Common Hall. The
ignorance about this is astonishing. One gentleman thought these
proceedings in the Common Hall were only formal, like the conge cFelire
to a dean and chapter to elect a bishop. Why, contests for Lord Mayor
and for Sheriffs are not even now uncommon, and probably never will
be, and the vote of the livery of these Companies is the all-important
factor in the elections. And so as to the control over them. It is not
technically that of the Corporation, but of the Court of Lord Mayor
and Aldermen, who fulfil, in respect to the Companies, functions very
analogous to those of a visitor of a college, a school, or a cathedral.
That these powers have not been exercised lately is because no case for
their exercise has arisen ; but the Charters of Richard II. and Edward III.,
granted in Parliament, alike declare that the customs of the City shall
not become' obsolete for non-user — a principle the courts of law have
always upheld, notably in the case of Mr. Scales, elected Alderman of
the ward of Portsoken in 1834, and rejected by the Aldermen as unfit,
though no such rejection had taken place for more than a century. That
there has been much estrangement and soreness between the Companies

162

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The City So-
licitor, Sir T.
J. Nelson, on
the Livery
Companies.

and the Corporation cannot be denied. It arose from the Common
Council in 1835 admitting persons to the freedom of the City without
their entering, as had always been the case, through the avenue of a
Company. But the Companies have flourished, notwithstanding this
departure from ancient custom. They are now threatened by a common
danger and a common enemy. Let them join shoulder to shoulder
to resist and vanquish the foe. The Companies have done much for
the public weal. The support of religion, of the poor, of schools, of hos-
pitals, and their hospitality is unbounded. These claims will never cease ;
to that they have recently added another self-imposed duty, providing for
technical education. There is yet one object to which their enemies
point as a proper source for the employment of their wealth, if they
obtain possession of it ; let me, their friend, also point to it — the
preservation of open spaces in the neighbourhood of London — a subject
affecting the health and recreation of the inhabitants of this metropolis
infinitely more than higher education — the knowledge of Greek and
Latin — the fad of the day. If any of the Companies are minded to help
in this direction, they have the means ; and the Corporation have the
power to hold these lands in mortmain and regulate their use ; but their
means are exhausted. The Companies can earn the gratitude of the
present generation, as well as of posterity, by entering upon this new
departure, and I can easily assist them to suitable objects for its applica-
tion.*

I am, &c.,
HOMBURG, Sept. kth, 1884. T. J. NELSON.

1 It is something to have earned this praise from the Commissioners, " They may
be said to have founded at their own expense the loyal province of Ulster, a scr-
vice to the Crown perhaps without a parallel, except the service rendered by the
Honourable the East India Company." Let them continue by their actions to be
worthy of it.

LONDON CITY LI VERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 163

CHAPTER X.

THE Companies evidencing before the Commission were the Grocers',
the Drapers', the Goldsmiths', the Salters', the Ironmongers', the
Clothworkers', the Apothecaries', the Needlemakers', and the
Stationers'.

GROCERS' COMPANY.

On the 21st of February, 1883, the following gentlemen attended Deputation
as a deputation from the Grocers' Company :— J;om Grocers>

The Master, Mr. J. T. Miller.

Second Warden, Mr. J. A. Kingdon.

Members of Court, Mr. W. T. Steinmitz and Mr. J. H. Warner.

Clerk, Mr. W. Ruck.

LORD DERBY, the Chairman, addressing the Master, said : — I under-
stand that you have come prepared to lay before the Commission a state-
ment of various points to which you wish to call their attention]

The MASTER : That is so, my Lord. We have already sent in, as we
think, a complete return to your questions, but we have understood
that the Commissioners wish to acquire a general knowledge of the
leading facts connected with the Company, and this statement has been
drawn up for their convenience.

LORD DERBY : And I understood that you proposed to read it ?

The MASTER : That is so.

LORD DERBY : We shall be very glad to hear it.

A. — The Grocers' Company have already, under protest, replied
promptly and fully to the inquiries of the City of London Livery
Companies' Commission, and in responding to the invitation addressed
to them to offer statements and oral evidence, they are anxious to give
the Commission all the information and assistance in their power. At
the same time the Company respectfully submit that this action on
their part shall not be considered as an admission in any sense of any
special jurisdiction of the Crown over the Livery Companies, or of the
right of the Crown, without the authority of Parliament, to institute an
inquiry into what has been judicially declared to be private property.

In 1833 the Company declined to appear before the Eoyal Commis-
sion appointed to inquire into the Municipal Corporations of England
and Wales. They could not, as they thought, appear without admitting
themselves to be a municipal corporation, and the Companies were ad-
vised that they were not municipal corporations by the most eminent
counsel.1 Moreover, the Royal Commission in that case purported to

1 Among others, Sir W. Follett, Sir J. Scarlett, and Chief Baron Pollock. The
following was the opinion of Chief Baron Pollock, then a leading member of the
bar:—

" I am of opinion that the authority purporting to be given (to the Commission),
of calling for all charters and papers, is not legal : nor am I aware that the Crown call

M 2

164 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation give power to call for papers, to compel the attendance of witnesses,
from Grocers' and to administer an oath ; and it was believed that such powers were
Company. illegal and unconstitutional. !No such powers are conferred on the
present Commission.

The Grocers' Company hold the second place among the twelve great
Companies of the City of London. The Commissioners are aware that
the senior Company, the Mercers', have declined to avail themselves
of the opportunity of offering oral evidence ; and it is proposed, with the
leave of the Commission and of the Mercers' Company, which has been
obtained for the purpose, to read the letter addressed by that Company
to the Commission on this subject : —

" Mercers' Hall, E.G.,

"Uth December, 1882.

" SIR, — In reply to your communication of the 10th ultimo, I am
desired by the Mercers' Company to thank her Majesty's Commissioners
for their courtesy in supplying the Company with copies of the statements
made to them.

" The inaccuracy, of many of these is, no doubt, mainly attributable to
an imperfect acquaintance on the part of their authors with the early
history of the City Guilds. So far as regards the Mercers' Company this
defect is remedied by the series of facts which the Company had the
honour to lay before her Majesty's Commissioners in the first fifteen pages
of Return A, Part 1, of their answers.

" The facts there set forth have been collected and arranged at the
expense of a great deal of labour, in the desire entertained by the Com-
pany to furnish all the information that can be gathered on the subject.
They extend (as the Commissioners will have remarked) over a period of
more than 700 years, and it would scarcely be possible, the Company
believe, to throw additional light on the matter. But if the Commissioners
Avould have the goodness to point out any particular with regard to which
they feel a doubt, the Company will give their best endeavours to remove
any ambiguity.

" In the statement prefixed to the returns of the Company to the ques-
tions of the Commissioners, the views entertained by the Company Avith
regard to the tenure on which they hold their property were distinctly
stated. Those views remain unchanged ; and the Company are glad to
find that they have incidentally received an unqualified confirmation in
the oral testimony of a legal authority of the highest rank before the
Commissioners.

" As regards the mode in which the Company's income is expended,
the Company trust that the same sense of the duties attaching to the
possession of property which has hitherto guided them in the administra-
tion of their own, will continue to do so ; and they venture to think that
in this respect they have no reason to fear a comparison with the most

confer upon the Commissioners any means of compelling the attendance of wit-
nesses or the production of papers. I think the Grocers' Company is not a Municipal
Corporation ; it has nothing to do directly with the government or protection of any
city, town, or place ; and I think the influence of its proceedings upon the election of
either the magistrates or the members of the City of London does not make it a
Municipal Corporation.

" I think the Grocers' Company are not bound to comply with any of the requisi-
tions, or to answer any of the inquiries, that have been sent to them by the
Commissioners.

"And I am of opinion that the Commissioners have no power of commitment or of
proceeding by attachment.

•TEED. POLLOCK.

"Temple, IGlh November, 1883."

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 165

liberal among the wealthy gentry and nobility of the realm. But, con- Deputation
sidering this point to be one affecting themselves only, they decline to from Grocers'
notice either the censure or the commendation which may have been ComPany'
expressed by others in reference to it.

"While gratefully acknowledging, therefore, the courtesy of her
Majesty's Commissioners in offering ' to receive statements and to hear
evidence on behalf of the Company,' I am desired to say that any action
thereupon on the part of the Company appears to them superfluous, and
that they are unwilling to encroach further on the time of the Com-
missioners.

" I am, sir,

" Your obedient servant,
" (Signed) JOHN WATNEY.

".H. D. Warr, Esq.,
" 2, Victoria Street, Westminster, S.W."

To the views .expressed generally in this letter the Grocers' Company
adhere. The statement of the law made before the Commission by the
highest legal authority in the kingdom is supported by the judicial decla-
ration of Lord Langdale, M.E.,1 and is consistent with [the uniform
practice of the Company.2

The Grocers' Company also concur in the opinion of the Mercers' Ans. 1680—
Company, that the inaccuracy of many of the statements made before the 1686» 1695'
Commission is mainly attributable to an imperfect acquaintance on the
part of the witnesses with the early history, and, it may be added, the
present management of the City Guilds. The Court of the Grocers'
Company feel that, after furnishing complete returns, they might safely
have left these misstatements to the judgment of the Commissioners ; but
the investigation must have thrown much additional labour on the Com-
mission, and the object of the present statement is to present the case of
the Grocers' Company in as concise a form as the subject will admit,
without too much detail or legal technicality, and with references to
various erroneous views which have been put forward either in books or
in the oral evidence given before the Commission.

As the Commission began their oral evidence by examining members
and officials of the Charity Commission, it is proposed to take, first, the
subject of the Company's charities ; secondly, to deal with the origin and
history and constitution of the Company ; and, lastly, with its present
administration and the application of its income.

PART I. — THE CHARITIES OP THE COMPANY.

By the Company's charities are meant the sums of money which the
Company is legally bound to apply for charitable purposes, and of which
a return is made every year to the Charity Commissioners.

1 See the case of the Attorney-General v. the Grocers' Company, reported in the
sixth volume of Mr. Beavan's " Reports," p. 526. The Master of the Rolls says
(p. 550), speaking of the surplus revenue under Sir Wm. Laxton's devise : — " This
" revenue, according to the construction which it appears to me ought to be put on
" this codicil, belongs as private property to the Company." The same observation
would apply to other estates devised to the Company in terms similar in effect to
those used by Sir Wm. Laxton, and still more strongly to estates devised to the ..
Company absolutely without any condition, trust, or charge, or purchased, as in the
case of the site of the hall and garden, by free subscription among the members of the
fraternity.

2 The Company's records show that from the middle of the 16th century to the
present time they have from time to time sold and made a title to lands aud other
property, part of their corporate estate, as being absolute owners and without the
intervention of the Court of Chancery. Probably the earliest recorded instance is iu
the year 1531 ; the latest, the sale of the Company's Irish estate ip 1876.f

166

KOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation In the case of the Grocers' Company, these charities bear a very small

from Grocers' proportion to the corporate income. They are set out in detail in the
Company. returns (pages 19, 20), and consist of two classes : (1) a number of small
payments charged on property of the Company for the benefit of various
parishes, hospitals, colleges, and similar objects. These amount altogether
to 3157. a year, and are simply paid over by the Company to the authori-
ties legally entitled to receive them, and the Company are not responsible
for the application; (2) charities under the management of the Company
itself. A considerable part of these have been appropriated by a Middle
Class School Scheme. Those which remain amount to 433?. a year,1 and
a capital sum of about 4700?.2

The Commission may, perhaps, think it right to consider how far these
charities are safe in the hands of the Company. On this subject important
evidence was given by Mr. Hare, in his report to the Charity Com-
missioners in 1863, after an inquiry into the condition and circumstances
of the charities under the management of the Grocers' Company. The
following is an extract from the report : —

" The Grocers' Company decline to exhibit any statement of their
property not specifically charged by the respective founders of the charities.
It has not been an uncommon circumstance in the case of the other City
Companies that charitable funds given them are not found at present set
apart in any definite form of investment, whilst the Company generally
admit their liability and pay the interest or dividends from their general
property. There can be no doubt that in the case of these ancient,
wealthy, and liberal bodies the funds are practically secure."

In illustration of Mr. Hare's opinion, it may be mentioned that the
Grocers' Company are legally bound to expend 300?. a year on the school
and almshouses at Oundle. The rest of the income, under Sir W. Laxton's
will, about 4000?. a year, belongs to the Company, by Lord Langdale's
decision, as their private property. But the Company actually expend
upwards of 3000?. a year on the school, and about 3001. a year on the
almshouses ; and have, within the last eight years, laid out 28,000?. on
school buildings, masters' houses, and playgrounds.

In the case of Witney School there is no beneficial gift at all to
the Company ; but the Company gives considerable help from their
corporate funds. Thus, in 1877, the Company gave 433?,, and in
1878, 862?. In the case of Colwall School the Company is bound to
pay 30?. a year, and actually expends upwards of 250?. There does
not appear to be any beneficial gift.

In the case of the University Exhibitions the Company are bound to
apply 40?. a year out of the income of the property, which now amounts
to 670?. The Company actually give 575?. a year, exclusive of exhibi-
tions from Oundle School. They are also maturing a scheme, with the
advice of some of the most eminent scientific men of the day, for the
endowment of original research in sanitary science. This will increase
the expenditure under the head of exhibitions by 750/. a year, besides a
quadrennial discovery prize of 1000Z.

These facts will probably satisfy the Commission that the charities
of the Grocers' Company are, as Mr. Hare says, practically secure. It
might be added that on more than one occasion, when the Company

1 The following is a list of these charities: —

(a) 300Z. a year for a school and almshouses at Oundle in Northampton-
shire.
(J) 63J. a year for a school at Witney in Oxfordshire.

(d) 401. a year for University exhibitions.

2 A capital sum of 46561. 10*., held under Lady Skne/s will for the purchase of
donative benefices.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 167

contemplated large expenditure on their schools at Oundlo or Witney, Deputation
they applied to the Endowed Schools' Commissioners for a scheme, and from -Grocer
in each case the Commissioners, influenced no doubt by the smallness ComPany-
of the endowment, preferred to leave the school in the management of
the Company.

All the remaining charities of the Company were redeemed some
years ago under the voluntary powers of the Endowed Schools Act,
1869, and the proceeds applied under the authority of a scheme in the
building of a large Middle Class School at Hackney Downs. The date 'of
the scheme is the 24th of March, 1873, and it was the first scheme of
any importance framed under the voluntary powers of the Endowed
Schools Act. The Endowed Schools' Commissioners expressly thanked
the Company for setting what the Commissioners termed so good an
example.

Mr. Hare in his evidence says he does not know of any City Com- Ans. 44.
pany having applied for a scheme, and that the City Companies are not
likely to apply for schemes. It is singular that he should be ignorant
of the first, and certainly one of the most important cases in which the
voluntary powers of the Endowed Schools Act were put in force. The
reason probably is, that Mr. Hare is an official of the Charity Com-
mission, and that he is not thoroughly acquainted with the proceedings
of the Endowed Schools' Commission, to whose functions the Charity
Commissioners succeeded in 1875. Mr. Hare's evidence on this point
'shows how easily witnesses, with the best intentions, may give a Avrong
impression as to facts. Mr. Longley also seems to have been unaware Ans. 466.
of the circumstances ; no doubt lor the same reason as Mr. Hare.

The capital value of the Company's non-educational charities appro-
priated under the Middle Class School Scheme was 27,0007. To this
the Company have added upwards of 50007. out of their corporate funds,
and a large and flourishing school has been established at Hackney
Downs, the district selected by the Endowed Schools' Commissioners ;
but the scheme fixes the tuition fees too low, and the Company now
makes good the loss on the working of the school, which amounts to
about 15007. a year.

Among the non-educational charities of the Company, appropriated
by the Middle Class School Scheme, is Lady Middleton's gift of 207. a
year for necessitous clergymen's Avidows. The Company, with a desire
to respect and carry out the wishes of the founder, where this can be
usefully done, even though the charity has ceased to exist legally, per-
petuate the name and wishes of Lady Middleton by now giving between
7007. and 8007. a year for the purposes she contemplated.

The recipients of the gift are carefully selected. The old ladies who
are successful candidates are invited to the hall, courteously received,
and entertained at luncheon. Every effort is made to render the gift as
welcome to the recipients as the act of giving is to the master and
wardens who distribute the Compan3r's bounty.

Connected with the question of the Middle Class School is a subject
on which a grave attack has been made upon the Grocers' Company by
Mr. Beale in his oral evidence; and the Commissioners could not
have a better instance of the worthlessness of some of the charges
made against the Companies. The case is this : — Among the charities
appropriated by the Grocers' Company's Middle Class School Scheme,
which has the force of an Act of Parliament, was a yearly sum of 9/. 2s.
payable to seven poor members of the Company, and charged upon the
lands and houses devised to the Company by Sir Henry Kebyll.
As to this Mr. Beale says : —
" The return of Keble's Charity is 9/. 2s. per annum ; I turn from Ans. 537.

168 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation that to Herbert's ' Twelve Great Companies ' for his evidence of Keble's

from Grocers' Trust, and I find that includes a mansion in Old Jewry and houses

Company. behind, in Grocers' Hall Court ; the site of Grocers' Hall itself was part
of Prince's Street behind, and part of the present Bank of England. I

Ans. 654. P11*1 *na^ modestly at 25,000/. a year, and it is returned at 9J. 2s."
Again, " In so far as I have attacked the honour of the Grocers' Com-
pany, it was upon the ground that they returned the 9J. 2s. only ; they

Ans 660 never said there was a return of 20,OOOJ. behind it. This 91. 2s. was the
income from six cottages and gardens and yards somewhere about the
year 1500. The entire income was given to be divided in certain ways ;
then I say, as a matter of law, that every shilling of that property, to

Ans 904 906 "wh^ever it may amount, must be used for the same purposes. Keble's
' case I take to be a sort of test ;" and " if we had these gentlemen here,
and asked them questions about it, we should change the face of these
returns."

It will be observed that Mr. Beale makes two distinct charges against
the Company ; one, of making a false return by not including the site
of Grocers' Hall in the property devised by Sir H. Kebyll's will ; the
other, of committing a breach of trust in not treating the whole income
of the property as applicable to trust purposes. Mr. Beale makes his
charges plainly and confidently ; he affects to regard the case of Kebyll's
will as a sort of test by which the Company is to be tried, and he does
not scruple to say, when pressed, that the Charity Commissioners were

Ans 910 certainly wrong when they took the same view as the Grocers' Company
as to the legal obligation to pay the 9/. 2s. only.

These statements of Mr. Beale have induced the Company to institute
a very careful investigation of the subject, and the result of this investi-
gation is to confirm in every respect the accuracy of the Company's
returns. The property devised by Kebyll's will is described with con-
siderable minuteness, and can all be identified, and it seems as certain
as anything can be, at this distance of time, that the will in no way refers
to Grocers' Hall or its site.1

Mr. Beale's mistake is, however, a very old one. In the year 1686,
when the Company were insolvent, and unable to pay their charities,
they applied for an inquisition of charitable uses, with the sole object

1 Alderman Sir H. Kebyll, citizen and grocer, made two wills. One of these, now
at Somerset House, does not affect the present question. The other, which relates
solely to property previously conveyed to the testator by the Grocers' Company, can-
not be found, but the Company possess a very ancient copy of it, made apparently in
1524. Sir H. Kebyll devised "the following property to the Company : —

(a) Two houses in Lawrence Lane in the ward of Westcheap. This lane is far to
the west of Grocers' Hall. There is no entry with respect to these houses in the
Company's books after 1549. They were probably sold in 1550 or 1551, for which
years the records are missing.

(b) Two houses, with the gardens adjoining, in the Erode Alley in the parish of
St. Margaret, Lothbury. This property was sold to the Founders' Company in
1531.

(d) The great messuage in Broad Street, devised to the Company by the will of
Nicolas Alwyn. This is the Warnford Court property.

(e) A piece of vacant land with stables in the Old Jewry. This is the property
No. 8, Old Jewry.

It is remarkable that, according to the recitals in the will, the whole of the property
devised by it had been originally property of the Company, and had been conveyed by
the Company to Kebyll, who was a member of the Court of Assistants. He recites
the various conveyances, but in the case of the Old Jewry property only does he say
that any consideration passed. With reference to that property he expressly says it
was conveyed to him for " a competent sum of money." There is therefore some
reason for supposing that the only beneficial interest which passed to the Company
under the will was in the Old Jewry property, and if so the Company have returned
too much property instead of too little.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 169

of charging the whole of the Company's charities on the whole of the Deputation
Company's property. For this purpose the Company's property was fr°m Grocers'
scheduled, probably very hurriedly, and under the head of Sir H. Kebyll's
will was put —

" A messuage in the Old Jewry, then in possession of Sir Robert
Clayton, a messuage then called Grocers' Hall, near the Poultry, in the
possession of Sir Robert Jeffery, Lord Mayor of London, and a messuage,
then several small messuages, in the parish of St. Peter's Poore."

The report of the Commissioners for inquiring concerning charities,
appointed by Parliament in 1818, quotes the will correctly, but also
quotes the description given in the Inquisition, and this description was
afterwards transferred verbatim to Herbert's book, which Mr. Beale quotes
as his authority.

But if there is some excuse for Mr. Beale's mistake as to the property
comprised in Sir H. Kebyll's will, there is no excuse at all for his state-
ment that the entire income of the property devised by the will was
specifically appropriated.

Sir H. Kebyll's devise to the Company was to the intent, and under
the manner, form, and condition, that the Company should with the rents
provide a chaplain, pay Qd. a week to seven poor freemen, and keep a
yearly obit, with a gift over if the Company should make default. It is
precisely the case put by Lord Cairns in his judgment in the Wax
Chandlers' case, stated fully in the Appendix to Mr. Longley's evidence.
It is a devise upon condition. The devise is accepted, the condition must
be fulfilled, and the money must be paid, whether the land devised is or
is not adequate to meet the payment. The land is the land of the devisee,
and every accretion to the value of the land belongs to the devisee. The
charity which has the benefit of the condition has a right to nothing more
than the payment. The same principle had been previously laid down
by other eminent judges, among them Lord Eldon,1 Lord Brougham,2 Sir
John Leach,3 and Lord Cottenham.4 But the present case does not
depend only on a rule of law, however well established. There is also a
gift over, which shows that the testator himself distinctly contemplated
giving a beneficial interest to the devisee on whom he imposed the
condition.6

1 Attorney-General v. Mayor of Bristol, 2 Jacob and Walker, 294.

2 Attorney-General ». Smythies, 2 Russell aud Mylne, 717.

a Attorney-General v. Cordwainers* Company, 3 Mylne and Keen, 534.

4 Attorney-General v. Fishmongers' Company, 5 Mylne and Craig, 11.

5 For the more complete satisfaction of the Commissioners on this important point
the Company have recently laid hefore Mr. Horace Davey, Q.C., a copy of Sir H.
Kebyll's will with a request to him to advise what interest the Company took under
it. Mr. Davey's opinion is as follows : " I am of opinion that, according to the

true construction of Kebyll's will, the Company was entitled to the surplus and
increased rents, after providing for the charitable payments, beneficially. It will
' further be observed that the greater number of the charitable purposes are super-
' stitious uses within the meaning of the Act of Henry VIII. and Edward VI., and it
' is probable that they became forfeited to the Crown and were redeemed under the
' Act of 4 James I., in which case, I believe, it is always considered that the Companies
' reacquired the lands for their own benefit."

Mr. Davey probably had in his mind the case of the Attorney- General v. the Fish-
mongers' Company (Preston's will), 5 Mylne and Craig, 16. Some of the observations
of Lord Chancellor Cottenham in his judgment seem very pertinent to such charges
as Mr. Beale has made against the Grocers' Company. The Lord Chancellor says
(P- 25) :-

" This probable ground of title, coupled with the 400 years' enjoyment, would, of
itself, have been an answer to the claim made by the information. In this case, it is
unnecessary to pursue that point further, as this additional ground is not required to
support the decree of the Master of the Bolls, which I now affirm, and dismiss the
appeal with costs ; but I cannot part with this case without expressing my regret that
this proceeding should have been instituted without that ordinary degree of considera-

170

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation It is perhaps no exaggeration to say that Mr. Beale has, in connection

from Grocers' with Sir II. Kebyll's will, charged the Grocers' Company with something
Company. like fraud, and the Charity Commissioners 1 with almost culpable igno-
rance or negligence. Not only are these grave and offensive charges
altogether unfounded, hut there is considerable reason to suppose that Mr.
Beale has never even seen a copy of the will on which he has based them.
Mr. Firth, in his book " Municipal London," attacks the Grocers'
Company in much the same way as Mr. Beale does. He says (page 79),
" It is not without a certain aptitude that one recognizes the motto of the
" Company, ' God grant grace.' It would have been interesting to know
" how the graceless grocers do dispense their vast trust property. For
" example, in 1636 one William Pennefather by his will gave 233Z. 6s. Sd.
"to buy land of the yearly value of HZ. 13s. 4d., such sum to be
" divided yearly amongst seven poor almspeople. How much does the
" land bring in, and how much is paid over ? So a house given to the
" same Company to provide 41. a year for an iron and glass lantern to be
" fixed in Billingsgate, and 61. 10s. to the poor. If the house brings in
" (as it probably does) 300Z. a year, how much is given to the poor 1 "

Without saying anything as to the taste in which this passage is
written, it will probably be sufficient to observe that the 233/. 6s. 8 d. given
by Pennefather's will was never invested in land, and that the yearly sum
of 111. 13s. 4d., intended by the will to be secured, and the capital
value of the house in Walbrook (176/. a year), devised by John Wardall,
were appropriated by the Middle Class School Scheme.2 But the Com-
missioners will not of course assume, because the Company assented to
the appropriation to the purposes of middle class education of the charities
created for the benefit of poor members of the Company by SirH. Kebyll,
Pennefather, and Wardall, that there is any desire on their part to
neglect their duty towards the poorer brethren of the fraternity. The
Company have always considered their whole corporate property as appli-
cable to the relief of their poor members, not as of right, but at the dis-
cretion of the Court. The obligation to relieve unfortunate members
dates from the earliest ordinances of the brotherhood, as far back as 1345,
and it has always been observed. All applications from poor members are

tion and research, which, if exercised, must have satisfied the relators that there was
no foundation for the case attempted to be made.

" The title to property, after an enjoyment of 400 years, is questioned, and great
trouble and expense necessarily occasioned to the owners, upon some expressions found
in a will of the year 1434, which even a slight attention to the history of the time, the
then state of the law, and the transactions relating to the property (which the relators
do not appear to have taken any pains to ascertain), would have shown to be wholly
unavailing for the purpose of supporting the claim made.

" The loss which this attempt will occasion to the relators is no compensation for
the injury which it has occasioned to the defendants, from which I regret the inability
of the court to relieve them, beyond the costs of the suit, given by the decree of the
Master of the Rolls, and the costs of the appeal, which I now order the relators
to pay."

1 Mr. Beale refers to the Charity Commissioners ; it would have been more correct
to have said the Endowed Schools' Commissioners, whose functions were not trans-
ferred to the Charity Commissioners till after the scheme in question had
become law.

2 There are two other cases of money having been left to the Company to be invested
in land, Walwyn's will in 1612 and Robinson's will in 1633, and these are very pro-
perly mentioned in the Appendix to Mr. Lucraft's evidence, but he too is wrong in
saying that the Company claim any benefit from the increased value. It seems to
have been assumed by the Company in these cases that there was a power to invest in
land, not an obligation to do so. The charities might no doubt have been benefited by
the increased value of the land, if the investment in laud had been made ; on the other
hand, the lands might have been lost altogether after the Great Fire. These charities
were all for the Company's poor members, and any possible increase of value is much
more than covered by the Company's expenditure for this purpose.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 171

carefully'inquired into, either by the Court of Assistants or hy the master Deputation
and wardens, and are dealt with on their merits, with a view to give f™m Grocers'
liberal aid to the deserving, and to avoid anything like a system of doles.
The expenditure of the Company under this head is about 4000Z. a year,
upwards of ten times the amount which, if the Middle Class School
Scheme had not become law, the Company would have been legally
bound to pay. Nothing could be more baseless than the imputation made
by Mr. Firth on this subject.

The general charities of the Company are dealt with in a subsequent
part of this paper.

PART II. — THE ORIGIN, HISTORY, AND CONSTITUTION OP THE COMPANY.

The first mention of the Guild of Pepperers is in 1 180. The Pepperers
of Soper's Lane, and the Spicers of Cheap, in the 13th and first half of
the 14th centuries, represented the English element in London trade with
the East, just as the terms " Brethren of St. Anthony," " Merchants of
the Steelyard," and " Easterlings " l point to a foreign element. These
merchants imported eastern products, practised the arts of coining and
weighing, and to some extent banking.

As instances of the importance of the Pepperers it may be noticed
that, in 1221, Andrew Bokerell, a Pepperer, was keeper of the "King's
Exchange." His duty was to receive old stamps or coining irons, and
deliver new ones to all the mints in England. He was Lord Mayor
for seven consecutive years, 1231 — 1237. Also, that at the beginning of
the reign of Edward III., 1328, while the commonalty of the City elected
the custodian of the small beam, by which silks and other speciaria
were weighed by the peso sottile, or pound of twelve ounces, the Pepperers
and their trade allies, who weighed by avoirdupois, elected the keeper of
the great beam of the king, at which the peso grosso, or merchants' pound
of fifteen ounces, was used.

The Pepperers were also correspondents of the Italian bankers and
merchants of Siena, Lucca, and Florence, and were probably concerned
with the transmission of Papal revenues collected in England by the
Pope's instruments, the preaching and begging friars. The Eastern trade
also brought Lombard merchants to London, and by the year 1250 these
merchants were firmly established in Lombard Street, to which they
gave its name. Li 1338 Edward III., being in urgent need of money
for his wars in France, extorted a large loan from the Lombards within
his dominions. This eventually caused the ruin of the Italian merchants
of Lombard Street. The greatest of them, the Bardi and Peruzzi, held
out to the last, and failed in January, 1345. This was a very severe
blow to the Pepperers and their allies in trade with the East ; and from
this time the name Pepperers ceases to be distinctive of a guild ; but on
the 9th of May in the same year some twenty Pepperers of Soper's Lane
"'of good condition," undaunted by their trade reverses, met to continue

1 St. Anthony was the founder of lay monastic orders. His disciples earned their
own living as traders. They extended their trading establishments from Egypt and
Constantinople through Lombardy and Gaul to England, and there is reason to believe
that the quay or wharf, known in later times as the steelyard, was originally a monas-
tery of the lay monks of St. Anthony, and that those monks are meant hy the term
" Merchants of the Steelyard." These merchants of the steelyard paid toll to the
king in kind, the toll being a certain quantity of pepper. " They are also called
" Easterlings," which is clearly a form of the word oesterlich, and probably meant
" Men of the East," or " Men of the Eastern Emperor," i.e. the Emperor of Constan-
tinople. The Easterlings introduced improvements in coining from Constantinople,
and gave their name to the new "sterling" money^ first made in England, A.D. 1180,
to take the place of the debased currency, just as the florin of gold was so called from
the Florentines who introduced it.

172 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation ' their connection as the social and religious fraternity of St. Anthony, and
from Grocers' adopted St. Anthony as their patron saint. The records of the Grocers'
Company. Company begin with a very ancient and probably almost contemporaneous
account of this meeting. The actual record is now being reproduced in
facsimile, and, it is hoped, will soon be ready for presentation to the Com-
mission. Nothing can be more quaint or circumstantial than this nar-
rative of the proceedings of the twenty Pepperers ; and their ordinances,
" pointz," as they are called, have been happily preserved to us. These
ordinances show that the objects of the fraternity were social, benevolent,
and religious, " for greater love and unity," and " to maintain and assist
"one another."1

Mr. Firth, in his work on " Municipal London," page 47, refers to
the origin of the Grocers' Company as described in " Herbert on London
" Livery Companies," and continues : "So amid prayer and feasting
" began the Grocers' Company, and, as it had begun, so it prospered, till
" in the zenith of its power as many as sixteen aldermen of the City
" Avere inscribed on its roll of members at the same time .... And the
" origin of the Grocers' was typical of that of many other Companies.
" Every member of the Company was engaged in its trade, and had its
"interests at heart; he subscribed his quarterage regularly to the
" common fund ; he was coequal with all other members of his Com-
" pany ; he helped to regulate and control its expenditure ; he had relief
" in case of necessity ; and, if he died in poverty, he was followed to the
"grave and buried by the brotherhood, and the Company's private
' " chaplain publicly prayed for the repose of his soul."

Mr. Firth follows Herbert's work, published in 1837. Herbert simply
copied the first edition of Baron Heath's excellent "History of the
" Grocers' Company," published in 1829. Subsequent investigations have
shown that the Grocers' Company was not a craft guild at all ; that the
first and crucial test of such a guild, that all members should be engaged
in its trade, was not a rule of the Fraternity of St. Anthony or of the
Grocers' Company, and that the institution of the fraternity or Company
was that of a social or religious guild.

It is true that the ordinances of the fraternity of 1345 provide that
no person should be a member of the fraternity if not of good condition
and of this mistery, that is, a Pepperer of Soper's Lane, a Canevacer of
the Ropery, or a Spicer of the Ward of Cheap,2 or other people of
their mistery 3 wherever they reside ; but only three years later Sir John
de Londre, parson of St. Anthony, was admitted a member, though pre-
sumably not of the craft ; so, in 1348, were Sir John de Hichan, parson
of St. Anthony, and Sir Simon de Wy, parson of Bernes.

The ordinances of the Grocers' Company of 1376 expressly ordain that
no one of any other mistery shall be admitted into the Company with-
out the common assent, and should pay for his entry 1 0/. This clearly
points to a practice of admitting non-craftsmen, and, combined with
the custom of freedom by patrimony and by redemption, which began

1 The original record gives the names of twenty-two founders, but two of these
were dead before the first meeting, and this is stated. The names were no doubt
inserted on the application of their relatives or executors, with a view to their Laving
the benefit of prayers for their souls. This clearly points to the religious element of
the fraternity.

2 The words are " Poyverer de Soper's Lane, Canevacer de Roperie ou Espicer
de Chepe." In Baron Heath's "History of the Grocers' Company" and Ihe
Company's Returns the words "Canevacer de Roperie" have been inadvertently
omitted.

3 " Mistery," according to the best opinions, means simply " business." It is minis-
terium, not mysterium. The author of '• Municipal London" makes an unnecessary
" mystery " about this in his note on page 57.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 173

about 1460, proves, as far as proof is possible in such a case, that the Deputation
Company was not an exclusive or craft guild. There was, in fact, no f*om Grocers'
"craft." We know that as early as 1363 complaint was made to the
king and Parliament that the merchants called Grocers (Grossers) en-
grossed all manner of merchandise vendible ; l that is to say, they were
general merchants ; and a " craft " of general merchants seems almost
impossible at a time when every calling, trade, or handicraft was minutely
defined and regulated.

In the leading work on the subject of English guilds,2 they are dis-
tinguished as (1) religious or social guilds, (2) town guilds or guild mer-
chants, and (3) craft guilds. Of these the most ancient form is the
religious or social guild. The statutes of one of them, the Guild of
Abbotsbury, drawn up as early as the beginning of the eleventh century,
actually remain. The object of that guild, according to the statutes,
appears to have been the support and nursing of guild brothers ; the
burial of the dead and the performance of religious services, and the
saying of prayers for their souls ; a yearly meeting for united worship in
honour of the patron saint ; a common meal, and, in order that the poor
raight also have their share in the joys of the festival, alms on the day of
the feast. Insults offered by one brother to another were punished on
the part of the guild. He who had undertaken an office, but had not
discharged its duties, was punished.

It is remarkable how closely these guild statutes agree with the ordi-
nances of the Fraternity of St. Anthony of 1345 and the ordinances of
the Grocers' Company of 1376. The same kind of religious and social
duties are enjoined, and, making due allowance for the interval of three
centuries, in similar terms. The modern representatives of this class of
guilds are, it is believed, to be found only among the City Companies,
which, owing probably to the commercial and municipal eminence of
their members, survived the violent changes of the Reformation, when
all other guilds of this class perished.

Of the other forms of "guilds," the learned authors of "English Guilds"
tell us that the town guild or guild merchant was the whole body of full
citizens, that is, of the possessors of portions of the town lands of a
certain value, the " civitas." This, after many changes, has become the
modern municipal Corporation. The third form of " guild " was the
craft guild. These guilds were originally the result of a struggle for inde-
pendence on the part of the handicraftsmen. The leaders in this struggle
were the weavers both in England and on the Continent. The contest
of the Weavers' Guild with the City of London from the time of King
John to 1220 is an example of this, and the craftsmen appear to have
been ultimately victorious. It was of the essence of a craft guild that all
men of the craft, and none but men of the craft, should belong to it.
The modern form of the craft guild is the trade union.

The term "Grosser" or "Grocer" is first applied to the Company in
1373. There is a break in the Company's records between 1357 and
1373. When they recommence in the latter year, the title " Fraternity
of St. Anthony " is dropped, and the Company of Grossers or Grocers
takes its place.8

1 " Les marchantz nomez Grossers engrossent toutcs maneres de marchandises •
veudables."

2 " English Guilds," published for the Early English Text Society by N. Triibner
and Co., 1870.

3 A Grossarius, of Soper's Lane, appears in one of the letter books for the year
1310; and in A.D. 1328, 2 Edward III., a body termed Grossarii is mentioned in a list
of the several mysteries of London. Ravenhill, Clerk of the Grocers' Company about
1690, asserts that John de Grantham was in 1329 chosen mayor by the title of Grocer;
but his authority for this cannot now be found. In the enrolments of the City guilds

174 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation ^ The rapidity with which the Company rose to importance towards the
from Grocers' enj 0£ y1Q fourtcenth century has been already noticed. By this timo
the practice of garbling, i.e. the cleansing or examining of spices,
drugs, &c., to detect and prevent adulterations had been established.
The first garbler was Thomas Half mark, a Grocer. About the same
time, John Churchman, Grocer, founded the first custom-house for wool,
and through him the duty of wool-weighing devolved on the Company.
In 1411 a descendant of Lord Fitzwalter who, in the reign of Henry III.,
had obtained possession of the chapel of St. Edmund, which adjoined
his family mansion, sold the chapel to the Company for 320 marks, and
in the next reign the Company purchased the family mansion and built
their hall upon the site. The foundation stone was laid in 1427, and
the building was completed in the following year. The expenses were
defrayed by the contributions of members. Five years latei the garden
was added.

In 1428 the Company's first charter of incorporation was granted by
Henry VI.

The reason for the application was, no doubt, that the recent purchase
of a site for the hall involved the necessity of a license in mortmain.1
The corporate name was " Custodes et communitas Misterii Groceries
Londini." The Company are to have perpetual succession and a common
seal, and are to be for ever persons fit and capable in law to possess in
fee and perpetuity lands, tenements, and rents, and other possessions
whatsoever : that is, the artificial incapacity to hold land created by the
Act of Richard II. was removed. Then there is a further grant that the
Company may acquire lands, tenements, and rents within the City of
London and suburbs thereof, " which are held of us," to the value of
twenty marks per year, and a charter of the followiug year provided that
the hall and its site should be considered of the value of six marks out
of the twenty. With respect to this charter it is to be noticed that it
contains no reference to trade and no condition of any kind. It is the
charter of a religious or social guild, not of a craft guild.2

In 1447 Henry VI. granted to the wardens of the Company the ex-
clusive right of garbling throughout all places in the kingdom of England,
except the City of London. This is not a charter affecting the corporate
body of the Company, but letters patent directed to the wardens.3

in 1318 and 1328, the Grossarii and Pepperers seem to have united, and the term
Grossarius gradually prevailed. Whether the term "Grosser" was derived from the
use of the peso grosso or avoirdupois weight, or from the fact of the leading members
being dealers en gros, is uncertain. A third derivation was suggested in 1363 hy
trade rivals, who petitioned the king and Parliament against the merchants called
Grossers, who " engrossed " all kinds of merchandise.

Whatever he the derivation of the word " Grocer," it is plain from the foregoing
considerations that the word, as used with reference to the Company, was of very wide
application. It prohably included all merchants and wholesale dealers, and had little
or no relation to the retail business to which the term is now limited.

1 The first Mortmain Act which affected guilds and fraternities was 15 Richard II.
c. 5, A.D. 1391.

2 The charter is printed at length at the beginning of the Company's returns.

' It may be interesting to note some of the instances of the interference of the
Company with the adulteration of goods : —

As early as 1456 a fine was inflicted on one John Ayshfelde " for makynge of untrewe
" powder gynger, cynamon, and sawnders."

In 1561 the books show that "hags and remn antes of cei'teyne evil and naghte
" pepper " were ordered to be conveyed over sea to be sold, and the dust of " the evil
" pepper, syrnamed gynger," was to be burned.

In 1562 the Court made an order that "grocerie wares shall not be sold in
"the streetes, figges onlie excepted." And that the apothecaries, freemen of
the Company, should not use or exercise any drugs, simple or compound, "or
" any other kynde or sortes of poticarie wares but such as shall be pure and
" perfyt good."

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 175

Charters were also granted to the Company by James I. and Charles L, Deputation
enlarging the power to hold lands in mortmain, and giving authority to from Grocers'
punish all delinquents unduly or insufficiently carrying on or exercising ComPany-
the mystery or art of Grocer. In these charters the power to hold land
(in the latter charter without limit) is unconditional, and the trade powers
do not form an essential part of the incorporation, but are superadded ;
the exercise of the trade powers is not limited to members of the
Company.

In 1640 the Company, on obtaining their charter from Charles L,
furnished him, on his demand, with the sums of 6000Z. and 4500/. In
16-12 they lent 9000/. to the Parliament, and the next year 4500/. to the
Lord Mayor " for the defence of the city in these dangerous times." The
Company also granted loans or gifts of 2000/. and 1360Z. to Charles II.

That these gifts or loans were very onerous there can be no doubt.
They were met by the contributions of members, and by mortgage of the
• Company's property. In the last resort the Company's plate was sold in
1642-43 for 1204/., to raise the money required. In the case of the 1360Z.
loan, the members of the Company were assessed as follows : Aldermen
9^., Assistants 7Z., Livery 51. each.

The Company throughout this period kept, in common with others, a
store of corn, according to ancient custom, for the supply of the poor at
reasonable prices when bread was dear. In the year 1560, the charge on
the Company for this purpose amounted to 4007. The Company had
regular granaries at Bridewell and at the Bridge House. The stock of
com was constantly kept up till the Great Fire in 1666. The money
required was levied by a personal contribution from, the members, and
two of the livery were from time to time appointed by the Court under
the name of " Corne Renters " to collect it.

The Company were also bound to maintain an armoury at their hall.

At the time of the Great Plague in 1665, the Company were assessed
in various sums of money for the relief of the poor, and they also
provided a large quantity of coals.

The next year the Great Fire inflicted losses on the Company from
which it did not recover for nearly a century. The Company's hall and
all the adjacent buildings (save the turret in the garden, which fortunately
contained the records and muniments), and almost all the Company's
houses were destroyed. The first action of the Company was to endea-
vour to provide another hall. Their funds were exhausted, and there

In 1571, Eauf King, a brother of the Company, " and certain others, makers of
' comfytts, were charged before the wardens for their misdemeanours in mingling
' starch with the sugar, and such other things as be not tolerated nor suffered. And
' the said Rauf King, having now in his place a good quantity of comfytts made with
' corse stuffe, and mingled as aforesaid with starch and such like," it was ordered that
he comfits should be put into a tub of water and so consumed and poured out; "and
' that every of the comfytt makers shall be made to enter into bonds in 201. that they
' shall not hereafter make any biskitts but with cleare suger on lie, nor make any
' comfytts that shall be wrought upon seeds or any other thinges, but with cleare
' suger oulie."

On the 7th of February, 1616, Michael Eason having been convicted before the
yourt of Assistants, he being an apothecary and brother of the Company, of selling
divers sortes of defective apothecarie wares, which, on trial, were found to be defec-
tive, corrupt, and unwholesome for man's body," and it being further proved, " that
he had sould and uttered the like wares to Mr. Lownes, the Prince his highness's
apothecarie, and others, and he alsoe being found very unfitt in making of composi-
tions and confections, and insufficient and unskillfull to deale therein, he is by the
Court, in consideration of the great damage and danger which might happen to the
Companie by permitting such enormities, committed to the Poultrie Compter."
There are several instances of the Company proceeding to these extremities.

As late as 1649 it was ordered that the search be again revived and evil goods
destroyed.

176 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation ^ were heavy debts. An appeal was made to the liberality of the mem-

from Grocers' ^pg of ftlQ Company in the form of a subscription, and the wardens

personally solicited contributions. In 1668 Sir John Cutler came i'or-

ward and proposed to rebuild the parlour and dining-room at his own

charge.1

In January, 1671, a special Court was summoned, to consider a Bill
exhibited in Parliament by some of the Company's creditors praying for
an Act for the sale of the Company's hall, lands, and estates, to satisfy
debts; and to make members of the Court liable for debts incurred.
The next year the hall was, at the instance of the Governors of Christ's
Hospital, sequestered, and the Company ejected till 1679, when, after
great difficulties and impediments, money was borrowed to pay off the
debts, and get rid of the intruders. In 1680 the Court of Assistants
agreed that the most effectual way of regaining public confidence Avas
to rebuild the hall. Sir John Moore set an example of liberality by
contributing 500Z., and he was followed by many other members of the
Court.2

1 In 1669 a petition was presented to Parliament which stated that the Company,
being an ancient Corporation, had, in several ages, by the charity of well-disposed
persons, been intrusted with divers lands, rents, and gifts, and by means thereof were
charged with the maintenance of, and contributions to, several hospitals, almshouses,
schools, provision for ministers, exhibitions to poor scholars in the University, and
other good and charitable uses ; that in 1642, when the kingdom of Ireland was
greatly distressed by the rebellion newly risen there, the Company borrowed and
advanced 90001. for the relief and defence of his Majesty's kingdom, and were in debt
for that amount and the interest, only 645/. having been reimbursed, and prayed for
leave to bring in a Bill to raise 20,OOOZ. by an equal assessment upon the members of
the Company of ability. The application to Parliament failed, and an effort was then
made to raise the 20,0002. among the members. The terms of the petition seem to
show that there was no idea at this time of any connection with trade.

2 " All being fully convinced that if the hall should long continue under those
circumstances not only all that had been done would be wholly fruitless, but all that
remained (for which they were trustees to the generations to come) would soon waste
into nothing, which would reproachfully render the present members most ungrate-
ful to their ancestors, whose names still blossom in what remains of those pious
mouuments of their charities, and obnoxious to those who should succeed happy mem-
bers of the society." See "A Short Account of the Grocers' Company," by Win.
Ilavenhill, 1689.

The minute is interesting, and certainly does not confirm Mr. Firth's statement
that " it is a matter of common repute that the estates of Companies are often leased
to members at absurd rentals, enabling the lucky lessees to make an excellent profit
in reletting them " ("Municipal London," p. 56). It is not known that this was
ever done at Grocers' Hall. At the present time no member of the Company holds a
lease under it. The minute referred to is as follows : —

" 18th August, 1687. — To the end this Company may not be for ever kept low and
poor, but may in due time be raised and restored to a capacity not only of discharging
their trusts and engagements, and may thereby remove their reproach, but also may
become, as they once were, a nursery of charities and seminary of good citizens, do
order and decree, and be it ordered and decreed (so far as the power and authority of
this Court may extend), that from henceforth no new lease be granted, or any term of
years added, to any term which shall be then in being, whilst there shall remain five
years or more to come of any term then in being and unexpired, nor under less rent
reserved thereupon than after the rate of 101. per cent, per annum of the full improved
yearly value thereof at the time of such demise, to be made without the consent of
a Court of Assistants of the one full moiety or half of the number of the assistants
that shall be then living, by subscribing their names do declare such their consent
thereunto. And that from time to time when any part of the Company's revenue
shall be so demised, or any such lease be granted, a short writing, purporting the
thing so to be demised or granted, be put upon the front door of their hall in the yard
by the space of one month before the wardens or any members do treat with any
person in order so to demise or dispose thereof; and that intimation be mentioned in
the tickets for summons of the assistants of the occasion of such Court to dispose of
such part of the Company's revenue, to the end the Company's revenue may hereafter
be improved and applied and disposed of to the most and best advantage, in order to
discharge their said just debts and charities, and answer their said great trusts. And

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 177

So pressing at this time were the parishes for their charities and Deputation
arrears, that on one occasion the members of the Court raised 30/. out of
their own pockets to pay Luddington parish, and so stayed Chancery
proceedings ; and they resolved in future to raise money out of their own
pockets to pay annual charges to parishes.

In order to prevent a second sequestration, an Inquisition was taken in
1680, before Commissioners for Charitable Uses, and, pursuant to a decree
made by those Commissioners, the Company in 1687 conveyed their
hall, and all their revenue (subject to existing charges) to trustees, to
secure the arrears and payment of the yearly sums and charities charged
upon the property by the various donors. Under the decree a period of
twenty years was allowed to the Company to discharge their debts.
The trustees left the appointment of the receiver to the Court of
Assistants, who nominated the clerk.

The records of this period show that the continuity of the Company
was maintained, and its property saved from destruction, by the personal
exertions and private liberality of members of the Court.

A minute of the Court of the 18th of August, 1687, throws light
upon the reduced condition of the Company at this time, the earnest
desire of the members to improve it, and the view then taken of the
purposes of the Company and the management of the property. The
minute speaks of the Company as " a nursery of charities and seminary
of good citizens," but makes no reference whatever to any connection
with trade.

Towards the end of the seventeenth century, the Company's right of
garbling fell into desuetude. The last mention of it is in 1687, when
a Mr. Stuart, the City Garbler, offered to purchase "the Company's
right in the garbling of spices and other garbleable merchandise." The
Court, finding that from long disuse their privilege of appointment to
that office was weakened, accepted a small fine of- 50/. from Mr. Stuart
for the office for life, and 20s. a year.

No mention has yet been made of the writ of quo warranto, under
the pressure of which the Company surrendered their privileges to
Charles II., and received a charter from him in 1675, and two charters
from James II. in 1688.

These charters were abolished and annulled by the Act of 2 William
and Mary, s. I.e. 8., which gave a parliamentary sanction to the status of
the Company as it existed before the judgment on the writ.1 Mr. Beal
seems to be pressed with this difficulty, and suggests that the words of
the Act, " which they lawfully had and enjoyed at the time of giving the An8- 829.
said judgment," operate to exclude the charters of the Companies, by
which he asserts a right of search was given, inconsistent with liberty of

for the more effectually observing of this order according to the true intent and
meaning thereof, it is in like manner ordered that the same be publickly read over
every year in the presence and hearing of the master, wardens, and assistants, and
cloathing on the Anniversary Festival of Inauguration of their master and wardens
after sermon and before dinner."

1 The 14th section of the Act is as follows: — " And be it enacted by the authority
aforesaid, that all and every of the several Companies and Corporations of the said City
shall from henceforth stand and be incorporated by such name and names, and in such
sort and manner as they respectively were at the time of the said judgment given;
and every of them are hereby restored to all and every of the lands, tenements, here-
ditaments, rights, titles, estates, liberties, powers, privileges, precedences, and immu-
nities which they lawfully had and enjoyed at the time of giving the said judgment ;
and that as well all surrenders, as charters, letters patent, and grants for new incor-
porating any of the said Companies, or touching or concerning any of their liberties,
privileges, or franchises, made or granted by the said late King James, or by the
said King Charles II., since the giving of the said judgment, shall be void, and
are hereby declared null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever."

178

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Gnuv
Company.

Ans. 28.
Ans. 29.

Ans. 242.

Ans. 596.
Ans. 815.

trade, and therefore contrary to Magna Chavta, which granted to all cities
and boroughs " all their liberties and free customs." Mr. Beal does not
show how these liberties and free customs were interfered Avith by the
means taken to prevent the sale of ill-made, spurious, or adulterated
goods ; but, even if he were right, the original charter of the Grocers'
Company, which contains no reference to trade, would, on Mr. Boal's
own showing, stand unaffected and good with the direct sanction of an
Act of Parliament.

In 1669, King William III. took upon himself the office of Master of
the Company for the year, and made the Company a grant, which ceased
at his death, of three fat bucks yearly out of Enfield Chase.

The last record of the indebtedness of the Company is in 1721. After
this the Company's affairs rapidly improved, and the public spirit and
foresight of the members who, at the time of the Great Fire, and during
the ensuing troubles and difficulties, had, at great cost to themselves,
maintained the Company's credit and preserved its hall and property,
were ultimately rewarded by the Company's prosperity. In 1758, the
finances of the Company admitted of the expense of the election feast
being defrayed by the Company instead of by the wardens personally,
and in the next year the payment of quarterage by members was given
up. By degrees the Company were enabled to increase their aid to
indigent freemen, to administer their trusts with liberality, and to sub-
scribe largely to objects of public interest and for the advancement of
religion, education, and charity. In 1798, a sum of 1000J. was given in
aid of the assessed taxes.

It is hoped that adequate proof has been given that the Company is
not, and never has been, a craft guild or trade guild. It may be added
that it is not known that any conveyance, devise, or gift was ever made
to the Company for trade purposes or in connection with trade, and that
of the thirty-seven separate gifts of money intrusted to the Company by
various persons for the advancement in life of young men, freemen of the
Company, two only refer in any way to the business or trade of a grocer.
It remains to be shown that the Company is not a town-guild, i.e. not a
municipal corporation or a part of the Corporation of London.

A municipal corporation, according to Blackstone, is " a lay corporation
created for the good government of a town or particular district." Some
kind of territorial jurisdiction is essential to the idea of a municipal cor-
poration.1

It has always been distinctive of the City guilds that they had no
territorial jurisdiction, and that residence was no qualification for
membership.

On this subject some very erroneous views seem to have been placed
before the Commission.

Mr. Hare says the Companies undoubtedly at present form part of the
Municipal Corporation of the City of London, and he gives as his
reason that the Companies form what is called the commonalty, the
common hall. Mr. Firth assumes that the Companies are an integral
part of the Corporation of London, and states that the Municipal Com-
mission of 1833 considered the Companies within the province of their
Commission. Mr. Beal says every Lord Mayor since 1189 (the beginning
of legal memory) has been a member of a guild, and would not have been

1 The preamble of the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 is, " whereas divers
' bodies corporate at sundry times have been constituted within the cities, towns, and
' bor ughs of England and Wales, to the intent that the same might for ever be and
' remain well and quietly governed." So the definition of Municipal Corporation in
the Municipal Corporations Act of 1882 is " the body corporate constituted .by the
incorporation of the inhabitants of a city or town to which the Act applies."

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 179

eligible for the office if he had not been a member of a guild ; also, that Deputation
the Corporation address the Crown in three distinct ways : by the Lord fr^m Grocers'
Mayor and aldermen in their inner chamber ; by the mayor, aldermen, ?°m^f*
and council in common council ; and by the mayor, aldermen, and livery
in the common hall ; and that the Lord Mayor of his own authority may
legally call a common hall. Mr. Phillips considers that the Companies Ans. 823.
are part of the Corporation, because they exercise municipal functions. Ans. 1419.

There appears to be a general confusion in the minds of these wit-
nesses between the Companies as corporate bodies and the individual
liverymen. A Livery Company, as such, forms no part of the Corporation.
It is not subject to the jurisdiction, and it has no voice in the manage-
ment of the Corporation. It consists of two classes, liverymen and free-
men, the latter being the more numerous body, and the liverymen
individually, if they are also freemen of the City, are members of the
commonalty or common hall ; in other words, the common hall consists
of such freemen of the City as have the status of liverymen.

If Mr. Firth is right in saying that the Municipal Commission of 1833
considered the Livery Companies within the province of their Commission, Ans. 701 et
the result (as stated by Mr. Beal) showed that the opinion of that se%.
Commission was wrong, for the Companies were advised to resist by the
most eminent lawyers of the day, and they resisted successfully. Mr. ^
Phillips admits that he knows of no case [in the last 200 years in which
the Corporation has interfered with the property of the Companies.

It is to be observed that not only is there the widest possible difference
between the Companies, as such, and the individual liverymen, being
members of the Corporation of London, but the liverymen are only
members, if at all, in an extremely limited sense. When we speak of the
citizens or burgesses of a city or borough being members of the corpora-
tion, we mean that they are electors of the governing body, the town
council, and themselves eligible for election. But in the case of the Cor-
poration of London, liverymen, as such, are not electors of the governing
body, the court of aldermen and common council, and they are not, as
liverymen, eligible for election as aldermen or common councillors.

The election of Lord Mayor by the livery in common hall is a curious
survival of ancient custom, but the importance of its bearing on the
present question has been much exaggerated. The Lord Mayor is elected
from the aldermen who have served as sheriffs.1 The aldermen are
elected by the same electoral body which forms the constituency of
the common councillors ; the qualification being either 101. occupation,
household suffrage, or lodger franchise.2 A liveryman has no vote for
the election of aldermen. Consequently the common hall or livery can
only select out of the twenty-six nominees of a different constituency,
and out of the twenty-six they must select two, between whom the court
of aldermen decides. The election of Lord Mayor is obviously little
more than a mere form. The two senior aldermen below the chair are
always selected by the common hall, and the senior of the two is usually
chosen by the court of aldermen. The livery have hardly any more real
choice than a Dean and Chapter in the case of a conge d'elire.

Another argument adduced is that there are instances of the Lord
Mayor, aldermen, and liverymen, in common hall assembled, approaching
the Throne. Upon this point Mr. Firth asks Mr. Beal : —

" Have you read the address presented on behalf of the Lord Mayor Q- 821.
and the Livery Companies in common hall assembled in 1775, in respect
to an answer of the king 1 " — " Yes, in the reign of King George III."

" With respect to what the rights of liverymen were ? " — " Yes ; and I Q- 822-
think it very important that that should be read, because it sets out in
1 " Municipal London," p. 29. 2 Ib. p. 32.

180

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Groc<
Company.

Q. 823.

Q. 824.

Q. 825.

tho strongest possible form that they are, and they claim to bo, an
integral part of the Corporation."

Then Mr. Firth reads the extract, which concludes with the opinion of
Mr. "Wedderburn, Mr. Glynn, and other learned counsel, as follows : —

" We apprehend that the head officer of every Corporation may con-
vene the body, or any class of it, whenever he thinks proper ; that the
Lord Mayor for the time being may, of his own authority, legally call a
common hall, and we see no legal objection to his calling the two last ;
we conceive it to be the duty of the proper officers of the several Com-
panies, to whom precepts for the purpose of summoning their respective
liveries have been usually directed, to execute those precepts ; and that a
wilful refusal on their part is an offence punishable by disfranchise-
ment. — That is the extract."

" I will leave that branch, as to the action of the City, and ask you
one further question. Have you read the decision in the case of the
refractory Companies in 1775, when between the Corporation and the
Goldsmiths' Company the question was contested?" — "Yes."

" What was the effect of that decision ?" — " The Companies were found
to be in the wrong, and that they were an integral part of the Corpora-
tion, and it is fully set out in your own book, ' Municipal London.' "

Nothing can be more circumstantial, or apparently correct ; and this
evidence, cleverly led up to, probably had some effect on the minds of
the Commissioners. But, like several other facts stated by Mr. Beal, it
will not bear investigation. The decision on which he relies was the
decision of Mr. Eecorder Glynn, one of the counsel who had signed the
opinion, and the decision was unanimously reversed, on appeal, by Lord
Chief Justice de Grey and four other judges. The so-called refractory
Companies, who opposed Lord Mayor Wilkes' impudent proceedings,
were the Grocers, the Goldsmiths, and the Weavers. The history is
given fully in Baron Heath's "History of the Grocers' Company,
pp. 162 — 170, 3rd ed. The papers are in the possession of the Gold-
smiths' Company.

It may be added that freedom of a City Company does not involve
freedom of the City, which must be taken up separately by a distinct
act ; also that the freedom of the City may be acquired by a person not
free of any Company, nor under obligation to become so.

PART III. — THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPANY.

The foregoing sketch of the history of the Grocers' Company may be
summarized as follows : — The Company was founded, in the middle of the
fourteenth century, by some of the leading merchants and traders of
London, as a social, benevolent, and religious fraternity, and this
character, except as regards the religious observances of the brotherhood,
has been maintained from the first meeting, 538 years ago, to the present
day ; the continuity of the fellowship never having been broken even in
the most troublous times. The hall and garden of the Company occupy
the original site purchased by free contributions of the members between
1411 and 1433. The Company rapidly gained importance after its
foundation, and before the end of the century was the most powerful
body in the City, and became entrusted with the public duties of weigh-
ing and garbling, which it retained for about 250 years. During the
same period the Company contributed largely to political and municipal
objects, by loans to the king or Parliament, by taking part in the
colonization of Ulster, by supporting the poor, and aiding in the defence
of the City. But though the commercial and municipal eminence of

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 181

various members exercised an influence on the conduct and proceedings Deputation
of the Company from time to time during its long history, the primary &om Grocers'
and essential principles of the guild, as a social, benevolent, and religious OTnPany-
body, were always paramount. The increase and independence of trade
towards the end of the seventeenth century deprived the Company
weakened as it was by its losses in the Great Fire, of its public duties of
weighing and garbling, and of its power of trade superintendence ; but
the members of the Court, who came forward in the Company's great
distress, and saved it from extinction by their personal exertions and
liberality, went back to the fundamental principles of the guild, when they
left a solemn record of their intention that the Company should again
become, as it once was, a nursery of charities and seminary of good citizens.

It remains now to show how the original purposes of the guild, as em-
bodied in the ordinances of 1345 and 1376, and the intentions of the
second founders of the Company (for such they deserve to be called), as
solemnly recorded in 1687, are now understood and carried out.

The religious element of the guild is observed in the Company's support
of the National Church. The Company are patrons, wholly or partly, of
eight livings of no great value, and, as patrons, they subscribe with well-
considered liberality to proper parochial objects. Four of these livings
have been purchased under the trusts of Lady Slaney's will. The Com-
pany regard their livings less as a matter of private patronage than as a
trust. In this spirit, when the living of All Hallows Staining, the only
valuable living which the Company ever possessed, with an income of
1600^, and a population reduced by changes in the City to 200, fell vacant
in 1866, the Company applied for and obtained an Estate Act, under the
powers of which the living has been united to a neighbouring benefice,
the sites of the church and the curate's house sold, and the proceeds
applied in building and endowing two district churches in the poorest
parts of the east of London ; and a third church will in due time
be added. The Company have aided the work by an expenditure out
of their funds of nearly 7000/. on parsonage houses, parish rooms,
organs, etc. They also contribute towards the support of curates and
church expenses.

The Company have also subscribed largely to the funds of the Bishops
of London, Winchester, and Rochester, with a special view to benefiting
the poor of the metropolis ; and to the Irish Church Sustentation Fund.

The social element of the ancient guild is preserved in the hospitality of
the Company. This is extended freely to public men, to illustrious
foreigners, successful administrators, admirals, and generals ; to dig-
nitaries of the Church, and to men eminent in the law, medicine,
literature, art, and science. The honorary freedom of the Company is,
it is believed, highly valued. A most distinguished French officer is
reported to have said of it on an important public occasion, that he had
during his life gained very many honours and distinctions, but he valued
none more than being the member of a society which had existed on the
same lines for upwards of 500 years, and that he earnestly desired for
his own country that such institutions were possible there.

The third object of the ancient guild is benevolence, or charity; under
this head is included education.

The Company manage Sir W. Laxton's School at Oundle, a first grade
school of considerable importance, schools at Witney and Colwall, and a
large middle class day school at Hackney Downs. The Company give a
considerable sum every year in exhibitions to the Universities, with
special exhibitions to unattached students. In all cases the candidates
are carefully selected on the three grounds of good character, poverty,
and school or college distinctions. The Company give to their poor

182

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Grocers'
Company.

Ans. 629.
Ans. 725.

members about 4000/. a year, to London hospitals about 2000?., to
clergymen's widows about 750/., to orphan asylums about 1000/., to
boys' homes, ragged schools, &c., 250/., to London police court poor-
boxts, 300/., to Mansion House funds, 300/., to benevolent and poor
relief societies, 700/. All the charities and charitable gifts are personally
managed or personally inquired into by members of the Court.

Mr. Firth could, it is hoped, have known but little or nothing of the
proceedings of the Company when he wrote of the members :l " The
" stewardship of a few charities and of many dinners is responsibility
" sufficient for them." But Mr. Beal makes an even more offensive
imputation against the Company with reference to the London Hospital.
To this hospital, the largest in London, and situate among the dense and
generally poor population of Whitechapel and Bethnal Green, the Com-
pany in 1873 gave 20,000/. for the erection of a new wing, and in 1876,
5000?. to furnish it. The Company has since made an annual gift of
500?., and appointed two members of the Court to serve on the house
committee,

Mr. Beal states that the gift of 25,000?. for the London Hospital was
made after his agitation began : " Why did they not give 25,000?. to the
" London Hospital before we began our agitation?" Clearly implying
that the gift was made under the influence of the agitation.

It is confidently believed that at the time when the gift was made no
member of the Court had ever heard of Mr. Beal's agitation. The gift of
20,000?. was made in 1873. The City Guilds' Inquiry Society was, it is
believed, formed in 1876, with Mr. Danby Seymour as chairman, and
Mr. J. B. F. Firth as counsel. Mr. Firth's book, " Municipal London,"
was published the same year.

The Company's first grant to the London Hospital was made as long
ago as 1796, and numerous gifts were made between that year and 1873.
When the grant of 20,000?. was proposed in 1873, twelve or fourteen
members of the Court of the Company were also governors of the hospital.
The member who proposed the grant was also on the house committee of
the hospital, and was intimately acquainted with its wants, and has
himself given 17,000?. to it. Another member of the Court has given
9000?. The proposal that the Company should build a new wing had
been mooted eight or ten years before 1873.

These facts speak for themselves. The Grocers' Company deeply regret
that they are compelled, by the unscrupulous imputations which have
been directed against the Company, to mention such matters at all to the
Commissioners.

The Commissioners are probably aware that the Company has given
large sums for the promotion of technical education. The Company has
also directed its attention to the desirability of encouraging original
research in sanitary science. After consultation with some of the most
eminent scientific men of the day, a scheme has just been matured for
founding scholarships of 250?. a year each for the encouragement of
research in sanitary science, and a quadrennial discovery prize of WOOL
This is a form of endowment novel in character, which, it is hoped
may prove eminently useful in solving some of the sanitary questions
arising from the dense aggregation of population in our great towns.

The Company find nothing in the official evidence from the Charity
Commission, so far as it relates to matters within the jurisdiction of that
Commission, to call for remark, except the unintentional omission to
notice the Company's Middle Class School Scheme as already mentioned.
That evidence appears to express general satisfaction with the manage-
ment of charities by the City Companies.

1 " Municipal London," p. 58.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 183

The evidence as to the corporate property of the Companies is almost Deputation
confined to the small knot of agitators who formed the City Guilds' f*om Gr°cers'
Inquiry Society. The facts alleged by these gentlemen against the Grocers'
Company have, it is confidently submitted, been completely disproved,
and the theories propounded by them seem to have little or no basis of
facts, and are inconsistent with each other. Sometimes it is said that
the City Companies are municipal corporations, and that their corporate
property is applicable to municipal purposes. At other times it is said
that they are trade guilds, and that their property is applicable to trade
purposes. Such arguments confute each other.

It is proposed to conclude with Mr. Firth's summary, in nine pro-
positions, of his case against the City guilds,1 with the reply of the
Grocers' Company in each instance : —

1. " The London Livery Companies are an integral part of the Cor-

poration."

This has been already disproved in an earlier part of this staternent.

2. "The property of the Companies is public trust property, and much

of it is available for municipal purposes."

The Commissioners will form their judgment on this point, so far as
the Grocers' Company is concerned, from this statement and the Com-
pany's returns. The Lord Chancellor has recorded his opinion against
Mr. Firth's view ; Lord Langdale judicially declared the Company's pro-
perty to be private property. In the very numerous cases in which the
Attorney-General has proceeded by information against City Companies
with respect to charities, it has, it is believed, invariably been assumed
by judges and counsel alike that the question was one between the
Company, as private owners, and the charity. Mr. Firth's suggestion of a
public trust is inconsistent with the history of more than five^centuries.

3. " The Companies are trustees of vast estates of which London

tradesmen and artisans ought to be the beneficiaries, but such
trusts are disregarded."

The Grocers' Company are unaware of the existence of any such trust.
It would be difficult to reconcile such a trust with the previous
propositions laid down by Mr. Firth.

4. "The Companies are also trustees of estates applicable to chari-

table uses ; they fail to apply to such uses the whole of the funds
fairly applicable to them."

The Grocers' Company discharge strictly all their legal trusts, and, as
lias been shown, siipplement them very largely from their corporate funds.
In some cases, such as Oundle School and University exhibitions, they
expend on the objects of the charity more than ten times the amount of
the legal obligation ; and even when the charity has legally ceased to
exist, as in the case of Lady Middleton's gift for poor clergymen's
widows, they perpetuate the name and wishes of the foiinder by the
application of their corporate funds to a much larger amount than the
founder contemplated.

5. "The Companies were incorporated to benefit trade, to train

artisans, and to repress bad workmanship ; they perform none of
these functions."

The Grocers' Company was not incorporated for any such purpose.
Their charter of incorporation was unconditional.
1 " Municipal London," p. 635.

184
6.

110 YAL COMMISSION.

Deputation 6. " The Companies are, by charter, to be composed of members of a

from Grocery given trade in many cases, and are legally compellable to admit

Company. members of it. They admit members irrespective of trade, and

impose restrictions on those who are admissible."

This is inapplicable to the Grocers' Company, which was never a
trade guild. I

7. " The Companies are subject to the control of the Corporation, but

as the members of that body are members of the Companies also,
and are promoted in the latter concurrently with their advance-
ment in the former, such control is never enforced."

The Companies are not subject to the control of the Corporation.
When the matter was brought to an issue between the Companies of
Grocers, Goldsmiths, and Weavers on the one hand, and the Corporation
on the other hand, in 1773, the Corporation signally failed. The
Grocers' Company know nothing about the advancement of members
here suggested by Mr. Firth. No member of the Company has rilled
the civic chair for nearly a century. That the control of the Corpora-
tion is never enforced is true, for it is reasonably supposed to have no
legal basis.

8. " The Companies are subject to the control of the Crown, and their

lands and monopolous privileges were only granted on condition
they performed certain duties ; they have ceased to perform the
duties, but they continue to hold the lands."

The Grocers' Company are not aware of any grant having been made
to the Company on condition that they performed certain duties, except
in the case of charges on lands devised, which are always punctually
paid. As to the control of the Crown, the Company are not aware that
they are in a different position to any other of her Majesty's subjects.

9. " The continuance of a large amount of land in the heart of the

City and in the north of Ireland in the hands of corporate and
unproductive bodies is a hindrance to commerce and a loss to
the public revenue."

It may be a fair question for consideration whether the Company
should pay a composition equivalent to succession duty on their cor-
porate property. They have never been called upon to do so. The
A ns. 118— 121. Company some years ago sold their Irish estate, arid the tenants, it is
believed, regret the change. Mr. Hare, in his evidence, does not agree
with Mr. Firth as to the inexpediency of land being held by corporate
bodies. The abolition of " unproductive " landowners is a question
extending far beyond the City guilds.

Grocers' Hall, February 19$, 1883.

DRAPERS' COMPANY.

Deputation THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Drapers'

from Drapers' Company : —

Company

Mr. William Henry Dalton.
Mr. John Rogers Jennings.
Mr. W. P. Sawyer,

LONDON CITY LLVEKY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 185

CHAIRMAN to Mr. Dalton : You have come, I understand, as repre- Deputation
senting the Drapers' Company 1
We have.

And I understand that you have a statement in preparation which you
intend to lay before the Commission, but which is not yet ready, is that
so?

Quite so.

May I ask you to what that statement refers 1

That statement refers principally to our Irish estates, and is an answer
to Dr. Todd's evidence.

"We have had your returns laid before us, and I understand that
your object in coming here is not so much to add to that, as to give
members of the Commission an opportunity of cross-examining upon
them if they think fit ?

We come in response to the Commissioners' invitation.
SIR EICHARD CROSS : I understand that you wish to correct some
statement that has been made by Mr. Longley 1

Yes, there are one or two things in Mr. Longley's evidence I should
like to allude to and correct. In question 322, Mr. Longley refers to
Howell's Charity. That case was decided by the Master of the Eolls
on the 3rd of May, 1843, adversely to our Company. It was decided
against us, but I think, looking back to that time, we are surprised
that we were not then legally advised to take it back into Court. I
had better read to you a few words of Lord Langdale's judgment,
which, I think, absolves our Company from any blame. On page 13
of the judgment he says : "Now nothing can be more satisfactory in an
" investigation of this kind than to find that there is no possibility for
" any imputation of bad or corrupt conduct on the part of the defendants.
' The present defendants, beyond all question, have applied this fund
' just in the manner in which it has been applied by their predecessors ;
' in all probability they never looked at the original foundation at all ;
' but instead of applying it to any beneficial purposes of their own, it is
' now shown by the evidence, and by their answer, and it is admitted by
' the Attorney-General that they have applied these funds not to their
' own benefit, but in a most beneficial manner for the most useful chari-
' table purposes ; and one may entertain very great doubts whether ex-
' tending the charitable purposes of the founder will be productive of
' effects anything like so beneficial as the charitable purposes promoted
' by the defendants." That will show, I think, that Lord Langdale ex-
onerates the Company from any blame for what they had done, and be-
sides that, the course they adopted was a wise course as far as the
administration of the funds went. Then afterwards, with reference to
Mr. Longley's evidence, in which he alludes to the cost of administration
of charities, I think he says the Livery Companies are very lavish in their
expenditure in management. Now I may say that our charitable trusts
income is 30,000 J. a year, and the cost of management is 1500?. ; that
is about five per cent. I should say the property consists of houses
in London, and farms and property in the country. That five per
cent, includes rent collection, the management of property and the
distribution of the revenue, and solicitors, surveyors, and land agents'
charges, and the property, being scattered all over the country, of
course there is occasionally considerable expense in its management.
As to the distribution of the revenue, we have six schools with 420
pupils, twelve sets of almshouses, with 206 inmates; four apprentice
charities, the number of apprentices averaging 80 a year, and 130
pensioners. We consider that five per cent, of the revenue cannot be
called a very lavish expenditure. Then we come to the statement

186 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation about Bancroft's School and Corney's School at question 457 of Mr.
from Drapers' Longley's evidence. He blends them into one institution, but they arc
Company. fc^y distinct. The date of Bancroft's will was 1727 ; he then left
money to found a school and almshouses, which we have had from
that time to this ; Mr. Longley in his evidence seems to imply that
we have gone with 50,000/. to the Commissioners, I will not say to bribe,
but to induce them to give us certain advantages ; now we deny that in
toto. This school is a pet school of the Company ; we have had it under
our management since 1727, and we take great interest in it, and also in
the success of our boys, and the boys turn out very well indeed in a great
many cases. The school was an old building and unfit for the present
times, and not in good sanitary condition, and our architect told us
it was of no use to patch it up and try to repair it. The funds of the
charity would not allow of anything like the expenditure necessary to
rebuild it, and we resolved to go to the Commissioners for a scheme to
rebuild the school, either where it is now, or elsewhere near London.
Then, with regard to Corney's School, that is quite a modern institution
founded by Mr. Corney, a personal friend of my own, and a master of our
Company, who left us 36,000/. to establish a school for fatherless girls.
We established that school ; we spent about 6000/. in purchasing the
freehold premises, and the 30,OOOZ. was invested for the income. We
have expended from our corporate funds upon the school 11,000£, and at
the present time we are paying one-half of the annual expenses. Last
year there was nearly 1000Z. voted on this account. The very fact, I
think, that a past master of our Company at the present day leaves this
large fund in our hands shows the confidence he has that we act as
faithful trustees of charitable trusts. Then I think I may say a word
about the Irish estates. Upon that matter we are prepared to send into
the Koyal Commissioners a statement to show our view. I do not know
that I have anything more to s&y. I would only add, in conclusion, that
we believe that our estates and property have been very judiciously
managed, and I honestly say that I am sure that our charity trusts have
been most faithfully administered. To quote the words of one of the
witnesses who have appeared before the Commissioners, " what we have
" dne in the past is a guarantee for what we shall do in the future ; in
" other words, we have earned a right to be trusted."

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : I think in addition to other charities your
Company spends large sums on technical education, does it not ?

It does.

They have given 10,0(XM. towards the erection of the Technical College
in Finsbury, have they not ?

They have given 10,000/. towards the college building in Finsbury.

MR. FIRTH : In what year was that given 1

Our first vote for technical education was on February 7th, 1877, when
we voted 2000/. a year to the Technical Institute. The 10,OOOZ. was
given subsequent to that.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : And the 2000/. has been increased to
4000?., has it not ?

To 4500J.

And is there every reason to believe that if the Institute conducts its
work properly, the Company will continue to support it ?

I may say the Drapers' Company have long felt a great interest in the
work of promoting technical education. The earliest meeting of the
City guilds was held at Drapers' Hall, I think, in 1876. We take a
great interest in the matter, and no doubt, if funds are wanting, we shall
be ready at any time with other Companies to come forward and supple-
ment the funds.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 187

Passing from that, I tliiuk we have heard that you have eighty distinct Deputation
charities 1 from Drapers'

I think we have. Company.

With an income of 28,000?. a year to distribute amongst them ?

We put our charity income at about 30,000?. in round numbers.

Is the charity income administered free of any cost of administration ?

I mentioned just now that five per cent, is the cost to the charities of
the management, but then beyond that we use our own money.

Do you charge the five per cent, against the charities ?

We do not make a charge of five per cent. ; the total expenses amount
to about five per cent.

Do you pay it out of the corporate income ?

No.

Not out of the charities 1

Yes, out of the charities. The amount charged out of the charity
trust fund amounts to about five per cent. ; it is not a five per cent, charge,
there are different items — surveyors, lawyers, land agents, and so forth —
amounting in the aggregate to five per cent., but we spend a great deal of
money besides out of our own corporate fund over and above that which
is the cost to the charities.

I understand you to say that you supplement your charity income out
of your corporate income ?

We do, considerably.

In many cases ?

In many cases.

Do you bind apprentices at Drapers' Hall ?

Yes.

Are they bound to persons carrying on the trade ?

No, any freeman belonging to the Drapers' Company can have an
apprentice bound to him ; he must carry on a trade, but not necessarily
the trade of a draper.

Are the apprentices bound to persons carrying on trade, and is the
master who takes an apprentice bound to teach him the trade which he
(the master) follows "?
' Yes.

Then they are all genuine apprentices ?

Quite so. We do not admit any one to the freedom who has not
really served his time.

MR. FIRTH : I see you have bound 58 apprentices in 10 years at the
Company's Hall, but you have placed out 596-; would you explain the
difference 1

We have a Dixon Charity and a Pennoyer Charity, which provide
funds for binding apprentices. They are not bound to our Company ;
they do not become freemen.

As to payments for Courts, can you tell me how much is paid for
attendance on Courts and committees 1

It is 31. 3s. to each member.

Each time ?

Yes, each time.

Is that paid to him at each attendance ?

Yes.

Is it handed to him ?

Yes ; every member of the Court attending at the Court has a fee
of 3/. 3s.

And that is the only payment ; each committee is paid in that way ?

Yes.

CHAIRMAN : We understood that you came hero wishing to make some

188

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation^ statement as to your Irish property ; have you anything to add to what

from Drapers' has already been said as to that 1

No ; I may say we have had the character of being admirable land-
lords, and we have never had our title disputed. We will send in a
written reply to Dr. Todd's evidence.

GOLDSMITHS' COMPANY.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

ON Wednesday, the 7th of March, 1883— the sixteenth day — Sir
Frederick Bramwell, F.R.S., and Mr. "Walter Prideaux attended as a
deputation from the Goldsmiths' Company.

The CHAIRMAN to Sir F. Bramwell : I understand you attend on
behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company, and that you desire to offer some
observations on their behalf 1

I do, in company with Mr. Prideaux. Those observations your lord-
ship has also in print, I believe.

Yes, I have read them.

We desire and trust that they may be taken as having been given
here as oral evidence.

Have you anything to add to this statement 1

Nothing has occurred to me since that was drawn up. I do not know
Avhether anything has to Mr. Prideaux.

You will understand me as wishing my questions not to take the
shape of cross-examining you, because I do not wish to do so ; I have
no desire to do more than to possess the Commission and myself of
exactly what I understand to be your contention ; as I understand, you
contend that the great bulk of the property of the Goldsmiths'
Company is absolutely their private property ; is that so ?

Yes.

And that it is subject to no legal restraint whatever?

Yes.

And might, if the Company chose, be divided amongst the members
of the Company to-morrow 1

Legally, I presume, it might be. I have not in the slightest degree
suggested that anything of the kind would be done.

Neither do I suggest it ; I only say that it might be so, according to
your view.

I hardly like to talk law to your lordship, but certainly that is our
view ; and I am fortified in that by the opinion of the Lord Chancellor,
with whom I had the honour of attending the Commission on a former
occasion.

I suppose your legal position, in your view, would be the same if the
Companies, or your Company, had ten times or twenty times the amount
of property that they now possess ?

That is so.

Or if they owned half England 1

Or if they owned half England. It does not appear to me that the
fact that I have got something which is doubly coveted, makes it doubly
the property of somebody who would like to get it.

And, in your view, the State would be guilty of spoliation, as I under-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES1 VINDICATION. 189

stand (" confiscation," I think, is the expression that you make use of), Deputation
or something approaching to confiscation, if in" the general interest it f™P* . , ,
interfered with the holding of property on the part of any one, however company. *
exaggerated and large that holding might be 1

I should certainly think so. It is the first time I ever heard it
suggested that there should be a limit to property held by an individual.

I suggest nothing.

I will not say that your lordship suggests it. It is a new proposition
to me that there should be a limit to property held in one person's
hands.

Even when those lands are mortmain 1

I believe so ; but as these are legal points, I should prefer your
lordship would allow Mr. Prideaux to break in and give answers upon
these matters.

I only want to know what is the extent to which you push your
view.

The extent to which I push my view is that which your lordship has
stated, viz. that the property is legally ours, except that part of it on
which there are direct trusts.

And that the right of the State to interfere is neither more nor less in
the case of very large properties held in mortmain than it is in the case
of very small properties held in the hands of private persons ?

Upon that point I should be glad if your lordship would allow
Mr. Prideaux to answer. So far as I am competent to express an
opinion, I should say " Yes " to that ; but if Mr. Prideaux might
answer it, I should be glad.

SIR EICHARD CROSS : As I understand, you consider that it is the
origin of the property more than the size of it which you have to look at ;
that is to say, how you got the property ?

How we got the property. It appears to me to be a somewhat
dangerous doctrine to say, " I will consider whether this property is large
" or small, and, if it is small, you may keep it ; if it is not, I will consider
" whether it shall not be taken from you."

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Do you know what proportion of the
property held by the Goldsmiths' Company consists of property formerly
held for superstitious uses, and which was purchased by the Goldsmiths'
Company from the Crown in the reign of Edward VI., and the holding
of which was confirmed by the present Act of 4 James I ?

I know it by referring to the returns. But if you will be good
enough to alloAv Mr. Prideaux to speak upon that point, he can do it
with more particularity than I can.

May I ask you whether your Company has, since the establishment of
the Charity Commission, applied to the Commissioners for any scheme
of alteration of the administration of your settled charities ?

I know as a matter of fact that they have ; but again I would refer to
Mr. Prideaux for the detail.

Xow I turn to another subject. In your observations you state that
at the commencement of this century the income of the Company was
very small. Can you inform us what it was at any earlier period, say
five or six centuries ago ?

I cannot ; but again I refer you to Mr. Prideaux.

May I ask you whether you consider that there is, or is not, a very
close connection between the Livery Companies and the Corporation of
London 1

I should have thought it but a remote connection.

On page 14 of the return of the Company you say, " An examination
"of this return will show that four-fifths of the income of all the

190

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

" charity property vested in the Goldsmiths' Company is applicable to
" the poor of the Company ;" and then, furthermore, it is stated that an
addition is made to that. I suppose out of the corporate fund, as if that
was not quite sufficient ; and then, " No deserving member of the Coin-
" pauy, no deserving widow, or unmarried or widow daughter, of a free-
" man falls into poverty or decay without receiving on application to
" the Company pecuniary assistance." Then further, I think you, or
the Company, or whoever wrote this for you, say, " The number of
" persons applying for pecuniary relief, however, diminishes year by
" year, and the time may probably come when the improved annual
" value of the Company's trust property and a diminution of the number
"of persons requiring relief, will render it desirable for the Company to
" take into consideration the expediency of applying some portion of
" the income of the trust estates, under a scheme to be approved by the
" Charity Commissioners, in a manner different from that provided by
" the wills of benefactors." Do you agree with that ?

I agree with that, certainly.

Does not that imply some apprehension in the minds of the Com-
pany, or whoever wrote this, that some mischief, if it has not already
come to the society by this distribution of money, may come either by
the funds that have to be applied to this purpose becoming so very very
much larger, or by the number of applicants becoming fewer ?

I do not see any apprehension whatever. We have certain trust funds
which at present very nearly satisfy the demands upon them. The
applicants, it appears, are becoming fewer, and thereupon we say, when
that stage of things arrives, we will go to the Charity Commissioners for
a scheme for the appropriation of such funds as we have not applicants
for according to the present scheme ; I should have not applied the
word " apprehension " to that, I should apply " foresight " or " fore-
" thought," or any other term indicative of good management.

The number of applicants who receive relief, if I understand you, I
do not know whether I gather that from this return, would depend
upon the character that they bear ?

The number does not depend upon the character ; that is to say, if you
have a sufficient number of good character and sufficient funds to relieve
them, and also the other conditions as to age ; but we make the strictest
possible inquiry into the character of the applicants by personal visits
and examination of every kind and description, and no person not of
good character gets relief or keeps a pension, for these are only given
during pleasure.

Therefore this relief does not go to the poor of the Company generally,
bnt to so many of the poor of the Company as the Company thinks have
a sufficiently good character to entitle them to receive it ?

Quite so, it is not lavished upon unworthy objects. It is lavished
upon those of good character who need it, or rather not lavished, but
spent.

With reference to the old term with which we are so familiar, " the
" deserving widow " and " the deserving poor," I am curious to know what
is the standard of a deserving person in your Company, and how you
arrive at the test you apply 1

Here is a book (producing same) which comes before the Court when
the matter has to be considered, and if you will be good enough to open
it anywhere, you will find the amount of information that we insist upon
having before any relief whatever is given.

I will take the first case ?

Here is another book of men's cases (producing same).

"Fanny Wall, age 56, the unmarried daughter of a freeman, and she

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 101

" is at present residing in Wales with her friends, and dependent upon Deputation
" them and the donation from the Company." Did she come up from from
Wales to satisfy you or those who examined her as to whether she was
deserving or not ?

I do not know that she came up from Wales, but you will see by the
reference there that that must have been not a first application.

I took this quite by chance 1

Quite so, and you see the words "and the donation from the Com-
" pany." It is clear, therefore, that she had applied on a previous
occasion.

May I ask has that woman ever been seen, has she ever been up to
London to give any account of herself, or how did you ascertain that she is
deserving 1

I cannot tell you whether that particular woman ever came up. Those
who reside in London certainly are seen, and in many cases we pay their
fares to come up to London, but one is content to take a good deal of
evidence from the parson of the parish and persons of that character.

You fall back upon the clergymen ?

Yes.

Is his opinion invariably taken with reference to these people 1

I do not know about " invariably taken," but if I get a recommenda-
tion from a clergyman of the Church of England, or any other minister,
I think I have a very good foundation to start from.

That a person was deserving ?

I say I think that, if I have got a recommendation from a clergyman
or any other minister, I have a good foundation to start from. But we
should not limit ourselves to that. We should not say at once that,
having got the recommendation that precludes all inquiry ; on the
contrary, we make every inquiry.

Supposing the father of this Avoman had been an improvident man,
and she herself had perhaps not done the best that she could have done
for herself, would that be taken into consideration, would that affect her
character as a deserving person ?

As far as her own conduct was concerned, unless there had been re-
form, that would be taken into consideration as affecting her character.
As far as the sins of the parents are concerned, we should not think of
visiting them upon her.

You do not visit the sins of the parents upon the children ?

No.

Now as to the deserving widow, take a case of that sort — suppose the
husband had been an improvident man, and had made no provision for
the widow, what view would you take of such a case as that 1

We should inquire into the character of the woman herself, and if we
thought that she was doing all that she could, and struggling to keep
herself, as these poor creatures do, trustworthy, honest, sober, and re-
spectable, we should not visit her husband's sins upon her.

You would not go so far as to inquire whether she, during her
married life, had tried to check her husband ?

No ; I should think that those are details which one could hardly go
into. All I can say is, that we make a very exhaustive inquiry.

As long as she is a deserving widow you ara content ; if she had
not been a deserving wife it would not be a matter of so much im-
portance ?

I cannot help thinking that that is a technical criticism. As long as
she was a deserving woman and in a state of widowhood, we should
relieve her. If she had been a very unsatisfactory wife, and there was
no great change since, we should not relieve her. I should like to piit
this case to you. I will not mention names, because these reports are

192

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

printed, but in my young days you could not take up a pack of cards
without seeing the name of a particular card-maker upon it, a man in
very good business indeed, who was a freeman of this Company. That
man died, his business fell away, he left children without any sufficient
property ; the little that they had dwindled year by year, and at the
present moment one of his daughters (who, I should think, is seventy-
five years of age) is living, having been brought up in the better middle
class, with all its associations and surroundings ; and there is nothing
but this Company between that unhappy lady and the workhouse. Now
that is my notion of a deserving case, arid such as that these Com-
panies very properly relieve.

Where does that unhappy lady live now ? Does she live in England ?

Yes.

What part?

In London.

In the City ?

No; she cannot afford to live in the City; she lives in the suburbs.

Has she no one to lend her a helping hand ?

She has no one to lend a helping hand. Every one who would have
clone so has died off. I know the family.

Is that very creditable to the community in which we live 1

I think it would be very discreditable to the community if the work
which is done by bodies such as these Companies (which is very often
difficult work) were left to be done by private individuals.

Will you tell me the course which is pursued before one of these
persons gets on to the relief list ? Who do they speak to first ?

They apply to the office of the Company.

They do not appear in the first instance, they petition ?

They petition.

They send in a written petition 1

Yes.

Can we see the form of that petition, is there a printed form for that
purpose ?

No.

Then what takes place next ?

It is read at the next Court ; it is then ordered, or not, according to the
opinion of the Court (and they almost always order these cases for
examination) to be referred to the Committee.

Is that the Committee which deals with the charity ?

It is a Committee of the Court, formed of thirteen members, four
wardens and nine members of the Court of Assistants. They, if they
think well, direct inquiry to be made ; then it comes up at the next
Court for confirmation. An inquiry is personally made by the beadle of
the Company in all cases where he can obtain access to the person to
be relieved.

The first direction of the Committee is that the beadle should inquire
into it ]

It follows as a matter of course ; it is his duty to do it.

Does the beadle inquire into the moral character of these people ?

Yes.

Is he a good judge of morality ?

He is not the judge ; lie is the person who makes the inquiries; we are
the judges.

Does he judge of the morality of these people by their appearance or
by their dress, or what takes place 1 I want to know exactly what takes
place.

He makes the usual inquiries that a prudent man would make, whose

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 193

business it is to ascertain the facts, and those answers to the inquiries Deputation
having been written are read out to us, and if we do not think them from
sufficient we order further inquiries to be made. Goldsmiths'

Still keeping the beadle as the inquiring officer 1

Still keeping the beadle as the inquiring officer.

He takes the statement of the applicant, I suppose ?

He is furnished with the petition ; he then goes and makes full
inquiry into the circumstances. As to how the beadle inquires into the
circumstances, 1 should say that I presume he does it very much in the
way one of us would do it if we were sent.

And when does the clergyman come in 1

Never.

I thought in one earlier case you stated that probably in such a case
as that the clergyman would come in 1

I thought you meant the chaplain of the Company. The clergyman
comes in when we want corroboration that we may not be able to get
by personal inquiry, but it need not be of necessity that of a clergyman.
It may be a magistrate or any person of position, a person whom you
believe to be a gentleman, and whose word you would trust.

Are any of these recipients of charities Dissenters ?

I do not know. "We do not inquire into their religion. We inquire
into their moral character.

Does it come to this, that the beadle is the person who inquires into
their moral character, and who lays the facts before the Court, and that
the Court are the persons who judge of the facts ?

Yes.

But you get the idea of morality strained through the beadle, and the
facts of the case ?

The beadle makes inquiry, and then the applicant comes before the
Court before the donation is given.

And through the intermediate agency of the beadle 10,000/. a year
goes out to the deserving poor, deserving in the view of the beadle 1

You can put it in that way if you please. I know that the word
beadle has become a sort of a joke, that the beadle is a man in a cocked
hat and with a staff in his hand, and so on ; but I do say that we have
a competent and intelligent person. It is the particular duty of his
office, as a competent and intelligent person, to collect the facts ; those
facts aro brought before the Court, and are weighed, and if they are not
thought to be sufficient, others are asked for, and finally the applicant
himself or herself is seen.

I do not wish in any way to make any reflection upon the beadle, and
I will use another word. I know the office of beadle has been connected
with Oliver Twist and all sorts of things, and I do not wish to treat it
in that way for a moment. I have no doubt that your beadle is a well-
paid man and an efficient man, but may I ask another question 1 In the
selection of the beadle, — I will come to that, — do the Goldsmiths' Com-
pany endeavour to obtain a man who shall be a judge of morals, and a
judge of nature and character, because that seems to me to be very
important 1

We endeavour to obtain a man who shall be a man of very consider-
able intelligence ; as a matter of fact, the man that we have got at
present was master of St. George's Workhouse.

Which St. George's 1

St. George's, Hanover Square, I believe ; a position which we thought
was not a bad training for a man who was required to discriminate
between imposition and non-imposition.

All of them who are within reach appear before the Court, you say ?

194

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

They do. Occasionally we have cases of bed-ridden persons, and so
on, whom we do not insist upon being produced.

Do you hold the opinion that it is not desirable to apply for any
scheme to regulate the administration of these large charitable funds,
or to apply them in any other way ?

I hold that it is desirable to apply for a scheme to regulate those
funds whenever they happen to be in excess of the objects for which
they were originally designed ; but with respect to the funds which have
at present an object, I believe that we purselves are perfectly competent
and do quite properly administer those charities, and I am at a loss to
see that, because persons happen to be in a particular Charity Com-
mission, or anything of the kind, they are more competent than we are.

You do not think the time has come yet at all events for any such
scheme ?

I trust not ; a scheme for applying surplus funds has been applied
for since the return was sent in. Mr. Prideaux will tell you more
about it.

That means the surplus beyond 10,OOOZ. 1

I do not think it is 10,000£. Mr. Prideaux will give you the details
of the scheme.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : Much has been said about the properties
of the Companies and their ultimate distribution. Do you think that
the property of your Company could be better administered or do
more good, if placed in other hands, than your Company is now doing
with it ?

I do not.

You are in the habit of subscribing liberally to all schemes for the
public good, and perhaps I might say that the other large Companies
are in the habit of doing so ?

I know, as a matter of common report, that they are. I know in my
position as the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the City and
Guilds of London Institute that they subscribe most largely to that,
and with respect to my own Company, I know, of course, its very large
contributions to all matters of public utility.

Much has been said as to the hospitality of the Company. I sup-
pose it is a question that must come out, do you consider the hospitality
of your Company to be beneficial in any view at all 1

I do. I think there is very great social benefit arising from it. I
wish to say this in answer to the chairman ; I have already expressed
my views, so far as they are worth anything, not being a lawyer, as to
what our position is with respect to our property, and that, therefore,
even if we had not used it well, it is very doubtful to my mind
whether we ought to be the subject of inquiry ; but I should like to
say this, and I say it boldly, that I believe we have used our property as
creditably as ever property has been used by any private owner of pro-
perty, and that we have done everything which a right-minded, high-
minded private owner of property would have done, with the one excep-
tion that we have not used any part of it worth talking of (a wretched
fifty guineas a year, or something of that kind) for ourselves.

MR. JAMES : With reference to what has fallen from my friend, Mr.
Pell, perhaps you are aware that there are some persons who say you
cannot spend money badly, so long as you do not give it away. I
suppose you are not one of those ?

There are persons who say that if you find a man lying in a ditch
with a broken leg, you ought not to pull him out, because it may
encourage others to fall into ditches carelessly.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 195

You state in your letter that you do not think that out of your gross Deputation
income 6000/. a year is a large sum to spend in entertainments ? from

I do not. I think those entertainments are of very great use indeed. Golde mt'1B
They bring together different classes of society. I know that I, who
have not very much opportunity of mixing with men of very high posi-
tion, have that opportunity there ; and there has been a certain amount
of utility in it. I believe that these meetings really do very great good,
and that if they existed elsewhere they would be found to do good in
other countries. I must put this to you. When a successful general
comes home the first thought of the people is to give him a dinner.
They give one at Willis's Rooms. They spend as much rateably upon
that dinner as wo spend upon ours. That is looked upon as perfectly
legitimate, but if the same man is invited to come and dine at our hall,
and the dinner is paid for out of our funds, some very hard words are
used about it. Some witnesses who have been before you have said that
which is not true about the unedifying scene at the hall when visitors
are leaving. All I can say is, that our members are a body of gentlemen,
and I have never seen anything contrary to that character. I repeat
that in the view of some people that thing which is right in itself when
done by subscribing and entertaining at Willis's Rooms, becomes wrong
directly it is done within a City hall. I cannot understand that.

Do not you think that those things are very much matter of opinion ?

I think they are, but I think that my opinion and that of those who
have got the property is quite as good as that of those who have not, but
who want to take it. I think it is very like the case of a private
individual being subject to the criticisms of a censor who might come,
for instance, to me and say, " You keep very good books, Sir Frederick
" Bramwell. I have looked over them, and I see that you have so many
" dinner-parties in a year, and they cost you so much."

You look at it in that light ?

I do.

You do not think that the goldsmiths of the United Kingdom are
entitled to their opinion 1

I do, and I think that the goldsmiths of the United Kingdom have
expressed their opinion pretty strongly ; there might be one who wishes
the Company disestablished, but, with that exception, I would appeal to
the goldsmiths of the United Kingdom.

MR. FIRTH : You have told us that, subject to moral obligation, you
think this property might be divided amongst the members of the
Company ?

No, I did not ; I beg your pardon.

What did you say upon that ?

I said I believed it was our own, and that might import that which
you state, but I did not use those words.

Are you aware that some of the Companies have passed resolutions
upon that question ?

No.

I find that in the voluntary gifts you have given altogether 131,406J. :
donations, 69,588/f. ; University exhibitions, 25,508/. ; subscriptions,
10,853Z. ; technical education, 86581. ; schools, 7137/. ; almshouses,
7405/. ; and annuities, 2257Z. That is outside the gifts and charities
provided for by the wills of donors. Now with respect to technical
education, down to 1877 I see you did not give 500/., but since that
time you have gone up to 2400/. 1

In 1877 the Livery Companies (certain of them) came together for the
purpose of establishing the City and Guilds Technical Institute, and the
amount that our Company returns under this head prior to that date is

o 2

196

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

that which was given for the support of that special technical education
•which we had ourselves instituted some years before, for the encourage-
ment of our own craft in artistic design, travelling scholarships, and so
on, but after 1877, when the Companies met together to establish the
City and Guilds of London Institute, the Goldsmiths' Company
determined to become one of the body, and then the contributions
appear, and those contributions have very considerably increased since
that date.

There are four societies in connection with your trade, I think,
specifically mentioned. The Silver Trade Pension Society, the Watch
and Clock Makers' Asylum, the Goldsmiths' and Jewellers' Annuity
Institution, and the Goldsmiths' Benevolent Institution ?

Yes.

To those four you have given 64487., If per cent, upon your expen-
diture. Are you aware that they have made complaint about not having
more 1

I do not know it, but I do know that without complaint we have very
largely increased our contributions.

What is the fee for attending at the Court ?

The fee for attending at the General Court is three guineas, and at a
Committee of the Court two guineas.

Can you give me a notion of the sort of business done at a General
Court ? For example, suppose you were to meet to-day as a Court, what
would you have to do ?

I think I can give you a very accurate idea. In the first place the
minutes of all the proceedings of the committees are read over and sub-
mitted to the Court for consideration and approval, and for confirmation
if they think proper. Those minutes very often occupy a considerable
time in reading ; they relate to a great variety of matters, everything in
point of fact connected with the general business of the Company. The
Court of Wardens is held once every month, the minutes are read over,
and those minutes also are submitted to the General Court for their con-
sideration and approval. All matters are brought forward on notice of
motion, which is required to be given at a preceding Court. Then if
any member has given a notice of motion, he moves it. If two or three
members have given notices of motion they move them according to their
seniority, and the matters are discussed.

Without at all wishing to penetrate into secrets, I do not for one mo-
ment suggest that there are any secrets to penetrate, give me a notion, if
you do not mind, of what sort of motion is brought forward and dis-
cussed ; conceal any name you like, but give me a notion ?

We will take one thing. Some time ago Sir Frederick Bramwell
brought forward a motion that we should give 10007. in aid of the endow-
ment of chemical research, that was opposed, some of the members
thought that we had nothing to do with chemical research ; others
thought that we had a great deal to do with it.

Forgive me for interrupting you, but for Sir Frederick Bramwell to
give notice of motion to vote 10007. must be a little out of the way; it
is not an ordinary matter of business, I suppose ?

I think so.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Can you form any idea, or give the Com-
mission any figures which would guide them as to the proportion of pro-
perty held by the Goldsmiths' Company which consists of property
formerly held for superstitious uses, and which was purchased by the
Company from the Crown in the reign of Edward the 6th, as compared
with property derived from other sources 1

Yes, I made a calculation upon that very point. I had it all taken out,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 197

and I find that 28,681Z. represent the rents of property of that descrip- Deputation
tion ; that is the property which we bought back from the Crown that ^°™ ,
became forfeited in consequence of the superstitious uses. Company -^

What proportion does that bear to the income arising from other
property ?

It is 28,000/. to about 54,000/.
Are you referring to corporate property ?
No, I am referring to the whole income of the Company.
Corporate and trust 1
Corporate and trust.

But setting the trust aside could you give any idea of what proportion
of the corporate income is derived from the property formerly held for
superstitious uses ?

Yes, the trust property amounts to about 10,000/. a year, therefore it
is 28,000/. to 44,000/. or 45,000/.

The Company are very generous benefactors, are they not, in the way
of giving exhibitions at Universities ?

We give a very large number of exhibitions.
Do you happen to know how many ?
It is seventy-five.

The CHAIRMAN : At the two Universities 1
Yes, equally divided between the two.
SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Between Oxford and Cambridge 1
Between Oxford and Cambridge ; it is all set forth at very considerable
length in the return.

Will you tell the Commission how you elect those who are to have the
benefit of these exhibitions ?

By merit. They apply, and after the applications have been received,
and a day is fixed closing the time when they are to apply, a list is sent
to Oxford and to Cambridge, to two examiners at each University, who
hold an examination and send us a report, and we act upon that report.
I think it is best expressed in the language which I have used here
as to the exhibitions. " A student who desires to become a candidate for
one of these exhibitions must have been in actual residence at his
1 college one term, and if at Oxford must have passed the responsions, or
'the examinations accepted by the University as equivalent to the
4 responsions, before the time appointed for the return of the petition,
' and his income arising from preferment at college or elsewhere must
' not amoiint to more than 70£ a year, exclusive of the Goldsmiths' ex-
hibition." Then we have stated here, in another part, that it is chiefly
done by examination. We say : " They are tenable for sixteen terms
'at Oxford and twelve at Cambridge, and are awarded solely by
' competition modified by consideration of the necessities of the student
' and his parents or friends. For instance, if A.B, stand above C.D. in
' the examiner's report, and his father have an income of 800/. a year,
' C.D. being dependent upon a father in straitened circumstances, C.D.
' would be preferred to A.B., who would probably not be elected at all.
' These exhibitions are open to the whole University. A student re-
' lated to a member of the Company has no preference whatever." Nor
do I ever remember any exhibitioner who was related in any manner to
any member of the Company.

I believe they are given the chance, irrespective of religious denomi-
nation 1
Entirely.

Can you tell us whether any students to whom you have granted
exhibitions have taken any honours ?

A very large proportion. I am sorry I have not the document that

198

KOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

I prepared the other day for the Court. I thought it would be ex-
ceedingly pleasing for them to know that three-fifths if not four-fifths of
our students took honours.

I may take it then that this part of the expenditure of the Company
has given great satisfaction to the Court ?

Great satisfaction.

Sir Frederick Bramwell gave the Commission some information in re-
lation to the funds appropriated to the relief of poor freemen and mem-
bers of the Company. Have the Company found that the property left
for that particular purpose is growing, if anything, rather larger than is
necessary ?

Undoubtedly.

Has it been a constantly improving property 1

I think I may say constantly improving.

And is any part of it property which is likely still further to improve
in the course of a few years ?

I think so ; I think that that property is particularly likely to
improve.

I think I understood Sir Frederick Bramwell to say the Company
were considering an application to the Commissioners for a scheme which
would enable them to appropriate a part of these funds in some other
direction, probably cy-pres to the original object ?

We have done more than that.

Will you tell the Commission how far you have progressed ?

When the return was sent in to the Commissioners, there was the fol-
lowing remark in a note attached to it : — " An examination of this return
" will show that four-fifths of the income of all the charity property vested
" in the Goldsmiths' Company is applicable to the poor of the Company,
" and it will be seen by the accounts that the annual amount expended for
" the relief of poor freemen and poor widows and daughters of freemen is
" considerably in excess of the income applicable to those objects. A
" large number of the freemen of the Goldsmiths' Company belong to
" the artisan class, and become objects of the bounty of the Company in
" consequence of sickness, age, and want of employment. No deserving
" member of the Company, no deserving widow, or unmarried or widow
" daughter of a freeman falls into poverty or decay without receiving,
" on application to the Company, pecuniary assistance. The number of
" persons applying for pecuniary relief, however, diminishes year by
" year, and the time may probably come when the improved annual value
" of the Company's trust property, and a diminution of the number of
" persons requiring relief, will render it desirable for the Company to
" take into consideration the expediency of applying some portion of the
" income of the trust estates under a scheme to be approved by the
" Charity Commissioners in a manner different from that provided by
" the wills of benefactors. The income derived from Perryn's estate, after
" providing for the fixed payments directed by the will, may, in accor-
" dance with the trusts of the will, be applied for educational purposes."
At the time when this was written I was not aware that there were cer-
tain properties falling in, certain increased rents accruing to the Company
from a Charity property of a very large amount, at least I was not aware
of the extent to which this was so, and very shortly afterwards I found
that the income of the charities trust property was more than sufficient
to satisfy all the claims upon it.

May I ask you whether, without disclosing secrets of the Company,
you could give the Commission any idea of the objects and purposes to
which such surplus, as it might arise, would be applied ; would it be
applied, do you think, to technical education ?

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 199

We actually applied to the Charity Commissioners for a scheme last Deputation
year, I think at the beginning of last year, and they in reply said they from
•were not disposed to entertain any application for a scheme so long as goldsmiths'
this Commission was sitting, and of course wo were stopped, and we
have now a considerable sum of money which we know not what to do
with. With respect to technical education, I think that we should not
ask to apply it to that. I think we have determined to apply so very
large a portion of the income of our general corporate property to tech-
nical education that it would not be necessary or desirable that we should
do so. The scheme that we proposed in the application that we sent to
the Charity Commissioners was this, " With this in view, and for the
' purpose of simplifying our accounts, I propose to apply to the Charity
' Commissioners for an order enabling the Company to consolidate all
' their charities founded solely or partially for their poor, providing that
' the whole of the revenues applicable thereto shall be carried to the
' credit of one account with an appropriate heading, and that all pay-
"ments for the benefit of poor freemen, widows, and daughters of
"freemen, whether by way of pension or donation, shall be debited
' thereto, the balance, whenever there shall be a surplus, to be carried to
" an accumulation fund, the application of such fund for some charitable
" object, such as the founding a Convalescent Hospital, establishing
" additional pensions for the blind " (that we have very much at heart
at the present time), " or the advancement of education, to be decided on,
" with the consent of the Commissioners of Charities, so soon as it shall
" amount to 10,OOOZ."

Passing from that subject, you told the chairman just now that your
Court consisted of twenty-five members. Do you find from your long
experience that a Court of twenty-five members is sufficient to practically
conduct the affairs of a Company like yours ?

I do, I think it is a very convenient number.

As a matter of practice, are the Court generally elected from the
livery by seniority, or is it rather more by the choice of those whom
the Court think would be the most eligible men of business ?

Certainly not from seniority ; we might have by that means very unfit
persons. It is really the persons whom we think are the best men of
business and persons of the best station.

Then, as a matter of fact, some are passed over and others are selected ?

There is no doubt about it, and there have been no complaints from
our livery.

You told the chairman, at least I understood you to say to the chair-
man, that you had no case where there were two relations, members of
the same family, on the Court ?

None whatever.

From your experience, would you think it an objectionable course to
have four or five members of the same family on the Court ?

No, I do not know that it is objectionable, in fact I have known
certain cases in which there are persons of the same family on the Court,
and in which, I believe, the business is remarkably well managed.

MR. PELL : Are the exhibitions at the University entirely open ; is
there anything of a nomination to begin with ?

None whatever.

They are open to the whole world, then ?

They are open to the whole world in fact.

Only you make some little distinction, after the examination is over,
in favour of those who are very needy ?

We take that into consideration. I think if the parents of the man
who was first on the list really were in a very good condition, say that

200

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Goldsmiths'
Company.

the father had an income which we thought did not justify him in
applying for an exhibition, we should not give it him.

I suppose you have power to increase those exhibitions if it were the
will of the Court to do so ?

We have done it. I think you will find, in the paper that we have
sent in, that we have given an account of the way in which we have
increased them from time to time, with the annual increase of our
income.

In this long list, can you tell me whether there is a single object
entered in which the poor who are helped are called upon to be doing
anything for themselves, or are all these institutions which you assist
entirely supported by voluntary contributions ?

AVithout going through the whole of them it is exceedingly difficult
to say. They are nearly all of them great public charities, such as the
Royal Naval School and the Consumption Hospital.

I have looked them through, and perhaps it would be better for me to
put it in this way : has the Court considered it desirable in the distribution
of its charities to attempt to encourage thrift ?

Most decidedly, and I may say as to the reports made to the Court
that the officer is instructed to make minute inquiries as to whether the
applicants have been thrifty persons or unthrifty persons.

MR. JAMES : With regard to the distribution of these charities I will
ask you just one or two questions with regard to the discrimination which
you make between the deserving and the undeserving ; are you able to
discriminate between the deserving applicants and the undeserving ?

I really think the best way to answer that question would be to have
in the person to whom I alluded, who makes these inquiries, to have
his reports in, and to interrogate him, to show exactly what takes place.
I may say the course is this : he is directed to make minute inquiries ;
he not only goes to the people to whom the applicants refer him, but he
also applies to other people. He tells me it very frequently happens
that people will refer to persons whom they are sure will give a favour-
able report, but he inquires what their antecedents have been ; he finds
out, for instance, for whom a man has worked, and he always goes and
makes application to that person. He then has always come to me first,
and has gone over his report with me, and stated to me what inquiries
he has made, and has asked me whether I consider they were sufficient.
I have very often found that they are not sufficient, and I have ordered
him to make further inquiries. When the inquiries are complete, then
the case is presented to the committee, and the applicant is directed to
attend. The members of the committee make such inquiries as they
think proper, and I must tell you that a very large number of applicants
are refused altogether. When we find that a man has been of intem-
perate habits, and, in fact, that his poverty arises from want of thrift,
or from drunkenness, or any other act of bad behaviour, his application
is refused.

By MR. FIRTH : One word with respect to your poor. I find that the

Charter to which you draw our attention recites amongst others one of

your earlier Charters of Richard II., which I presume therefore is still

in force, and which says this : " Know ye whereas Edward our grand-

' father late King of England, at the suit of the goldsmiths of our City

' of London, suggesting to him how that many persons of that trade by

' fire and smoke of quicksilver have lost their sight, and that others of

' them by working in that trade became so crazed and infirm that they

' were disabled to subsist but of relief from others ; and that divers of

' the said City compassionating the condition of such were disposed to

' give and grant divers tenements and rents in the City to the value of

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 201

" twenty pounds per annum to the Company of the said craft towards Deputation
" the maintenance of the said blind, weak, and infirm, and also of a from
" chaplain to celebrate Mass amongst them every day for the souls of all Goldsmiths'
" the faithful departed, according to the Ordinance in that behalf to be
" made, did by his Letters Patents for the consideration of a fine of ten
' marks, for himself and his heirs, as much as in him lay, grant and
' give licence to the men of the community aforesaid that they might
' purchase tenements and rents in the same City of the value of twenty
' pounds per annum, and not above, of the men of that City, for relief
' and maintenance of such blind and infirm and of such chaplain as
' aforesaid. To hold to them and their successors of the same society
" for ever for the purposes aforesaid ; the statute workman or any other
" statute or ordinance to the contrary thereof notwithstanding, as in and
" by the said Letters Patents more fully and at large \i may appear."
Can you tell me how much of the money which is now given to the poor
of your Company is given to the poor of a trade ?

I think I have stated that in the Returns, but I think I can give it
you now. The number of freemen pensioners who are or have been
connected with the trade or craft of Goldsmiths or Silversmiths is
thirty-four.

SALTERS' COMPANY.

THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Salters' Deputation
,, from Salters'

Company :- Company.

Mr. Arthur Bowdler Hill.

Mr. Frederick Le Gros Clark, F.R.S.

Mr. Thomas Hicks.

Mr. Henry William Eaton, M.P.

Mr. Alderman Fowler, M.P.

Mr. E. Lionel Scott (Clerk).

CHAIRMAN to Mr. Clark : We understand that you wish to contra-
dict or modify some statements made by Dr. Todd in his evidence with
regard to your Company,or that you have some statement to make with
reference to it. We have certain statements before us which were made
by Dr. Todd which you do not exactly accept as accurate, we under-
stand 1

We have made our answer in the short statement which has been
drawn up and handed into the secretary.

I see you say here that you have spent in all 51,000?. upon your
estates in the last twenty-eight years ?

Yes.

I see a complaint was made by Mr. Brown, a gentleman who
appeared here as a witness, to the effect that there is considerable poverty
prevailing on the Salters' estate, because during the bad years the Com-
pany never made them any reduction or allowance on the rents ; do you
admit that statement ?

It is answered in the paragraph which I will read to your Lordship :
" Mr. Andrew Brown, a tenant on the estate, who gave evidence before
" the Commission, also on the twelfth day, complains that an appeal which
" was made against an advance of twenty per cent, put on a portion of the
" estate in bad years, was rejected." Now this bare paragraph, as it
stands, would tend to somewhat mislead those who read it without being
acquainted with the circumstances, but the answer is given in the next

202

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Saltera'
Company.

paragraph : " This augmented rent was an addition of twenty per cent on a
" small section of the town-park holdings, which had been reduced ten
" per cent, in 1855, and not increased when the rentals of the agricul-
" tural holdings were raised ten per cent, in 1866. The aggregate anunal
"accretion of rent from this source amounted to about 150/., and simply
"placed all town-parks and agricultural holdings on the same footing."

It is also stated, I observe, that the recent appeal for a reduction of
rent was rejected ; that you deny ?

"No, we do not deny that we rejected it. The paragraph which follows

states : " It is true that the Company declined to adopt a general reduc-

' tion of their moderate rental, which, for agricultural holdings, is about

' ten per cent, below the Government valuation ; but they promised to

' take into consideration individual applications for relief, and to deter-

c mine them on their respective merits. This decision has been acted on,

' and in several instances remission of rent has been granted, and pecu-

' niary assistance afforded to needy tenants." I may say this has been

done to a very considerable extent. We have always fully taken into

consideration the nature of the appeal and the character of those who are

appealing to us.

And in reply to the statement that nothing has been done upon the farm
except by tenants, you answer that you have spent 16,OOOZ. on the
rural districts, and 1 2,000 1. odd on the town holdings 1

Yes ; and the particulars are given in the table below in our reply.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Is it not true that the Salters' Company
paid a sum of money at the beginning of the seventeenth century for
their share of the Irish estates ?

The Salters' Company paid a sum of money for possession of the Irish
estates.

For their share ?

Quite so.

Is it not true that shortly after that, whatever trust there was on
the Company's property that was transferred in fact to the Irish
society, and that the Company's properties have been sold, and that it has
been acknowledged that there is no trust impressed, upon them ?

Yes, quite so. The property of the Company, as I understand it,
was by the act of the Star Chamber taken from the Companies, and
restored to them when it was proved that that dispossession was unjust
and illegal.

Is it a fact that the Salters' Company have expended large sums of
money in public buildings, especially in the erection of churches in the
district in which your land is situated ?

It is quite true.

And not confined to any particular denomination ?

No.

Is it a fact that you have contributed towards the erection of Roman
Catholic churches?

Quite recently we have contributed 10007. towards the erection of a
Roman Catholic church, besides giving the site.

Have the Company throughout the time they have been the owners
of this estate sought to benefit the people quite apart from any sectarian
views ?

Entirely so.

Their schools have been always open to all denominations, have they
not?

Yes, they have been. We have made no difference between Presby-
terians, Episcopalians, or Roman Catholics.

MR. FIRTH : I find that your Irish estate income for 1879-80, accord-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 203

ing to your return, was 12,309?., deducting balance carried forward, Deputation
840?., that leaves an income of 11,469?. ; and I see that something over j™m Baiters'
2000?. was devoted to the objects you speak of— 2125?.; is that about
the usual proportion of your income that you apply for Irish pur-
poses ?

I should think a larger proportion than that out of our income,
certainly.

I have the figures here. With respect to your English expenditure,
perhaps I might ask you a question. I find that your total English
expenditure was 29,7 90?., but there are items with respect to the purchase
of land from the Sadlers' Company and the Dyers' Company ; you
purchased their shares of the Irish estates, did you not ?

We have done so.

There remains of current expenditure, as I read your account, five
items on page 24 : Expenses of maintenance, 7275?. ; entertainments,
3046?. ; gifts, 1574?. ; subscriptions and donations to decayed members
and their relatives and others, 2508?. ; technical education, 5751. You
did not give anything to technical education before 1878, I think 1

No, I think that was the first year in which we gave anything.

Will you kindly tell me with respect to the other item as to gifts
to decayed members and their relatives what that means ] do you give
to the relatives of your members 1

Those who are related, such as widows and daughters. Every case is
carefully investigated, of course.

The items of current expenditure I have read over amount to 14,978?.
I see that those two items, maintenance and management and enter-
tainments, amount together to 10,322?. Do not you consider that a
large proportion of your current expenditure for maintenance and
entertainments ?

That includes a great many items.

They are all put by you as maintenance and management. It is the
second item to which I refer : " Rates, taxes, insurance (mostly repaid
" by tenants), salaries, wages, professional and other charges of main-
"tenance of buildings and management, 7275?." Then there are
entertainments, 3046?. ?

Yes, that is quite right.

My question was, do not you consider the 10,322?. a somewhat large
proportion to expend out of a current expenditure of 14,978?. for those
purposes ?

Of course, it is a matter of opinion whether it is so or not. If each
item is carefully investigated I do not think it will be considered a large
proportion.

Do you pay anything to your Court of Assistants or members of com-
mittees for their attendance 1

We do.

What proportion is paid to the members of the Court ?

2130?.

MR. BURT : In answer to Sir Sydney Waterlow, I understood you to
say that what you give for any purpose is given entirely on unsectarian
grounds ?

Entirely so.

With regard to the next item mentioned here, Ministers and Church
Sustentation Fund, church buildings, parsonages, &c., is that the Church
of England ?

You will find in the second page, " Support of education, church
" building and parsonages."

It is the Church of England, I suppose, in that case 1

204

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Baiters'
Company.

No, not exclusively. You are speaking of the Church of Ireland, I
presume ?

Yes. With regard to charitable and other donations, on what
principle is that money given ; is that also entirely irrespective of creed 1

It is where applications are made to us for relief.

Persons connected with the estate, I suppose 1

Yes, certainly; they are our own tenants.

With regard to the apprenticeship, is it merely nominal or are the
apprentices really apprenticed to the Salters' ?

Our apprenticeship is actual servitude. We inquire very carefully
into that, and some of our officers look after the apprentices from time
to time to see that it is actual servitude.

MB. ALDERMAN COTTON : Do you consider that the money which you
give in charities, that is to say, in pensions and annuities of that kind,
does a very great deal of good 1

I do, certainly.

Do you consider that by supplying these pensioners with moneys you
save them going upon the rates or going into the workhouse ?

Certainly, or from becoming absolutely destitute.

Their home would be the workhouse if it were not for the assistance
you give them, would it not ?

Yes, in a large number of cases, no doubt. We have some very sad
cases, where the applicants have been the children or widows even of
members of the Court.

IRONMONGERS' COMPANY.

Deputation
from

Ironmongers'
Company.

THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Iron-
mongers' Company: —

Mr. F. J. Barren, Master.

Mr. W. Bevan, Senior Warden.

Mr. J. T. Homer.

Mr. H. R. Price.

Mr. William Gribble, of Scriveners' Company, on behalf of Associated
Companies, and

Mr. K. C. A. Beck, Clerk.

CHAIRMAN to Mr. Barron : We have received from you two printed
statements, one relating to your Irish estates and the other to your
property in general, which have been put before us as part of the
evidence, and which I think it will not be necessary that we should
read, as they are in print in the hands of the Commissioners. Is there
anything you wish to add ?

We would respectfully submit that you allow them to be printed on
your minutes of evidence, if you take them as read.

CHAIRMAN : This shall be done.

Have you anything to add to what has been stated in those papers ?

Only as to the Irish estate. We ask your Lordship to hear Mr.
Bokeby Price upon that.

To MR. KOKEBY PRICE : I understand you to wish to make some
supplementary statement with regard to your Irish estates ?

Yes, we wish just to draw the attention of your Lordship and the
Commission to the fact that the statement made by the deputation from
Ireland which attended before the Commission is incorrect in saying

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 205

that it is a trust. We wish also to mention that we did in 1764 redeem Deputation

the tithe entirely on behalf of our tenants, which cost us 11151.; by from

that payment we extinguished all tithe for the future. We wish also Ironmongers'

to draw attention to the fact that we have expended very large sums Company.

on- roads, bridges, and fences, amounting to about 625?. a year. We give

also 400?. to schools and other charities, and we have contributed, as we

state in our statement, which your Lordship has before you, 200/. towards

the preliminary expenses of the Deny Central Railway, and guaranteed

five per cent, interest on 5000 1. worth of shares for twenty-five years.

We deny that the tenants hold from the middlemen from year to year ;

we deny that, and that they held on lease from 1841 for three lives.

We wish also to draw the attention of the Commission to the fact that

during the time we have had the property in our hands, which is since

1841, we have had but three evictions on the estate, and that was from

circumstances which we could not possibly avoid. Having served on the

Irish Committee for a good many years, I think I may say that we have

had no application for a reduction of rent from any of our tenants, Avith

the exception of a few from an estate called the Stirling estate, which AVO

purchased a few years ago, and on this estate the rent had been raised

shortly before we bought it ; but since then we have reduced the rent.

Otherwise the tenants proper of the Ironmongers' estate have made no

application for the reduction of rents, so far as my recollection goes.

I see that you state your present rental is six per cent, below Griffith's
valuation 1

That is true.

What do you mean by the statement which appears in the last
paragraph of your printed memorandum, that in 1860 the Company
established a tenant right equivalent to ten years' purchase of the rent 1

I was just going to mention that ; it is a very important thing. I believe
our estate was the only estate in Ireland that had that custom. When
the estate came out of lea se from the Bishop of Meath there was no such
thing as tenant right upon our estates. Our rents were then so low that
tenant right arose, seeing then that we thought it would be a very bad
thing to have an indiscriminate price for our tenant right, we established
this custom, that if any person wished to give up his farm the Company
would buy it at a ten years' price. It was sold to us (the Company), and
we sold it again to the incoming tenant at the same price. Our policy
was not to introduce any fresh tenants on to our estate, if possible, but
to give the offer of any vacant farm to the neighbouring tenants. Our
object was this : Our neighbours found out to their great cost, and it
is now a still greater cost since the Land Act, that it was a very
disadvantageous thing for a tenant to give an enormous price and to be
saddled with a very large debt for the tenant right, he would not in that
case be able to do justice to the farm. We have evidence now before
us of three or four farms of ours having been sold in the last few
months, where they have actually given 48 to 50 years' purchase for the
tenant right.

Is not that more than the value of the freehold ?

It is more than we can get. I can give the name of some such cases.
Thomas Boyle, of Collins, is one ; his rent was 8/. Is., and he has sold
his interest for 400?. to an adjoining tenant, which is about 48 years'
purchase. Widow Dempsey's rent was 4?. 9s., she sold hers for 100?.
Alexander Ranger's rent was 28?. 10s. 8cZ., he sold his for 555?. Roger's
rent was 11?., he sold his tenant right for 315?. ; and Maclntyre's rent
was 10?. 17s., and he sold his tenant right for 305?. net. And I am
reminded by my colleague here that two of those have stated that we
charged them too much rent before, a statement of which we never

206

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Ironmongers'
Company.

heard until lately, a statement not borne out by the prices they obtained
for their tenant right.

SIR RICHARD CROSS : What dates are those ?

Two or three of them within the last two or three months. There
have been eight cases taken into court against us by our tenants. In
those eight cases the Government valuation was 102/. 10s., our rent
88/. 9*1., and we have been reduced by the judicial rent to 751. ISs.

You said " the Government valuation," I suppose you mean Griffith's
valuation ?

It is the same — for Government purposes — it is Griffith's valuation.
Our rent in 1881 was 88Z. 9^., and we were reduced by the judicial rent
to 751. 18s. We have appealed against those cases, and they are under
appeal now. We have made one omission which I ought to mention.
As an individual Company we have given to our tenants various sums.
In 1881, when they applied for assistance in consequence of a bad season,
we gave them 600J., to be laid out in such a way as our agent and the
tenants could agree for the benefit of the people by straightening mereings,
roads, and drains, and all that sort of thing. That we have not stated
in our paper which you have before you. We also wish just to draw
your attention to some italics with regard to the Coopers' Company in
the last two paragraphs on page 3. The date of the charter you see was
1609. In 1612 the Coopers' Company found that they could not pay
the additional sum which was required, and the condition was that if
any one of the Companies did not pay, they were to lose the money they
had previously paid. The Corporation stepped in and bought of the
Coopers' Company their share. The words are " the City is to receive
" all the benefit and profit as well already due as hereafter shall grow
" due to the said (Coopers') Company by the said plantation of Ireland."
Then, in 1615, James I. gave us the licence "that the Companies may
" in future reap some gain and benefit of their great travails and expenses
" taken and bestowed thereon." I only mention that because it has
been stated by Dr. Todd, or some other witness here, that we did not
hold for our own behoof and benefit. We contend that we do, and we
contend that the various Companies laid out 150,000^. for various
purposes upon the property. It is not at all likely that we should have
done that except for some benefit. Then, again, I wish to draw attention
to the fact that we state here that Mr. Canning, who was then a
member, and previously the Master of the Ironmongers' Company, was
sent out there to be governor, and he sold an estate in Warwickshire of
his own, and laid out certain money, as we state there, in building a
church and doing certain other things on the Company's Irish estate, and
acquired part of the estate, and resided there. He would not have done
that if he had thought we could not convey to him with a good title.
He would not have sold property in England and invested the money
in Ireland unless he were quite certain that he had a good title in Ireland.
We think those are certain points which are refuted altogether. We
wish also to draw attention to the statement we made in the second para-
graph of page 2. Dr. Todd, in his evidence to prove we held these
in trust, lays great stress upon the articles of agreement which were
made for the first time to make a plantation. It appears from records
we have, as well as those of the Corporation, that there were two negotia-
tions started. The first one failed ; in fact, to use a common expression,
it did not float. Then the Government came to the Corporation again,
and entered into certain other negotiations with us. The articles to
which Dr. Todd refers are the articles of the scheme which did not float
or did not succeed. The articles we hold are those of a subsequent
agreement, which are very different indeed, and which are set out in the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 207

schedule in full. I do not know that there is anything else. If I have Deputation
omitted anything, my colleagues here will put me right. I should just from
draw attention to one other point. On page 5 in the last paragraph we Ironmongers'
state: "In 1842 the Company's estate contained 12,686 acres, then
"valued by the well-known valuators, Messrs. Nolan, at 5610J. per
"annum, and let at 5509?., chiefly on yearly tenancies to the tenants
" actually in occupation at the expiration of the last lease which had
" been granted by the Company on lives." Your Lordship will see that
we put our rents at IQQl. a year below the rents which those well-
known valuators agreed upon, and in 1860, when the re- valuation took
place, Mr. Nolan was sent for from Ireland and attended the Iron-
mongers' Company. We then gave him "directions as to re-valuation,
and told him not to make too excessive a valuation. He said he would
not, and he did not. The result is what you have there. From 1861
up to this time we have had no complaints as to those rents, I think
I may say, with the exception of those Stirling tenants. Having been
three times over to Ireland on a deputation from this Company, I can
say that on no occasion have I or my colleagues had an application in
person for a reduction of rent. The last time we were over there it was
known that we wanted to sell our estates, and there was an agricultural
show there which the Company have every year, and, being there by
myself on a subsequent occasion, I was besieged by the tenants and
begged not to sell. I said, we must sell ; and they said, we do hope you
will keep us out of the hands of the Gombeen man and private owners.
Those were the expresions made use of to me on that occasion. I think,
if we had been such hard landlords, or that our rents had been too high,
they would not have asked that ; so long they had been our tenants, and
they asked us to continue their landlords.

CHAIRMAN : Did they express a wish to buy themselves 1

No ; I should tell you that some of them would buy. Your Lordship
will see that a scheme of acreage is given in our statement, and you will
see that we have a very large number of tenants, and a number of them
at very small rents indeed. That your Lordship will find in the original
return. We have 541 tenants on our property at rents something like
an average of 13/. a year.

MR. FIRTH to the Clerk of the Company : I should like to ask you
about this return on the first page as to list of trust deeds, founding,
regulating, or affecting the Company. You say there are none except
the ordinances regulating the Company; what was the date of the
ordinances ?

25th January, 19th Henry VII.

Is that the last you have ?

Yes.

Those would be settled under the statute 7th Henry VII., I suppose,
by the Lord Chancellor and two chief justices 1

Yes, they were.

You state on page 42 that the decisions and the proceedings of your
Court are not published ; but every member can ascertain them from
the minute book, which is read at every Court. Do you mean that
every member of the Company has that open to him ?

Every member of the livery.

Any member of the livery can ascertain that information 1

Yes.

Can you tell me who your apprentices were bound to ; what was the
trade to which they belonged ?

At what date ?

The last ten years ?

208

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Ironmongers'
Company.

They were apprenticed to any trade.

Were the masters bond fide trading ?

They have to make a declaration that it is a bond fide servitude.

And they really served seven years ?

Or five. They are apprenticed for five or seven years.

Living with the person to whom they are bound ?

I do not think it is necessary for them to be living with them.

Attending at their places of business every week ; is that so
constantly ?

I may say every day. It is not a colourable servitude.

MR. EOKEBY PRICE : May I just say that when I was senior warden
of the Company, which was a few years ago, we had a certain firm of
brushmakers named Pritchard, in Newgate Street, who had been members
of the Company for generations, and I myself, as senior warden, whose
duty it is always to do it, bound a young man to Messrs. Pritchard
for five years, and I have every reason to believe that he is there
still.

That is one case 1

Yes.

Upon your accounts I notice that you return for the last year a total
expenditure of 13,2071.; deducting the balance, 2,148/., there remains
11,059. Is there any expenditure whatever for the interest of the
Ironmongers' Trade Society in any way 1

The CLERK : None at all.

MR. ROKEBY PRICE : We give ten guineas a year as a donation to
the Ironmongers' Trade Society, but that is all.

That is among the 10281. which is given for donations and gratuities?

Yes ; it is a simple gratuity, like any other gratuity that we give.

The CLERK : The Ironmongers' Company have nothing to do with
trade.

I notice in the last paper with which you have supplied the Com-
mission to-day, you say that the Company is independent of any
control by the City. Are you aware that the courts of law have held
that the Courts are subject to the control of the City ? Have you ever
heard of a case ?

I have heard that statement made.

Do not misunderstand my question. Have you heard or seen that it
has been decided by courts of law that the Companies are subject to the
control of the City 1

No.

What is the statement that you had heard1?

That which is referred to in the Grocers' statement. I cannot give
you any better information than is given in that statement. The case
is thoroughly argued out there.

You do not consider that they are under the control of the Court of
Mayor and Aldermen 1

No.

Nor, I see, do you consider that they form any part of the Corpora-
tion of the City ?

No.

Have you considered this : suppose they do form no part of the
Corporation of the City ; if they were dissolved for any purpose (if you
dissolved yourselves, for instance) do you consider that the Corporation
of the City could go on ?

I have not considered it.

You are aware that under your regulating Act in one respect the
liverymen of a Company can vote for the Lord Mayor ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 209

I am not aware. Deputation

MR. GRIBBLE : The Scriveners' Company, my Lord, is one of the from
Companies associated with the Ironmongers' Company, who, in point of Iromongers
fact, contributed to find the money which was assessed upon the Iron- omPany-
mongers' Company. I only wish to say a few words as evidencing what
was the thought and intention of the members of the Scriveners' Com-
pany of that day Avho subscribed their money, and to read you a resolu-
tion of the Company which was passed in 1626, showing that they
themselves thought the money was their own, and that they were getting
their share of the estates for themselves. It is signed by the different
members of the Scriveners' Company. This is a copy which I have
extracted from the books. "A Court of Assistants held the 10th day of
'January, 1626. At this Court it is ordered that all moneys paid and
' assessed to be paid towards the plantation in Ireland, and the Com-
' panics' proportion and part of lands there, and the rents, issues, and
' profits of the same shall for ever hereafter be and remain to the
'general use of this corporation" (that means the Scriveners' Company)
'and payable towards the providing and maintaining of an hall and
' other necessary general affairs of this society, and not to be or retane
' to the private or particular use of any, and for a general consent here-
' unto the brethren of the said Company do freely hereunto subscribe
' their names." That is signed by the members, and amongst those the
!ather of an eminent man, John Milton. Then at "A Court of As-
' sistants holden 25th October, 1627, Mr. Ashenden" (he was a member),
being demanded the money by him due for the Irish plantation,
' desired to be respited till the next Court day, which the Court thought fit
' to yield to, but if he do not then pay the same it is ordered he shall
' be no longer dispensed with all." This shows that evidently in 1626,
very shortly after moneys were advanced and the Company came into
possession of the estates, they themselves considered that they advanced
the money for the purpose of getting their share of those estates. My
colleague, Mr. Price, has stated, I think, almost everything that can be
stated. I am a very old member of the committee, I should tell you,
which manages this estate, the oldest present member of the committee,
therefore I know something about it. From inquiries which we have
made we feel perfectly convinced that none of the tenants are in a
position or will be in a position — I should rather say very few of the
tenants are in a position or will be in a position — to purchase the estates.
It is therefore idle to suppose that they will ever be purchased by them.
They have not the means to do so, and they consider themselves better
off Avith us as landlords to deal with than if they became owners of the
estate, having interest to pay to money-lenders and usurers. I should
have stated that I do not appear only for the Scriveners' Company, but
for the Ironmongers' Company, and the Associated Companies as a
body, I appear for the Associated Companies as a body because I know
more about it than the other members. I am an older member of the
committee than the other members of the committee. We are all acting
entirely in unison.

MR. FIRTH : I should like to ask you whether you have in your
records any copy of the return which I find by the journals of the House
of Commons was made by your Company to the House of Commons in
1724?

No, none. I can answer for that, because I have gone through all the
books of the Company very recently.

210 ROYAL COMMISSION.

CLOTHWORKERS' COMPANY.

Deputation THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Cloth

from workers' Company : —

Clothworkers'

Company. Mr. Edward Gregory (Master).

Mr. W. H. Townsend (Warden).

Mr. J. Bazley White }

Mr. James Wyld > (Assistants), and

Mr. John Neate )

Mr. Owen Roberts (Clerk).

CHAIRMAN to Mr. Townsend : We have your return and your
statement ; if there is anything else by which you wish to supplement
that statement the Commission are perfectly willing to hear it ?

Perhaps the statement would be taken as read, my Lord, as part of
my evidence.

If you please.

There is one inaccuracy, if I may say so, which I wish to correct if
your Lordship will permit me to do so. It is in the sixth page, five
lines from the bottom. It is the case of the Attorney-General against
the Haberdashers' Company. The reference is given wrongly to the
fourth Brown's Chancery Cases ; the case referred to should have been
stated as in the first Mylne and Keen's Eeport, page 420, before Lord
Brougham.

Is there any other correction that you wish to make 1

None other, I think.

Is there anything you wish to add to the statement you have laid
before the Commission ?

I think not, my Lord.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Can you tell the Commission in round figures
what percentage is spent on education and charity by the Company ?

In a series of years or in the year 1880, do you mean ?

Whichever is most convenient to yourself.

I think I can tell the Commission in general terms. We have taken
three periods, 1802, 1842, and 1880, the last year to which the returns
are made up. Speaking roughly, the total income of the Company in
1802, the corporate income and the trust income, amounted to 10,000/.
Of that sum the sum of 2700?. was the income of strictly trust pro-
perty. That being deducted would leave 7300/. as the amount of the
corporate income. Out of that, the sum of 2300Z. or thereabouts was
spent in what we may call voluntary charity or benevolence, and
5000/. was spent in the management and the expenses of the Company
generally. That would be a proportion spent in what I may call
voluntary charity and benevolence of rather less than one -third of the
corporate income of the Company.

That is in addition to the amount spent of course out of the trust
property ?

Yes ; that I put on one side. That is, of course, strictly allocated to
the trust, and is applied accordingly. Then in 1842, as I understand,
the total income of the Company had increased to 20,OOOJ. It had, in
fact, doubled. Of that sum, the sum of 6000/. was the amount of the
trust property income. That had rather more than doubled in the forty
years. Deducting that from the 20,OOOZ. would leave 14,000/. Of that

LONDON CITY LIVER? COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 211

40007. was spent for the purposes of voluntary charity and benevolence, Deputation
leaving the sum of 10,0007., that being 10,0007. for the management {™™, ,

and expenses of the Company generally. That again would have been a Company. ^
proportion of rather less than one-third applied for the purpose of
voluntary charity out of the corporate income of 14,0007. Going to
1880, the total net income of the Company had increased to about 45,3107.
Of that the income of the trust property had increased to about 11,3107.,
which being deducted from the other, would leave 34,0007. Of that
20,0007. was applied for the purposes of voluntary charity, leaving
14,0007. for the expenses of the general management of the Company.
The proportion therefore of the corporate income which was applied for
general charitable purposes in the year 1880 had increased so as to be
very nearly two-thirds of the corporate income of the Company, and
that proportion has still further increased in the two years which have
elapsed since 1880. Thus we may say, in round terms, that of corporate
income about two-thirds are applied for the purposes of charity, educa-
tion (general and technical), and other benevolent purposes, leaving an
outlay of about 14,0007. for the management and expenses of the
Company generally.

As the income has increased, have the Company largely increased
their expenditure on educational and charitable objects ?

'They have very largely increased their expenditure on education and
other charitable objects.

I think the Company held a very valuable estate in Ireland some
years ago ?

They did.

When they sold that did they impose any obligations on the purchaser
with reference to the maintenance of the charities and moneys for a
period of years 1

There was, I believe, no actual legal obligation imposed, but there was
an understanding with the purchaser to expend sums amounting, I
believe, to 242/. a year for the purposes of certain churches, schools,
schoolmasters, and so forth on the estate for a limited term. The pur-
chaser has complied with that obligation and has expended that amount
up to the present time as I am informed.

CHAIRMAN : What was the income of the estate ?

60007. was the rental.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : The Company, as you have said, has a large
income arising from trust property ; have they found that the obligations
under some of those trusts have become obsolete, and have they applied
for fresh schemes in order to render the trust funds more applicable to
the wants of the present day ?

Yes, they have done so in many instances, under schemeseither of the

Court of Chancery, or the Charity Commission, Some of those charities

were for loans and clothing, and have been diverted under the authority

of the Charity Commissioners for educational purposes in connection in

particular with the North London Collegiate and Camden School for

girls, in one inst ance, and in another for scholarships in connection with

elementary schools, and also in some degree for technical education.

Another — Hobby's — charity was for the benefit of prisoners for debt,

and that had become obsolete. That again under the authority of the

Charity Commissioners has been diverted largely to educational and

modernized charitable purposes. In other instances that has been done,

and a great many of our charities, I think, are now either administered

under a decree of the Court of Chancery, or under schemes framed at

our instigation by the Charity Commissioners. I may say, the whole of

our trust personal estate, consisting of divers funds and securities, is, I

p 2

212

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Clothworkers'
Company.

think, almost without exception vested in the official trustee of charities
under the direction of the Charity Commissioners.

Have the Company large funds for the relief of the poor members —
freemen ?

Some of the strictly charitable funds are applicable to those pur-
poses, but they supplement them very largely out of their own corporate
funds.

Do the Company find that they have a sufficient number of urgent
and necessitous cases of poverty arising among their own body to absorb
the funds which were left for the poor of the Company ?

Yes, I consider that they do. The applications are pressing and
numerous, taken in connection with the age of the people and their
means. Some of the trust charity funds are specially devoted to that
purpose, as I have said.

In regard to Lambe's Chapel, formerly in the City. Practically the
Company removed the old chapel, and built a new church in a populous
neighbourhood 1

They built a new church in a populous neighbourhood where it was
more wanted, and that they did out of their corporate property.

How many years ago is it since the Company first subscribed towards
technical education1?

It began to take up the question in 1870. In 1876 I think it took
the initiative in establishing the City and Guilds' Technical Institute,
to which it subscribes very largely.

Were the Clothworkers' Company the first Company to subscribe to
that1?

They were the first Company. It was they (as I think the Lord
Chancellor, Lord Selborne, mentioned in his evidence before the Com-
mission) who took the active lead in the matter ; indeed, if I might be
permitted to say so, Mr. Mundella, speaking in our Hall in the year
1881, said, when he first became interested in that question, which
was sixteen years ago, the first persons that gave him any assistance at
all were the Clothworkers' Company.

Without going into detail, can you tell the Commission roughly how
much money you contributed last year towards technical education in
London and the provinces ?

We contribute between 8000/. and 9000J. a year.

Have you a large school in Kent, at Sutton Valence 1

Yes, we have a large school at Sutton Valence.

How many boys do you educate 1

About 100 in the school itself.

Do they get a collegiate education ?

I may perhaps mention that we were constituted a distinct corporation
of that school by a charter of Queen Elizabeth as a grammar school,
and Latin is taught there ; therefore it is a classical school.

I think that was a gift of Lambe's, was it not ?

That was a gift of Lambe's.

Have the Company supplemented the funds left by Lambe out of
their corporate income ?

The endowment of the school is very small indeed. I think the
actual endowment only amounted to about 301. a year, and thinking that
the education of the school might be rather above the class of small
fanners and so forth of the neighbourhood, we give that 30/. a year to
the National school there, which admits boys of all classes without
any religious distinction, and 201. to the British school there ; and we
give to the school proper upwards of 1000/. a year out of our own
corporate income. We rebuilt the school some years ago (in 1864, I

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 218

think), at a cost of about 8000/. or 10,000/., and a further addition Deputation
in 1876 cost about the same.

I think this Company have also a school at Peel, in the Isle o
Man, have they not ?

Yes, they have.

Is that supported largely out of the corporate income ?

Very largely indeed. It was founded under the will of Philip
Christian.

Can you tell the Commission how many members you have on your
court ?

About forty.

Do you find that number larger or smaller than you think sufficient
to do the business ?

I do not think it is larger than it ought to be to do the business
properly. The members attend and give very great attention to the
subjects brought before them. There is a great deal of work connected
with the administration of the Company and its charities, and there are
men of different classes and rank in the court, and of different attain-
ments, and I think that their experience in their various branches of
business and professions and private life are very valuable indeed on the
questions broug ht before them. I do not think that the number of
the court is anyimpediment.

Do you think that the Company would be as efficiently conducted if
there were twenty members on the court instead of forty ?

I cannot say that, but I do not think that the number of forty is
inconveniently large, and we do get the benefit of the various experience
and attainments of the different members.

Of course the forty cost double what the twenty would ?

No doubt that does involve an increased cost.

Are the whole of your trust funds administered without making any
charge against the trust for management ?

The whole of the trust funds are administered free of any charge what-
ever to the charites, there is no charge at all, we do not even accept the
five per cent. alloAved by the Court of Chancery and the Charity Com-
missioners as receivers. We pay the whole expense of the management
of the trusts out of our own corporate income.

Have you, in your statement to the Commission, made some suggestion
in reference to an alteration of the Charitable Trusts Act ?

I may say we have been anxious to avail ourselves as largely as
possible of the Charity Commission. We have full confidence in them :
we have always gone to them in difficulty : we have put several of our
charities under their revision — many were already under the Court of
Chancery ; and we should be quite willing that the powers of that body
should be increased somewhat in the way (if we might suggest) indicated
by Mr Longley in his evidence before the Commission. For instance,
both Mr. Hare and Mr. Longley mentioned the fetter or limit of 501. ;
if the property of a charity exceeds that amount they are deprived of
taking the initiative without the consent of the trustees of the charity.
That is an impediment, and we should think that that limit might very
well be done away with, subject to reasonable and necessary limitations
and safeguards. Of course we are only a deputation from the court of
the Company, and we cannot go beyond our powers, but in other respects
I think I may say that we should be quite willing that the jurisdiction of
the Charity Commissioners should be increased, safeguards being pro-
vided as was done, I think, by the Bill (amended in the House of Lords,
to a certain extent) which was last introduced into Parliament in 1880,
I think. To some extension of the powers to the Charity Commissioners

214 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation we should most willingly accede, and I think that it would be very
from beneficial to charities generally.

Clothworkers* jj^ ^y jarge part of ^he Company's property been acquired, by
bequest or otherwise, during the present century 1

Some part has been, of course ; the devises of land were made princi-
pally before the eighteenth century, but there have been some, West's
and others, since.

That was a trust bequest ?

Principally trust bequest.

I mean gifts or bequests for the benefit of the Corporation ?

There was the one^to which attention has been a good deal drawn,
Mr. Thwaytes' bequests. He made two bequests, one of 20,000/. to
found a charty for the blind (which sum is now represented by an in-
vestment standing in the name of the public trustee of charities, and is
administered under the Charity Commissioners), and the other of 20,000/.
further " to be used in a way to make the Company comfortable."

How do you pend that ?

I was going to explain that. A good deal has been said about it I
observe in the evidence, and it has been much commented upon. The
way in which it is spent is this. The charitable bequest we have largely
supplemented out of our own funds so as to admit of pensions to a larger
number of the blind than the 20,OOOZ. (less legacy duty) which he left
for that purpose would admit of. The income of the other 20,OOOJ. is
applied partly in payment of one of the dinners of the Company which
is held on the first Wednesday in January in every year in commemora-
tion of Mr. Thwaytes. That does not exhaust by any means the income
of the legacy, and the remainder of that income is used in supplementing
the blind pensions and for our general corporate purposes. The sum is
invested in a way to produce a good income, and the balance of the in-
come, after paying for this dinner, is applied as I have said.

Do not the Company give very large sums of money in payment of
exhibitions and scholarships at the colleges and many of the high-class
schools 1

Yes, many exhibitions both to Oxford and Cambridge and King's
College, and to other colleges and schools for young men and women.

Has that been done for some years ?

That has been done for some years.

Do the Company receive reports of the method in which it works 1

They receive the examiners' reports from the Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge. In addition to that, I may mention that we have for
the poorer class of students unattached exhibitions now both at Oxford
and Cambridge, all which are given irrespective of religious opinions.
In addition to that, we have also admissions to the North London
Collegiate and Camden School for girls, and scholarships for competition
among the public elementary schools of the metropolis, so as to get hold of
any children who show any considerable aptitude. Some of the girls get to
the North London and Camden College, and then if they distinguish
themselves there they can be possibly passed on to the colleges at Somer-
ville Hall, Oxford, or Girton or Newnham College, Cambridge, to which
we largely subscribe, and to which we are increasing our subscriptions,
and from which colleges wo get returns of the conduct of girls that we
send there.

May I ask, are the Company quite satisfied that they are doing good
and increasing good by the payments they make for the higher educa-
tion of young men and young women ?

They consider so, and the reports confirm that.

Have they increased from year to year their payments in that direc-
tion?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 215

They have been doing so. Deputation

SIR N. M. DE ROTHSCHILD : You say you would like to see the powers fr«m
of the Charity Commissioners extended, and that you put your own Clothworkers'
charities under the Charity Commissioners ; perhaps you would not mind
telling the Commission what advantage you think would arise to the
public from further interference by the Charity Commissioners with
other Companies. Do you think that their charities would be better
managed 1

I may say that we have thought the Charity Commissioners' assis-
tance useful. Probably the Charity Commissioners would require to bo
strengthened in some way ; but we think that the charities are very well
administered under their supervision, and some of us think it would
be a proper thing that the charities of the country generally should be
brought more under their control.

Do you think then that the Charity Commissioners are better judges
of the charity objects than the courts of the Companies 1

I will not say that, but they are a public body entrusted with the con-
trol of charities, and we find that they do not interfere improperly with
us. "We submit our accounts to them, and if any change of investment
or anything of that sort is required we find that they accede to our pro-
posals as far as possibly can be done. In some instances if they do not
approve they say so, but as a general rule they fall in with what is pre-
sented to them if they think it reasonable and we think that it is desir-
able. Of course we have no power to alter these obsolete charities with-
out the sanction either of the Court of Chancery or of the Charity Com-
missioners, and we find that it is satisfactory that such of them as are
obsolete or useless should be altered by means of a well-considered
scheme drawn up under the immediate supervision of the Charity Com-
missioners and carried out accordingly.

SIR EICHARD CROSS : Are you speaking of trust funds only, or trust
and corporate funds 1

Trust funds only, certainly. I merely referred to charities. Both Mr.
Hare and Mr. Longley expressed their opinion that they had nothing to
do with corporate property under the Charity Commission. I was
merely alluding to the strictly charitable trusts which are committed to
our care.

CHAIRMAN : There are also two questions which I should just like to
have an explanation upon. Are those funds which have been called trust
funds derived from property, the whole income of which is expended on
the trust purposes, or only a certain portion of which is expended, the
increment going to you ?

In most cases it is the whole income of a particular charity.

You make the payment and take the difference ?

In some, but in the latter case, where there has been a charge on the
property for charitable purposes with the surplus given to the Company,
we have redeemed, under the sanction of the Charity Commissioners, the
charge, and the sums paid by us for the redemption of that charge are
now invested in consols or some other stock in the name of the official
trustee of charities, and administered in that way ; we have done that very
largely for many years past now. Wherever we had a property charged by
the will that devised it with a sum applicable to charity and subject thereto,
the surplus given to ourselves, I think in almost every instance we have
redeemed that charge under the sanction of the Charity Commissioners,
and as approved by them.

Then the statement that you do not take the five per cent, for
managing these charities applies to all ?

Yes, to all. We do not take it at all.

216 BOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation As to this 20,000/., you say the income goes to a dinner in com-
from memoration of Mr. Thwaytes, and then for general corporate purposes,

including other dinners, I suppose 1

It goes into the exchequer of the Company generally, and is applied as
I have before stated.

It goes into the 14,000?. ?

It would go into the 14,000?. or, rather, it goes into the 34,000?., and
so much of it as is applied in augmenting the pensions of the blind falls
into the 20,000?., and the rest of it faUs into the 14,000?.

MB. JAMES to Mr. Owen Roberts (Clerk of the Clothworkers' Com-
pany) : I believe you were mainly instrumental in establishing the City
and Guilds' Technical Institute ?

I was concerned in establishing the Technical Institute as Clerk of the
Clothworkers' Company. The movement of technical education origin-
ally arose from the invitation of the Society of Arts instituting examina-
tions in connection with the annual series of exhibitions at South
Kensington, and when the turn of cloth manufacture came, the Cloth-
workers' Company first gave a prize of 100 guineas for the encouragement
of the examinations in connection with the cloth trade, and afterwards
put themselves into communication with Colonel Donnelly and others on
the subject of technological examinations and technical education
generally, more especially in connection with the cloth industry. They
afterwards obtained a conference at Clothworkers' Hall consisting of the
mayors of various corporate towns and Presidents of Chambers of Com-
merce of the towns in the West of England, Yorkshire, Glasgow, and
other places where the textile industries are the staple industries of the
district, and took their advice as to the best way of promoting a system
of technical education in connection with the industries of the various
localities. That matter has grown gradually, and now the Company
have schools or classes, independently of the City and Guilds of London
Institute, in almost all the centres of the clothworking industry in York-
shire and the West of England ; they have also subsidized a technical
weaving school in Glasgow.

But the one central institute up to the present time has been in
Finsbury, has it not ?

I am speaking of the Clothworkers' Company's action in technical
education. Then in 1876 the Clothworkers' Company took counse!4with
the Drapers' Company, who also had shown an interest in the question,
and availing ourselves of the fact that at that time Lord Selborne was
Master of the Mercers' Company, a scheme was submitted to him, and
he expressed his cordial approval of it, and through his intervention a
combined movement of the guilds was then brought about for the estab-
lishment of technical education in a general sense, distinct from the
clothworking industry, but including it.

That is the movement which eventually proposes to establish the large
central college at South Kensington, is it not 1

That was one of the objects, but the great object of the central
institution is not to teach the application of science and art to the
ordinary workmen, the rank and file, and there always must be
rank and file, but to teach the men who are picked out from
among them as the leaders in intelligence, and whom we hope to
make into efficient foremen or managers, and above all into efficient
teachers, for trade schools throughout the kingdom. These men will
come from every part of the kingdom, and will not be drawn from the
industrial classes of London alone, or even to any great extent, and even
the London men will in all probability be for the most part picked men
supported by exhibitions, and not, while students of the Central Insti-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 217

tution, engaged in journey work. We found when we established our Deputation
dyeing school at Leeds that we could not in this country find a teacher ; [f,011^ , ,
there was no technically qualified teacher of dyeing. We found the company
same difficulty wherever we founded schools. By the advice of Profes-
sor Huxley, and with the concurrence of scientific opinion, it was
thought absolutely necessary before any movement of technical education
could obtain a hold in the country that there should be a normal training
school to supply technical teachers in the same way as the normal train-
ing schools at Battersea and elsewhere supply the elementary teachers,
and now the universities are recognizing that teaching involves not only
the possession of knowledge, but is a profession, and like any other pro-
fession requires special preparation.

What post does Mr. Magnus hold ?

Mr. Magnus is the director and secretary of the Guilds' Institute.

That is the Institute in Finsbury ?

He is director and secretary of the Institute as a whole. He holds
also in connection with it, temporarily, the function of director of studies
in the Finsbury College. Probably he will also, when the institution at
South Kensington comes into operation, assume some such position there ;
but that is not settled.

And Mr. Magnus is also a member, I think, of the Commission upon
Technical Education at the present time 1

Yes, it was thought exceedingly desirable that he should obtain that
experience (which, conjoined with his opportunities as director of the
Guilds' Institute, I suppose would make his qualifications in regard to
technical education almost unique in this country) by going about with
that Commission to various countries abroad. His experience will be
most valuable, and it has been found so already.

Can you tell me what contribution the Clothworkers' Company make
to this movement 1

We give 30001. a year; but we have also paid 10,000/. for the Build-
ing Fund of the Central Institute, and of the Finsbury College ; and we
hope to establish, as time goes on, trade schools in various parts of
London ; also to supplement local effort wherever we find there is a
tendency towards technical education.

The effort to raise the money among the other Companies for this In-
stitute was originated in the first instance by the exertions of the Cloth-
workers' Company, or to a great extent, was it not 1

~No doubt the Clothworkers' Company took a foremost part, but the
Drapers', the Fishmongers', the Goldsmiths', and the Mercers' Companies
also took part in it. I should not wish to claim more than our proper
due in the matter. We found all our fellow-guildsfolk equally anxious
to enter into the movement as soon as they found that technical educa-
tion was a matter that could be worked out adequately in practice. As
soon as they found a proper scheme could be formulated, other
Companies showed themselves as anxious as we were to carry the matter
out.

APOTHECARIES' SOCIETY.

THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Apothe- Deputation

caries' Society : — from

Apothecaries'

Mr. J. Saner, Master, and Society.

Mr. J. E. Upton, Clerk.

218

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Apothecaries'
Society.

CHAIRMAN to Mr. Saner : You represent the Society of Apothecaries,
I understand 1

Yes.

You have sent us a statement upon which you are prepared to answer
any questions, I suppose ?

Certainly.

That is the object of your coming here to-day, I presume ?

Certainly.

No one, I see, can be a member of your Society who is not an
apothecary ?

No,

And under the powers of your first Act of Parliament you have become
one of the licensing bodies examining persons qualified to become
apothecaries ?

Yes.

That is under the Act of 1815 ?

Yes.

Was that your first Act ?

That was our first Act.

Then you have occupied yourselves a good deal in securing to the
public the use of unadulterated drugs, I understand ?

Very largely.

You say that you have done that by means of a body created out of
yourselves, and allowed to use your name, but placed under your control ;
what body is that ?

The body is defunct now. A certain number of our members were
allowed to subscribe and form themselves into a body to carry on the
trade. It was what they called the United stock, and they carried
on the trade until within about three years ago, when, in consequence
of a change of business, the trade failed in a measure, and it was all
wound up ; now the Society carry it on on their own account at the
present time.

Then what is your connection with Apothecaries' Hall 1

That is the place where we transact all our business affairs entirely.
The trade and the Court of Assistants all meet there.

I see also you state that you were the first of the medical bodies to
institute an examination in classics, mathematics, and science to test the
liberal education of candidates seeking to become medical men ?

Yes, we first instituted that examination ourselves, but now it is very
largely followed by all the medical bodies.

You obtained an amendment of your Act of 1815 some years ago ?

Yes, in 1874, in order that we could elect a better class of examiners
by opening it to all physicians and surgeons as well as to our own
body.

And you have founded scholarships in medicine and surgery ?

Yes.

And also appointed a lecturer on botany ?

Yes.

Then, putting it generally, your contention is that your Society have
active duties to perform, and are actually performing them to the general
satisfaction of the public 1

Quite so. I do not know anything that is left undone under our
charter or those two Acts of Parliament. I believe every point is rigidly
carried out to the letter, and, more than that, we have endeavoured to
improve in every way to suit the requirements of the times in which we
live.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 219

Are you still the possessors of the Botanic Garden at Chelsea ? Deputation

Yes, we cannot part with it. We have 51. a year to pay to Lord from
Cadogan to keep hold of it, that is all Apothecaries'

You are bound to maintain it for its present purpose 1 ie y*

Yes.

ME. FIBTH : The Company is now trading in drugs, I understand ?

Yes.

Then you are a trading Company 1

Yes, we are a trading Company.

I understood you to say that no one could become a member of your
Company unless he was an apothecary, was that so 1

That is so.

Then have not you admission by patrimony ?

Yes, but the person admitted by patrimony is an apothecary also.

MR. UPTON : There are two instances to the contrary. Persons could
be admitted, but as a rule the Company have admitted nobody but
apothecaries with two exceptions.

To MR. SANER : You laid down the law or rule, as I understand it,
stringently that they must be apothecaries 1

Yes, we do so.

According to your charter ?

Yes, that is so. "We have only two exceptions where they are not
apothecaries.

Is your charter different in that respect from that of any other Com-
pany, so far as you know ?

So far as I know, it is.

And I notice that you expend on the Chelsea garden 5251. out of an
income of 2414?. Is anything else spent in the direction of the trade in
any way 1

We have a curator who receives 100Z. a year.

That is included in the 241 4Z. ?

Yes. I was explaining how we spent so much. It is keeping the
gardens up altogether. The curator has 100Z. a year, and so on.

But the rest is spent in keeping the Company up, I think, so far as I
see. Do you consider your right of search still existing ?

Well, I suppose it still exists, but we do not use it, because the
apothecaries' shops have so altered.

But you did use it down to the present generation 1

Yes.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : You were originally united with the Barbers'
Company, were you not ?

The Grocers'.

And they took over the bulk of the properties, I think ; when you
separated from them, you almost had to begin again 1

MR. UPTON : Yes, they were the original Company, and we were
dissociated from them.

You are a great public benefit, I believe 1

MR. SANER : We consider that we have done a great deal of good
since 1815.

CHAIRMAN : In any case there is no mistake about the fact that
you do perform certain functions intrusted to you by Act of
Parliament 1

Certainly we do a great many.

MR. PELL : I see you continue the system of apprenticeship ?

Yes, but, unfortunately, we have very few apprentices come up now ;
the times are so altered now that very few apprentices come to us.

220

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Apothecaries'
Society.

How many have you apprenticed within the last three years 1

Well, I suppose not more than eight or ten.

Who are those lads apprenticed to 1

To general practitioners always.

Are they supposed to require any knowledge beyond that of mixing
drugs and compounding drugs ?

Yes, now they do particularly. Formerly their particular occupation
was mixing drugs, because the general practitioners compounded and
sent out their own medicines instead of giving prescriptions, but now
they do not do that so much.

This is one form of medical education ?

Yes.

Is there any advantage in that over the education which a medical
man might derive without apprenticeship 1

No, I think not. Of course he is only apprenticed really for the
purpose of becoming a member of the Company ; he is not apprenticed
for the purpose of becoming a medical man.

But supposing he was apprenticed to a medical man and he after-
wards abandoned that particular line of life, would he then become a
member of your Company, or could he be admitted ?

The question would arise whether he could claim by patrimony ?

He would have to fall back upon patrimony ?

Yes. We took advice some little time ago as to whether anybody
could claim admission who was not actually an apothecary.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : I believe you are celebrated for the sale of
genuine drugs ?

That has been our pride all along.

And you supply a very large number now 1

Yes, to hospitals and dispensaries.

You are really most useful in your generation ?

That is so ; we have prided ourselves upon that all along.

NEEDLEMAKERS' COMPANY.

Deputation
from Needle-
makers'
Company.

THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Needle-
makers' Company : —

Dr. Eamsay, and
Major Charles Harding.

CHAIRMAN to Dr. Eamsay: You attend here as representing the
Ueedlemakers' Company, I understand ?

We do.

I have been told that your object in coming to give evidence here
is to contradict certain statements which have been made in the evidence
which has been put before us ?

Just so.

Will you tell me what are the statements to which you refer ?

MAJOR HARDING : Those in regard to the Company having been
resuscitated for the purpose of advocating particular political views.

CHAIRMAN : It is the fact, is it not, that it was in a very moribund

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES5 VINDICATION. 221

condition, and that it has lately been revived by a considerable ad- Deputation
dition of members ? from Needle-

I may explain that the circumstances were these. Some of us had ™akers
it in contemplation to join a City Company when the opportunity
offered, and we heard of this Company, which we joined simply with
a view to being members of a City Company. Opportunities presented
themselves for inducing a number of our friends to join, but without any
notion of political views whatever.

You simply wished to belong to a City Company, and you selected this
one as one that might be revived 1

Yes, at a moderate cost.

Is there anything else that you wish to put before us 1

DR. RAMSAY : I think I may as well inform your Lordship, and the
other members of the Commission, that we had no object in view in refer-
ence to obtaining political votes by reason of resuscitating this Company.

As a matter of fact, the Company was on the point of dissolution, was
it not, when this effort was made to revive it 1

It was on the point of dissolution.

It was a question whether the property should be divided 1

Decidedly.

MR. PELL : I see in the return under the head of technical education
that your Company promised 250/. in five instalments to the City and
Guilds of London Technical Institute ; have they not been asked to pay
that?

We have paid the instalments every year.

You promised a subscription ?

As soon as ever we were formed we set about to see whether we could
advance the interests of technical education in any way from the very
first time of our reconstructing the Company ; and we found that at Red-
ditch in "Worcestershire the needle-making had concentrated itself there,
and we set about to see if we could advance it, arid offered prizes and
various inducements. At first we thought it would be a good thing ;
however, the jealousies among the masters of the trade were such that we
were advised not to try it again, otherwise we contemplated giving prizes
for a series of years.

MAJOR HARDING : Anyhow the whole sum has been contributed up to
the present time. The Company had no funds, and we subscribed funds
to put the Company into a state of prosperity.

MR. FIRTH : There were no funds you say at the time it was resusci-
tated 1

DR. RAMSAY : Scarcely any.

Therefore there would not have been any funds to divide in case it
had come to an end 1

Yes, there would have been. There were some funds to divide, but
not of any great amount.

How many members were there at this time ?

A good many members.

At the time that it was resuscitated ?

MAJOR HARDING : I should think about twenty or thirty.

Can you tell me without difficulty what your object was in resuscitating
this Company ?

I had no object myself, being one of the first to enter that Company,
to resuscitate it at all. I was only too desirous, for my own part, to join
a City Company, and I happened to mention incidentally my desire to
an amiable friend who would have been with me to-day but for some
misfortune in not sending him due notice. In fact, I spoke to him about

222

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from Needle,
makers'
Company.

it, and he thought that he would like also to be associated with a Com-
pany, and I was recommended to join the Tin Plate Workers' Com-
pany, but subsequently I was told of the ISTeedlemakers' Company.
The mere ambition to be a member of a City Company because one's
interest lay generally in the City was the motive which animated me,
and we found among many of our friends a desire to join us in member-
ship.

But what advantage did you propose to yourselves ]

I do not see what advantage we have got out of it, or are likely to get
out of it, excepting the ordinary pleasurable idea of being associated with
a City Company.

Did you make application to the Court of Aldermen to have the livery
increased ?

Yes.

In what form was that power given ? Did the Court issue an order
increasing your livery ?

Yes.

Did you appear before them ?

Certainly.

By petition ?

DB. KAMSAY : In the usual manner.

The Court of Aldermen have a control over these Companies, then,
according to your experience ?

Yes.

Were you aware that this Company, when you joined it in this way,
was governed by charters controlling the trade, and was subject to the
government of the City by charters ?

MAJOR HARDING : Yes.

Were you aware that it was bound to instruct and examine people in
this trade ?

DR. EAMSAY : Quite so.

Did you not consider that you had any liability in that direction at
the time that you joined ]

We were quite aware of that.

MAJOR HARDING : We had, but the question was as to exercising
it. Of course, the question of exercising rights is a thing to be advised
upon.

Did you know that apprentices to this Company had to be tested ?

Certainly, we knew the terms of the charter.

As a matter of fact, as an incident to your membership, you have a
vote for the City, have you not ?

That is an incident, but it need not be an incident, because votes are
regulated, in the case of most of us, by actual rates and rents, and
so on.

Is there any other advantage, but that incident to membership, in the
Needlemakers' Company 1

I should think not, not to any of the members that constitute that
Company, certainly not to the new ones, and I do not think there can be
any to the old ones.

MR. ALDERMAN COTTON : You answered the learned Commissioner
just now to the effect that the Court of Aldermen had a control over the
City Companies. Beyond allowing you to increase the members of your
livery they have no other control over you, have they 1

DR. KAMSAY : Certainly not.

Then you answered the question correctly when you answered it in
that way ?

MAJOR HARDING : I thought so,

J.T-1

> "Wardens.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 223

The Commission will understand thoroughly that they have no control Deputation
over you except the right to increase your members 1 fr°™ Needle-

DR. RAMSAY : None whatever. We were informed that it was neces-
sary, if we Avished to increase the number of our members, that we should
make an application to the Court of Aldermen. We did so on the usual
form, and they gave us that increase. I believe some observation
was made that we were manufacturing faggot votes. We repudiated that
at once, because we had no intention of manufacturing any votes at all,
but of advancing the interests of our Company, which we resuscitated.

In your efforts to promote technical education in the interests of your
own trade you signally failed?

We failed, inasmuch as we found the jealousies amongst the manufac-
turing needlemakers of Redditch in Worcestershire were such that we
were advised to postpone any further offer of prizes for a year or two
until we saw how it got on.

STATIONERS' COMPANY.

THE following gentlemen attended as a deputation from the Stationers' Deputation
Company : — from

Stationers'

Mr. J. J. Miles, Master. Company.

Mr. John Miles

Mr. C. Layton

Mr. C. R. Rivington, Clerk.

CHAIRMAN to Mr. J. J. Miles : I believe you come here as representing
the Stationers' Company?
Yes.

I believe there are some facts which you wish to lay before the
Commission ?

Yes. If you would allow me, I think it would save the time of the
Commission if I ask our clerk to reply to the questions. He has all the
information so much better at his fingers' ends.

To MB. RIVINGTON : I understand that you are prepared to show that
there are some peculiarities in the constitution of your Company ?
I am.

You have duties imposed upon you by Act of Parliament, is not that
so?

Under the Copyright Act.
Will you state what those duties are ?

I may mention that that is not the special peculiarity of our Company.
I must go back, if you will allow me, to a date before the incorporation,
but I will not keep your Lordship many minutes. The Stationers' Com-
pany was incorporated in 1556, but it had existed for upwards of a
century or a century and a half before as a society or brotherhood, con-
sisting exclusively of persons employed in the production of other than
official books. The members were printers, and they had a common stock.
Each member put a certain sum of money into a common stock ; the
work was divided amongst the members, and the productions sold at a
profit, and a certain portion of the profit was distributed amongst the
members of the Company. In 1556 the Company was incorporated
and clothed with certain powers as to the controlling of printing and
books issued. Then, of course, the Company became a corporation, but
the old body existed, and trading has existed and been carried on separate

224

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Deputation
from

Stationers'
Company.

from the Company as a corporation from that time until the present day,
and it is continued, so that in the Stationers' Company there are really two
bodies ; there is the corporation of the Stationers' Company and the
partners in the stock, which is called an English stock. Formerly there
were several stocks ; there was a Latin stock, an Irish stock, a Ballad
stock, and a Bible stock. The stock existing now is an English stock.
About 1601 the Company obtained a grant from the king giving
them the exclusive right of printing certain publications, and that was
amalgamated with the English stock. This stock has a capital of between
41.000/. to 42,000/., which is held amongst 306 members of the Com-
pany. The capital is divided into certain shares, which are held just in
the same way as the shares of ordinary companies, and the profits
of the stock and property belonging to the stock are appropriated thus :
A certain amount is distributed amongst the poor of the Company (it
used to be 100Z. a year, but now it is 400?. a year), and after paying
that the nett profit is divided by way of dividend, which is paid each
half year. The members of the Company under the byelaws have a
power of disposing of the shares to their widows, but to no other persons.
Upon the death of a person who has not disposed of his share to his
widow the amount is paid out, and an election takes place among the
members of the Company to that vacant share. If the share is be-
queathed to the widow, the widow can take the share and enjoy the
profits during her life, and upon her death that share is then disposed of
in the same way as I mentioned before.

SIR SYDNEY WATERLOW : Then, as a matter of fact, each member sub-
scribes capital towards what is called the English stock just as in the
case of a joint stock company ?

Not each member of the Company, but each partner. The members
in the trading stock are only a certain number of the liverymen.

And the capital thus raised by that select number of the liverymen is
a trading capital used in printing and publishing books at the present
time t

It is.

And that monopoly enjoyed by the Company from the charter granted
by the king was a monopoly for printing Bibles and almanacks ?

Almanacks and primers.

Of course that monopoly has ceased many years ?

That monopoly has ceased many years.

The Company still continue operations 1

They still continue operations and publish school books.

Can you tell the Commissioners what is, in round numbers, the
amount of corporate money beyond that belonging to the English stock 1

The money belonging to the corporation is all set out in the detailed
returns which I had the honour to submit to the Commissioners. The
property belonging to the English stock consists of this trading capital
and investment of certain profits which were accumulated and not wholly
distributed amongst the partners. At the time that the stamp duty was
repealed, a large sum of money was received by the Company, and that
was invested, and the produce of that was divided amongst the partners
as part of the profit.

Is the membership of the Company still limited to persons connected
with the trade 1

Exclusively to persons connected with the trade, and to persons born
free. So particular are the Company as to that, that if any application
is made from any person who is not a member of the trade, it is not
even submitted to the Court.

Is the Company practically carrying on at the present time all the
duties imposed upon it by the original charter ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 225

Yes. Of course the duties relating to the controlling of printing are Stationers'
obsolete at the present day, but the Company bind a very large number Company,
of apprentices, as many as between 100 and 200 a year; and those bind-
ings are all bond fide bindings, the apprentices actually serve their time
to printers or booksellers. The Company have the administration of the
charities, which are exclusively confined to members of their trade.
They have nothing to do with persons outside their trade with regard to
their charities. They have various duties under the Copyright Acts.
Indeed, there is now a Bill pending before the House of Commons to
increase those duties very considerably by requiring registration of all
engravings at Stationers' Hall.

Do the Company derive any profit as a Company from the fees taken
under the Copyright Act.

None at all. Far from deriving any profit, they are at a considerable
expense ; it is no pecuniary advantage to the Company.

MR. FIRTH : On the first page of your return, speaking of your
charter, which you say is destroyed, you say that it purported to
establish a corporation to control the printing and publication of books.
I think this Company was established by Queen Mary, apprehending, as
she says, much ill to the State and Holy Mother Church, and giving you
absolute control and sole power to print and publish books; is not
that so ?

It was incorporated.

Giving you the monopoly ?

At that time, certainly.

And under that monopoly you destroyed many thousands of books 1

A very large number.

As to almanacks of which you spoke, your almanack monopoly began,
I think, in the reign of James I. ?

Yes, that is so.

And that lasted for 150 years, I think?

Until the middle of the last century.

How many almanacks do you publish now 1

About twenty.

Old Moore's Almanack you publish, amongst the rest, I think ?

Yes.

And do you still continue your prophecies in Old Moore ?

No.

With respect to Stationers' Hall, do you consider that Stationers'
Hall carries out the object set out in the statute of George III., that it
tends to the greater encouragement of the production of literary works
of lasting benefit to the world ?

That is a matter of opinion.

I ask you your own opinion 1

It is a subject I have not considered.

You have not considered whether your own Stationers' Hall has that
effect 1

The Company perform all the duties cast upon it, I believe.

Is there an index or register kept at Stationers' Hall ?

There are four different registers kept there.

226

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Supplemen-
tary state-
ment on
behalf of
Fishmongers'
Company.

CHAPTER XI.

Memoranda of facts replying to misrepresentations of witnesses : — Supplementary
statement on behalf of the Fishmongers' Company — Memorial of the Gold-
smiths' Company — Observations of Sir Frederick J. Bramwell and Mr.
Prideaux on behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company — Memorial of the Skinners'
Company — A short historical account of the connection of the Livery Com-
panies of London with the county of Londonderry — Memorandum of the
Merchant Taylor's Company — Supplementary statements of the Salters' Com-
pany and of the Ironmongers' Company — Observations of the Cloth workers'
Company on the evidence of witnesses — Memoranda from the Barbers' Com-
pany, the Coachmakers' Company and the Homers' Company— Concluding
observations.

Supplementary statement on behalf of the Fishmongers' Company, pre-
sented to the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the City
of London Livery Companies.

IN replying to the invitation of her Majesty's Commissioners to offer
any remarks or further explanations which may appear to arise on the
evidence that has been given before the Commission, the Fishmongers'
Company and its governing body desire to avoid anything that might
appear to be recriminatory or to bear the aspect of harsh or personal com-
ment ; especially as it is sufficiently obvious, without detailed criticism,
that some of the witnesses have been misled by prejudice in many of
the statements made, and have not been guided solely by a regard to
public considerations.

It is alleged that the Companies, in their returns, have not disclosed
the full value of their respective properties. To this the Company reply
that, while they have rendered a full return of their income, they con-
sider that any endeavour to fix a hypothetical value on their property,
apart from a statement of the income derived from it, and of the out-
goings and mode of expenditure of the net proceeds, would have involved
special, needless, and very costly valuations, and would not have aided
the inquiries of the Commissioners. The rated value of the properties
for occupation obviously bears no^ relation to the Company's interests
therein, which in many cases are th*ose of ground landlords only. They
have desired to give every information in reference to the whole of their
property, as on every other subject of the Commissioners' inquiries.

On the general question of the Company's right to the absolute and
plenary possession and uncontrolled disposal of its corporate property, it
is sufficient simply to recall attention to the second paragraph of their
return already made, in which it is stated, with perfect accuracy, that no
part of it has been derived directly or indirectly from any public source,
but the whole from its own members or from other private sources.
What has been purchased has been paid for out of the Company's own
moneys. Where it has been acquired subject to any condition, the
condition has been fully and loyally performed.

On this subject a passing reference may be made to the clear opinion
expressed by the Lord Chancellor, when he appeared before the Com-
missioners as representing the City and Guilds Technical Institute ; also
to the series of decisions in the Court of Chancery in the cases relating to
the Company mentioned in page 3 of the Company's Return ; to the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 227

decisions in Attorney-General v. Wax Chandlers' Company (House of Fishmongers'
Lords, 1873, L. E. 6, App. 1), and Brown v. Dale (9 Ch. D. 78), and Company,
to the numerous cases in which, even where trusts, and not merely con-
ditions, were attached to the ownership, any surplus of property or in-
come has been held (where such trusts were limited), to belong to the
Company absolutely.

As respects many of the trusts confided to the Fishmongers' Company,
the objects of which are of a beneficial character, the Company have
made large additions to the trust property from their own funds.

In the case of Sir John Gresham's Grammar School at Holt, in Norfolk,
the Company have from time to time supplemented the trust funds,
especially for the purposes of rebuilding and repairs, the amount in
which the trust was indebted to the Company, at a not very distant date,
having been over 10,000?., and this notwithstanding the constant warn-
ings of the Charity Commissioners that the Company were doing this at
their own risk, and that they could in no case be permitted to apply any
part of the capital of the trust funds in repayment of their advances ; nor
any part of the trust income, except within a period of thirty years.

In the case of Quested's Trust and the other trusts for the almshouses
at Harrietsham, the income of which is only 108?. 10s. 4c?., the Com-
pany, from their own funds, supplement the income of the charity to
the extent of 300?. a year.

In the case of St. Peter's Hospital, Wandsworth, the Company, in the
year 1849, from their own funds, rebuilt the almshouses at a cost of
26,840/. ; and they spend annually in the support of this benefaction for
their own poor members 3800?. a year, although the yearly income of
the trust property is only 377?. 7s. 8d.

As an instance of the Company's desire to contribute largely for useful
public objects, it may be mentioned that in 1875 and the two following
years, they laid out above 15,000?. in erecting industrial dwellings for
artisans on a portion of their property in Wai worth.

The Company having been in its origin a trade guild, one of the main
objects of which was the government and protection of the members of
the mystery or industry, the hereditary right to membership (which
could not be and cannot be abrogated short of direct spoliation of private
interests), and the gradual, if slow, growth of the property of the
Company, have by degrees, and in the course of many centuries,
given increased prominence to its character as a benefit society.
Its income has, from time immemorial, been applied for the following
objects: — In furtherance of objects of interest to the trade, in the
comparatively few instances in which this has been practicable ; in
supervision of the markets and other places where fish is sold, and the
seizure, condemnation, and destruction of bad and unwholesome fish ; in
the support or temporary aid of its poorer members ; in pensions for the
siipport and education of the children of its members, if destitute or
insufficiently provided for ; in aid of the sick, helpless, and aged ; in
support of the Company's almshouses at Wandsworth, Bray, and
Harrietsham (not in doles of bread or money) ; in educational work and
exhibitions ; for objects of public charity and utility ; and in hospitality
and entertainments ; and more recently in the prosecution of offenders
against the various Acts of Parliament relating to the taking and sale of
fish, passed during the last few years; and in promoting technical
education.

No further explanation is probably needed unless in reference to the
expenditure on hospitality and entertainments, and this, it is believed,
can be fully justified, although it has been the subject of some hostile
criticism. It is in accordance with the usage and practice of the City

Q 2

228 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Fishmongers' Companies generally, as well as of the Corporation of London, and,
Company. being sanctioned by the immemorial usage and traditions of the Com-
pany, is, by strict presumption of law, in accordance with its charters
and a proper exercise of the powers of the governing body. It is further
matter of fair comment that all the members of the Company are in-
terested in the benefits derivable from the corporate property; that every
freeman of good character is eligible to the livery on payment of the
required fee ; and that, dividing the members roughty into two classes,
namely, those who need and those who do not need and would not
accept any pecuniary aid from the Company's funds — the former (the
needy) are by far the smaller body. Almost the only mode in which
the latter can derive any benefit or gratification from their membership
(apart from the possession of the municipal and parliamentary franchises)
is by partaking of the Company's hospitalities. The funds thus em-
ployed for the benefit of the larger are less than one-third of those
applied in assisting the smaller body. It may fairly be noticed, in
addition, that in a country where public hospitality to persons of dis-
tinction, native or foreign, hardly exists, except in the cases of the
London Corporation and the City Guilds, this is not without public
benefit, while strictly in accordance with ancient usage and tradition,
and at the same time affording frequent opportunities to statesmen and
politicians of eminence for an informal exposition of their political views
and intentions, often of great public interest and importance.

It has been alleged that the expenses of management are very large ;
but they are not excessive. The income of the Company is considerable,
derived from many sources, and its application distributed over a multi-
tude of objects, requiring great and minute care, and a large amount
of labour on the part of a skilled and capable staff. Every account and
payment is submitted to a strict audit. The attendance fees of members
of the court (the whole pecuniary benefit which they derive from the
Company) are less than the attendance fees of the directors of many, if
not of most, public companies of anything like equal importance, and
only represent time . and work honestly bestowed. The average amount
of the fees paid to the members of the court during the ten years, 1870
to 1879, has already been stated in the Company's Eetum (p. 41). From
this it appears that the average annual amount of each member's fees,
including the wardens, during that period, was 567. 14s. IQd.

A question has been raised as to the principle of selection adopted for
members of the court, and it has been stated that this is " quite a
" mystery." It is susceptible of very easy explanation. The members of
the court must be persons possessing qualifications as men of business ;
and when they become wardens, and especially when they succeed, in
rotation, to the office of prime warden of the Company, should be
qualified, socially, to conduct the public business of the Company, and
to receive and entertain guests of distinction. These considerations
render some selection, apart from mere seniority, essential, or at any rate
highly desirable. Great weight is attached to the claims of old family
association with the Company. In the instance of the elections on the
court of which complaint has been made (answer to Question 1218), the
gentlemen selected were born free of the Company, and their families
have been long associated with it, several of them having been members
of the court, three, at least, prime wardens, and some of them men of
high public and social position.

The statement that any compulsion has ever in modern times been
exercised on any person to become a member of the Company is destitute
of any foundation ; so is the statement that any one has ever been

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 229

threatened, on the part of the Company or its governing body, with Fishmongers'
being turned out of the guild. Company.

No clause against persons sleeping on the premises has ever been in-
serted in any lease granted by the Company.

THE COMPANY'S IRISH ESTATE.

The title of the Company to their Irish estate is derived under a deed
of grant of the 24th of October, 1618, referred to in page 4 of the Com-
pany's former return.

By that deed the Irish Society, " for and in consideration of a certain
" competent some of monie to them in hand paid," granted to the wardens
and commonalty of the Mistery of Fishmongers the manor of Walworth,
with its appurtenances (being the Company's Irish estate), " to hold
" to the said wardens and commonalty, their successors and assigns, for
" ever, to the only use and behoof of the said wardens and commonalty,
" their successors and assigns, for ever," with a covenant by the society
for the wardens and commonalty peaceably and quietly to possess and
enjoy the same " to their own use and uses for ever."

Prior to the date of this deed of grant, namely, on the 29th of March,
1613, King James I. had granted the Irish plantation, of which the
manor referred to formed a part, to the Irish Society thereby incorporated
subject to the performance by the Irish Society of certain conditions
necessary for the protection and advancement of the plantation. The ob-
jects and intentions of the grant were expressed in certain articles pub-
lished by the Privy Council (already referred to before the Commissioners),
which, among other things, provided against any part of the lands being
" demised at will only, but for years, for life, in tail, or in fee
" simple," against the grantees selling or demising their lands " to the
" mere Irish," or at all during five years from the date of the intended
grant, but declared that, after such five years, they should be entitled to
alien the same to all persons " except the mere Irish " — obviously now
an obsolete condition, although the only one that can now by any
possibility be deemed to subsist. All the other conditions determined
at the expiration of five years from the date of the Irish Society's
charter, and therefore prior to the date of the conveyance to the Fish-
mongers' Company.

It is, therefore, indisputable that no trust nor even condition attaches
to the Irish estate of the Fishmongers' Company, as held by them since
the 24th October, 1618, unless it were the obsolete condition before
referred to.

The Company, for many years after the purchase of the Irish estate,
from time to time let the whole on lease to successive single tenants.
The last of these leases is the only one to which it is now necessary to
refer. It was granted in 1747 for sixty- one years and three lives ; the
survivor of these lives was his Majesty King George III., on whose death,
in 1820, the Company entered into the direct management of their
estate.

The Company sent over to Ireland in that year a deputation of mem-
bers of the Court, who spent many weeks in investigating the condition
of the estate and the circumstances of the tenants.

The deputation obtained the advice of the most competent authorities •
in the neighbourhood, and made a full report, now in possession of the
Company.

The estate was re-let on leases for twenty-one years in accordance with
the valuations which the deputation had obtained, and on the recom-
mendations contained in their report, at a total rental of 74 181. 4s,

280 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Fishmongers' It is impossible to compare the new rents thus fixed with those which
Company. tiie tenants had been previously paying, as it appears from the report re-
ferred to that the Earl of Tyrone (the Company's lessee) had granted
leases to his Protestant tenants for the same term of years and the same
lives as he held the estate, but at large premiums.

The result of an examination of the documents in the possession of the
Company shows that the statement that the rents were quadrupled is
grossly exaggerated, and that the statement that they were arbitrarily
fixed without a valuation is misleading.

So far from the rents having been arbitrarily fixed without valuation,
a temporary letting for a year took place in order that the rental might be
fairly adjusted, and in 1822 leases for twenty-one years were granted and
accepted by the tenants at substantially the same rents ; these leases
continued until 1843.

In April, 1843, prior to the expiration of these leases, the Company
engaged the services of Messrs. Nolan and Co., surveyors of known
eminence in Londonderry, to re- value the estate.

In 1844, they reported on the letting value of each holding, and the
total of their valuations was 7637Z. 14s. lid., but, owing to the de-
pressed state of agriculture at the time, and the famine and distress in
Ireland, which rendered necessary the grant of assistance to the tenants
in remission of rents and otherwise, no systematic re-letting of the estate
took place, but the tenants continued to hold their farms on the basis
of the expired leases until 1852, when a deputation was appointed
to proceed to Ireland to make arrangements for the re-letting of the estate.

In pursuance of their report new leases for twenty-one years were
granted from 1851. At this re-letting, in view of the circumstances
above referred to, a considerable reduction was made from Messrs. Nolan's
valuation, and, notwithstanding that a large amount had been laid out by
the Company on the estate, the net rental reserved by the new leases,
after deducting the value of lands in hand and half the poor-rate paid by
the Company, was about 7000/. per annum only.

The last-mentioned leases expired in November, 1872, when Messrs.
Nolan again valued the estate, with a view to new leases being granted.

The gross amount of such valuation was 9507Z. 5s. 9d., but this amount
included 5s. per acre allowed by the Company to the tenants for all lands
which they had brought into cultivation during the previous leases, and
also an amount in respect of lands held in hand, woods, mountains, town-
parks, &c., not leased to tenants. It was also subject to deduction in re-
spect to half the county cess, formerly paid by the tenants, but then
first assumed by the Company, as well as half the poor-rate. After
making these allowances, which amount to about 2040/., the actual in-
crease in the present rental under the new leases is estimated to be less
than 5002. a year, and this increase is in a great measure due to the large
expenditure made by the Company on the estate since the previous leases
were granted, the interest on which is included in the rental.

On a careful comparison of the present net rental of the estate with the
net rental fixed at the time when the estate fell into the Company's hands
in 1820, it appears that there is but little actual difference between the
amounts.

As further evidence that the estate has been leased on moderate rents,
the Company append a statement showing the premiums for which lease-
hold interests of their tenants have from time to time been sold since
1857 :—

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION

231

Year.

Tenant.

Acreage.

Rent,
including
County
Cess and
Poor-Rate.

Premium paid by
Assignee.

Time the Lease
had to run.

(H o

fef
||

A. E. P.

£ s. d.

£ *. d.

1857

Cresswell .

11 0 2

600

145 0 0

24i

1859

Cherry

133 1 26

89 0 0

1190 0 0

isj

Patchell .

68 3 32

13 10 0

550 0 0

40J

1860

Hill ....

22 3 14

83 16 0

400 0 0

Collins

52 2 13

25 6 0

285 0 0

ll|

1862

Eakin

30 3 29

17 1 0

300 0 0

175

McLarry .

12 3 9

500

125 0 0

1863

Parkhill .

26 2 34

6 10 0

160 0 0

24£

1864

Breeson .

41 0 13

11 0 0

290 0 0

26k

Irwin ...

20 1 7

11 2 0

200 0 0

1865

Rosborough .

55 1 21

14 0 0

200 0 0

14*

Leslie . .,

91 1 35

26 0 0

600 0 0

McCormick .

30 1 4

13 15 0

280 0 0

20*

Longhery .

113 2 29

34 0 0

600 0 0

17|

1866

McLaughlin

24 0 5

7 10 0

105 0 0

Wilson

40 1 26

26 0 0

710 0 0

27*

Eakin

22 3 30

950

270 0 0

29£

1867

McGrath .

33 2 7

36 0 0

500 0 0

Blair.

25 0 6

14 10 0

400 0 0

27i

1868

Semple

597 3 31

30 0 0

280 0 0

Mallan . . .

41 0 12

13 0 0

450 0 0

34|

1869

Thorn

65 3 17

12 10 0

575 0 0

1870

Eakin

79 3 21

28 0 0

650 0 0

23|

Cochrane . . .

35 2 7

27 0 0

650 0 0

Shannon .

39 2 16

37 10 0

730 0 0

19k

1872

Brizzle .

47 2 27

14 3 0

467 0 0

exp.

Christy . .

40 1 10

12 5 0

150 0 0

do.

12±

1873

Patchell .

24 1 24

22 0 0

650 0 0

29fc

Patchell .

66 1 35

26 5 0

830 0 0

32*

McClosky .

57 1 21

17 0 0

327 0 0

19*

Craig

8 2 29

20 0 0

280 0 0

1874

Reid.

803

9 10 0

310 0 0

19|

22J

McClosky .

21 2 26

11 15 0

310 0 0

19|

Millar

45 0 29

16 10 0

410 0 0

19*

Loughery .

20 3 13

15 10 0

370 0 0

1875

McClelland

18 0 34

26 5 0

577 10 0

18|

Boss ....

27 0 8

17 5 0

425 0 0

18|

1876

McKeisack

16 3 31

12 10 0

440 0 0

17J

35^

Green . .

16 3 8

11 15 0

250 0 0

171

21*

Hamilton . .

12 1 11

6 10 0

450 0 0

69 J

1878

Brizzle . . •

119 1 10

27 0 0

800 0 0

16|

29 i

Smyth

28 0 32

12 0 0

540 0 0

ie|

Atkinson .

33 1 34

41 5 0

880 0 0

21*

1879

Rosborough

45 2 24

25 10 0

360 0 0

14|

14J

Gormley .

26 0 7

14 5 0

415 0 0

14|

29J

Kane

66 0 16

6 15 0

200 0 0

14f

29£

Williams . . •

22 3 22

8 10 0

250 0 0

14J

Toner

24 2 5

14 15 0

775 0 0

14j

52 }

Miller

34 1 28

18 10 0

500 0 0

141

Henry . . •

47 3 26

40 0 0

1130 0 0

28J

Miller

37 1 3

16 15 0

400 0 0

23f

McDonagh . .

24 2 31

12 0 0

400 0 0

33*

1880

Walker .

16 1 2

3 15 0

162 0 0

13|

Stewart . . .

22 0 22

18 10 0

540 0 0

13|

29]

Cochrane . . .

34 3 10

16 10 0

450 0 0

13|

27J

Clarke

18 1 21

20 0 0

820 0 0

13|

Ross ....

51 1 28

41 0 0

805 0 0

13?

19J

Craig

203 0 5

21 13 3

600 0 0

13}

2ii

Sloano

19 1 20

24 10 0

500 0 0

13J

20*

Fishmongers'
Company.

232

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Fishmongers'
Company.

Rent,

3 s

PH <a

including

Year.

Tenant.

Acreage.

County

fl-

•S S

*o^

Cess and

^•o

S H

Poor-Rate.

A. R. P.

£ s. d,

£ s. d.

1880

Brizzle

169 2 5

29 10 0

510 0 0

18*

17*

McGreelis

8 1 37

3 15 0

200 0 0

Ferguson

28 2 26

14 0 0

600 0 0

42|

1881

Fleming

90 0 13

34 0 0

815 0 0

1882

Coyle

23 2 19

17 0 0

295 0 0

111

17*

Whiteside

111 0 38

16 0 0

130 0 0

11J

Bryson

18 3 28

17 15 0

505 0 0

28|

The above statement contains particulars of all the sales of which full details
have been furnished to the Company on application for licences to assign.

The foregoing statement shows that no less a sum than 30,473Z. 10s.
has been paid by incoming tenants in purchasing leases under the Com-
pany, of which, on an average, only 12 years were unexpired — the
amounts so paid being, on an average, 25-| years' purchase.

The evidence of two of the witnesses would convey the impression
that the Company have done little for the benefit of their Irish estate,
and, with some quite unimportant exceptions, nothing for their tenants.

A careful examination of the Company's books leads to an opposite
conclusion.

They show that from the year 1820, when the estate fell into the
Company's hands, down to the year 1881, the Company have expended
large sums in road-making, irrigation, the construction of river and canal
banks, the supply of building and other materials, labour, grants and
allowances to tenants, planting, the building of cottages, mills, and dis-
pensaries, the maintenance and support of seven schools, wherein
excellent practical education is given to more than 500 children of the
tenantry and labourers on the estate, towards the erection and main-
tenance of places of worship, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Roman
Catholic, in grants towards the support of their ministers, and in casual
relief and pensions.

Without entering into needless detail, the following may be taken as
a perfectly fair approximate statement of the amounts expended under
the several heads since 1820 : —

For roads, irrigation, river, and canal banks .
For building materials supplied, labour thereon,

grants and allowances to tenants .
For cottages, dispensaries, mills, reclamations,

town-parks, farming societies
For trees, woods, and plantations .
For schools .......

For places of religious worship and donations

to ministers ......

For relief, pensions, and donations to the sick,

aged, and destitute on the Company's estate .

about 28,558

„ 26,443
33 722

,, Ot»,l _i^l

„ 20,632
„ 33,528

„ 21,292

„ 24,849

£189,024

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 238

Frequent references have been made in the evidence given before the Fishmongers'
Commission to the alleged desire of the Irish tenantry to buy their Company,
holdings.

This is a subject which has engaged the careful attention of the Court,
who have, Avithout pledging the Company to any particular course of
action, passed the following resolution : —

" That, having regard to the course of recent legislation relating to
" land in Ireland, this Court is of opinion that it would be desirable
" that the Company should, at the proper time, sell their Irish estates to
" the occupying tenants, so that each tenant may have the opportunity
" of purchasing the freehold of his own holding on reasonable terms."

As respects any reforms that might be suggested, the Company would
refer to what appears in their return already submitted. They are
willing and desirous to adopt any proved reform consistent with the
duty to preserve the rights of the Company confided to the guardianship
of its managing body. As to the suggestions of witnesses, everything
coming from the Senior Inspector of Charities under the Charity Com-
missioners is, of course, entitled to respectful consideration. But the
scheme set forth by him appears far too wide, and, if it may respectfully
be said, too vague, to be practically susceptible of adoption ; while the
proposals as to giving wider scope or greater control to the Company
over the conduct of the trade would require the most careful handling to
avoid exciting the jealousy or opposition of the very persons whom it
might be desired to benefit. At the same time the Court of the Company
are quite prepared to give effect to any practicable suggestions for establish-
ing relations closer than those at present existing between the Company
and the trade.

As respects the number of the governing body, which is fixed by the
charters, if this were reduced, it would be disadvantageous to the
livery, the persons from whom the Court is selected ; and if seniority
were made the qualification for membership of the Court, the efficiency
of that body for the government of the Company would be certainly
reduced, from the extreme age of its members ; the youngest member of
the Court at this moment, had the rule of seniority prevailed, would be
over sixty-five years of age. The management of the Company's affairs
would, under such a rule, fall to an undue extent into the hands of its
officers, with little, if any, effective control ; and there would immediately
arise a tendency to make the livery far more exclusive, to the serious
prejudice of the body of freemen, while the inducement which mainly
influences the most desirable of its members to join the livery would no
longer exist.

GOLDSMITHS' COMPANY.

MEMOKIAL.

London, E.C., Goldsmiths' Hall,
November, 1882.

To HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO THE
CITY OP LONDON LIVERY COMPANIES.

GENTLEMEN, — The Goldsmiths' Company instruct me to express their
appreciation of the courtesy of the Commissioners in sending them a print
of the oral evidence which has been given before them, and they desire
to make the following remarks on some parts thereof.

234 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Goldsmiths' They find that charges of conduct, prompted by unworthy motives,
Company. have been made against them ; and as they assume that the Commissioners
•will report upon each Company separately, it is important to the Com-
missioners as well as to the Goldsmiths' Company that mis-statements
should not go forth uncorrected.

I begin with the evidence of Mr. E. J. WATHBRSTON, one of the Livery-
men of the Goldsmiths' Company, and in dealing with the statements of
this witness, as he has thought fit to bring himself and his father and
their contentions with the Goldsmiths' Company prominently before the
Commissioners, I shall be obliged most unwillingly to refer to personal
matters of a very unpleasant character.

Mr. E. J. WATHBRSTON has asserted that his father was opposed by the
Company, and rejected for the office of Warden because he was a reformer.
This is entirely untrue.

When Mr. Watherston's turn came to be nominated for the office of
Warden, he was nominated and balloted for in the usual manner. The
result of that ballot was not in his favour ; in fact, he had but one vote.
The following Members of the Court were present, viz. : —
James Boyle Smith ;
William Gladstone ;
Alderman William Taylor Copeland ;
James Bankes Friend ;
George Ashlin ;
James Garrard ,
George Smith Hayter ;
Richard Davis ;
James H. Watherston ;
Alexander Trotter ;
William D. Child ;
Henry John Lias ;
James Malcolmson ;
Augustus W. Gadesden ;
John Gray ;

Richard Fownes Wingrove ;
William G. Hicks ;
Henry Sykes Thornton ; and
George Grenfell Glyn.

Now I will ask whether it is likely that eighteen gentlemen, comprising
amongst them men of his own craft as well as some of the leading bankers
and merchants of the City of London, would be unanimous in rejecting
a colleague without due cause.

It is true that subsequently the members of the Court declined to hold
any communication with him ; they did so in consequence of his offensive
conduct. This state of things continued for some time, but ultimately he
apologized to the Court for his behaviour through me, and he also
apologized to its members individually ; after this he and his colleagues
of the Court went on smoothly together, but subsequently his conduct
soon again became unpleasant and offensive.

With regard to the letter which he addressed in July, 1876, to the
Masters, Wardens, and Courts of Assistants of every Livery Company of
the City of London, in which he signed himself " a Member of the Court
of Assistants of the Goldsmiths' Company," it is to be noted that he was
then, and had been for some time previously living in Devonshire, and
then seldom attended the meetings of the Company, and that he was
probably, therefore, not aware that for a long time previously the subject
of Technical Education had been (informally it is true) under the con-
sideration of the Goldsmiths' Company, and some of the other chief

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 235

Livery Companies. Indeed at that time the main question was not Goldsmiths'
whether the undertaking should be commenced, but what form it should Company,
take, and how it should be carried out ; Mr. Watherston's views and
those of the Company were very dissimilar, and his views and those
which have subsequently been acted upon under the advice of the
most eminent practical men of science of the present day, are opposed
to each other, and the Company certainly did not approve of his signing
his circular letter as " a Member of the Court of Assistants of the Gold-
smiths' Company," embodying as it did his individual view, and not those
of the Company.

"With regard to the witness, Mr. E. J. Watherston, he has not dis-
guised his ill-will towards the Company and his desire (to use his own
words) "to disestablish it." He has tried for years to write down the
Company in certain papers. This being so, it was not likely in 1878,
when he applied for certain information to which he was not entitled
as a matter of right, that the Wardens would give it to him as a matter
of favour.

This witness complains that on the morning of the day of his examina-
tion, he had applied for a copy of the oath which he took, and that the
person to whom he wrote replied to him that he was unable to comply
with his request, without asking the permission of the "Wardens. This
person was not myself or any superior officer of the Company, but was
Mr. Williams, a clerk in my office, who certainly has no authority to
give copies of documents to liverymen without the authority of the
"Wardens or myself.

In order to depreciate what the Company have been doing for the last
eleven years with a view to encourage Technical Education in the design
and execution of works in the precious metals, this witness has endeavoured
to induce the Commissioners to believe that the prizes which have been
offered by the Company yearly since 1870 are solely for drawings; that
the drawings or designs which have been produced have been of no value ;
that they have never been carried out on any single occasion ; and that no
person in the trade attaches any importance to them. All these state-
ments are untrue. The prizes are offered not only for designs in the
shape of drawings, but for models and for excellence in executed works.
As to their value, Mr. Watherston, in his letter to Mr. Beale, says "ask
Mr. Poynter," meaning Mr. E. J. Poynter, the Eoyal Academician.

The following letter from Mr. Poynter in answer to my inquiry
addressed to him on this subject will speak for itself , —

28, Albert Gate, S.W.,

June 22nd, 1882.

DEAR MB. PRIDEAUX, — I have no hesitation in saying that the Gold-
smiths' Company's prizes called out some very good designs, many of
which would have worked out well if they had been executed. Whether
the competitors were " pot-himters " I do not know ; I presume that
they were frequently professional designers, and I imagine it to have been
part of the intention of the Company to encourage a better kind of work
among this class. But they were not invariably trade designers ; to the
best of my recollection we had many designs sent up by students of
Schools of Art, and others.

It seems to me to be in the nature of things that the designs as a
rule should not be carried out ; the execution of large pieces of plate
being expensive, it is difficult to see how the Company could give com-
missions for the execution of the prize designs without encumbering
themselves with costly pieces of plate, which they do not want, and it

236 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Goldsmiths' is not often that firms of silversmiths have the will or the opportunity
Company. ^o carrv out; a large ornamental work not specially designed for them, as
Messrs. Elkington have done in the case of Watkins' admirable design
for a shield.

The list of subjects for which the prizes were offered seemed to me
to be well considered and to cover all that is necessary, and the Com-
pany always showed themselves ready to listen to any suggestions which
I had to propose ; and I know of no way of encouraging an art but by
offering prizes, and opening competitions, for design and workmanship :
— unless, — and you will remember that I have spoken to you once or
twice on this point with reference to repousse work — it be by the esta-
blishment of technical schools under carefully selected instructors.
This, however, is another matter. I am confident that the money spent
by the Company has done good service in the encouragement of good
design.

I am, very truly yours,

EDWARD J. POYNTER.

Executed works and models in plaster of great beauty have obtained
prizes, and at the present time, as stated by Mr. Poynter, Messrs. Elk-
ington and Co. are executing at a large cost a most beautiful work from a
design for a shield, by Mr. J. "Watkins, which obtained a prize in 1876.
To four of the successful competitors, the Goldsmiths' Company have
also awarded Travelling Scholarships, from which the holders have, it is
believed, derived great benefit.

The following extract from a letter dated the 2Qth of June, 1882, from
Mr. Owen Gibbons, who held one of these Scholarships, will show what is
the opinion of a practical man, of the value of the competition esta-
blished by the Company.

Mr. Gibbons is now the master of a school of art at the Coalbrook Dale
works in Shropshire.

He writes to me as follows, viz. : —

"With regard to the good your competition has done, for my own
part I can say that had it not been for it I should not have practised
design in goldsmiths' work to anything like the extent I have done,
and in my designs for actual execution in the precious metals I should
not have been so ready, and I could not have taught my students so well
how to design for goldsmiths' work.

" Even in the case of those who failed to take prizes, the endeavour
to design, and the study, and consequent knowledge gained, is a great
step towards the improvement of design.

" If the Science and Art Department prize drawing and models were
to be judged by the number sold, the idea gained would be that the
Art Schools do no good, but what the Department aim at (and the Gold-
smiths' Company also) is to improve the decorative art of the kingdom
by encouraging the best art, and keeping the students working so that
they may be led on from one success to another, at the same time an
exhibition is held to show those who failed in what way they came short
of success.

" With regard to the Travelling Scholarship I can only say that I
learnt a great deal. The drawings I made have been of great use to me,
the knowledge I gained of much more.

" If the Goldsmiths' competition were to be given up I should feel that
the art of design had suffered a great loss."

As to Mr. Watherston's complaints of the hall-marking of plate, he
is entitled to his own opinion, but in holding himself forth as the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 237

champion of the trade, we must point out that he has failed to get the Goldsmiths'
trade to go with him. Company.

On the 3rd of April, 1878, a meeting of the trade was held at St.
James's Hall. At that meeting four-fifths of the firms which pay the
plate duty were represented, and a resolution was unanimously passed
that it was undesirable to interfere in any way with the present system
of hall-marking.

Mr. Watherston has complained of me for the part which I took
before the Select Committee on the subject of gold and silver hall-
marking in 1878 and 1879. The course which I took upon that occasion
was simply this : I endeavoured to make the Committee understand the
state of the law, and the system pursued, and I believed it to be my
duty to correct mis-statements made by Mr. Watherston, and to show
that certain conclusions which he stated were, as I believed, erroneous.
For instance, he stated that he knew that wedding-rings hall-marked in
England were sent out to some foreign dealer and the rebate or drawback
of duty received, and that afterwards they were easily smuggled back
into England. He stated that he " knew that this could be done and
that he felt sure that it was done " (See Report on Gold and Silver Hall-
marking, House of Commons, 1878. — Question 207).

With reference to this mis-statement I informed the Committee that
this was a pure invention, for in the year 1820, long before the witness
was born, an Act of Parliament was passed which enacted " That there
" should be no drawback allowed on the exportation of wedding-rings or
" any rings or on any ware of gold under two ounces in weight" and there-
fore it was utterly impossible that this should have occurred. (See Report,
Question 1583.)

The witness in his examination before the Commissioners has com-
plained of the manner in which the hall-marking is carried on by the
Company, and has stated that it is very much better done in France,
where, he says, it is done by what is called "touch," and not by the
" scrape and parting assay," as it is in this country.

He says " the hall-marking is admirably done in France, and very
"badly done in this country by reason of the antiquated manner in
"which it is conducted."

Now, as regards this charge it is to be remarked that in 1878, when
he was examined before the Select Committee on Hall-marking — many
goldsmiths and silversmiths being then present — he was asked the fol-
lowing questions : —

" Do you object to the way in which they do the hall-marking, or do
you object to the law which gives so important a public function to a
body of gentlemen who have not experience in that particular trade 1 "

To which he answered, "To the law." "7 have no cause to complain
" of the manner in which the work is done."

He was then asked, " Then yours is rather a theoretical than a prac-
" tical objection 1 " To which he replied, " Decidedly so." On which
the chairman remarked, " If they do the work well and employ proper
" people, I do not see that there is much room for complaint." (See
Questions 93, 94, and 95, House of Commons' Report on Hall-marking,
1878.)

As regards the statement that the hall-marking of gold and silver
plate is done differently in France from the manner in which it is done
in England, that is to say, that it is done by the " touch," here again the
witness has made a mis-statement. It is true that in France small
articles which cannot be scraped without injury, such as jewellery, which
in England are exempted from hall-marking, are tested by what is called
the " touch •" but the French, recognizing the inaccuracy of this method,

238 HOTAL COMMISSION.

Goldsmiths' by the law of 19 Brumaire, an 6 (9th of November, 1797), require that
Company. the assay of all such articles as alone are here subject to obligatory hall-
marking, shall be tried in the same manner as that employed in England,
viz., by scraping and cupellation. In corroboration of this it may be
stated that in the year 1865 the Goldsmiths' Company sent one of their
assay officers over to France to see their mode of treating the work in
the operations of assaying and marking in the establishments there, and
he found that it was dorie in almost exactly the same way as it is done
in England. It was done by scraping and cupellation, or the " parting
assay." He bought a gold watch-case in the assay office in Paris which
had been sent to be assayed and marked, having got the assay master to
stop it, in order that he might bring it over and show how it was done.
That gold watch-case I have in my possession at the present time. It is
in its rough state, and shows exactly from what parts the scrapings for
the assay have been made, and that the process has been identical with
that used at Goldsmiths' Hall.1

Keverting to that part of the evidence of Mr. E. J. "Watherston, in
which he complains that if one article in a parcel of plate is defective
the whole parcel is broken, the answer is that the power to do this is not
exercised unless there is reason to believe a fraudulent intent or a want of
care. As a matter of fact the care of the honest manufacturer, and the
influence exercised on the less scrupulous by the action of the Gold-
smiths' Company, has had the effect that only about *75 per cent, of the
gold plate and *25 per cent, of the silver plate offered for assay is
broken.

The witness moreover says : —

" / should like to place on record this fact, that only six years ago they
{meaning the Company} were strongly opposed to Technical Education."

Now we may remark that the demand for Technical Education is of
comparatively modern date, and that the Goldsmiths' Company had a
very early appreciation of its importance is shown by the steps taken in
1871 to organize a plan for its encouragement by offering prizes and
travelling scholarships.

Here again then we have a palpable mis-statement by Mr. E. J.
Watherston ; for instead of being strongly opposed to Technical Educa-
tion six years ago, it will be seen that eleven years ago the Company
established a scheme for its promotion, which has been in full action
ever since.

It is most distasteful to be obliged to deal with subjects of a personal
character which might have remained in oblivion if Mr. E. J. Wather-
ston had not thought fit to bring his father's and his own contentions
with the Company as matters of complaint before the Commissioners.

1 Since this was written I have received from the chief ,'officer of the assay office
(Bureau de la Garantie) in Paris, the following note, in answer to questions which I
addressed to him : —

1. La Loi du 19 Brumaire est encore celle qni regit toutes les operations de la
garantie en France.

Les ouvrages d'or, ler, 2d, et 3e titres, qui sont d'une dimension qui permet la
grattage pour la prise d'essai, sont essayes a la coupelle et marques du poison a la
tete de medecin grec — No. 1, 2, ou 3 — qui garantit le titre — 920, 840, 750. Ceux
qui ne peuvent subir la prise d'essai sont essayes a la preuve de touche et marquds
d'un poincon special (tete d'aigle), qui garantit le payment des droits et un titre
approximatif au dessus de 650.

2. Les ouvrages d'argent au \er efc 2d titre qui peuvent supporter la prise d'essai
sont essayes a la coupelle et marques des pontons tete de minerve 1 (950), te"te de
minerve 2 (800).

Ceux qui ne peuvent supporter la grattage sont essayes & la preuve de touche et
marques du poison a la tdte du sanglier.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 239

He having done so, the Goldsmiths' Company feel that they have no Goldsmiths'
alternative than to deferid themselves. Company.

A few remarks are necessary on the evidence of other witnesses.

Mr. Longley says, that with regard to certain Companies of which he
had experience, he should say that they had been exceedingly liberal in
their administration of the trusts, and in many cases which are already
known to the Commission, have subsidized the trust funds very largely
out of their corporate income ; " but," he remarks, " on the other hand
" our experience is that their administration of the trusts has been on a
" very generous scale, as regards expenses, almost lavish in some cases."

Now with regard to these observations, the Goldsmiths' Company
desire me to state that they have riever charged any expenses for
management against any one of their charities. The whole of the costs
of the management of their charity property, and the administration of
the trusts reposed in them, has been paid for out of their general cor-
porate income.

Two witnesses, namely, Mr. Beale and Mr. Gilbert, have thought fit to
make some remarks on the subject of my salary, as Clerk of the Com-
pany ; and Mr. Gilbert has taken upon himself to make a computation
of my income, not only from the Goldsmiths' .Company, but from other
sources. Mr. Gilbert can know nothing of my private affairs, nor, even
with the widest licence allowed to witnesses in this inquiry, can he be
concerned with any part of my income, excepting that which arises from
my office as Clerk of the Company.

He has stated that I am Secretary of the Assam Tea Company, and,
to use his own words, " one of the leading men of the New River Com-
pany," " and I believe one or two other things as well."

Now I am not Secretary of the Assam Tea Company ; I am a Director
of the Assam Company, and I have been so for many years. I am also
a Director of the New River Company, but not " of one or two," or of
any other things whatever. If the witness means to complain of my
holding those offices, I say that he might as well complain that I spent
some hours a week in general reading, or in any pursuit other than that
of my duties as Clerk of the Company. My employment as a Director
of these two Companies occupies me on an average about two hours
a week, and taking much interest as I have done in their affairs, I
may say that it tends to relieve the monotony of a life which has
been, and still is, one of great labour ; besides, as regards the New
River Company, my presence as a Director at the Board of that
Company, at which I represent the share of a friend, is, I believe, of
service to the Goldsmiths' Company in enabling me to watch over
their interests, they being the owners of a share as trustees of Sir Hugh
Middelton's Charity.

As regards the amount of my salary, the facts relative to it are stated
in the Company's Return.

I have held my office for upwards of thirty years — I am now in the
seventy-seventh year of my age.

I never was related to, or connected by blood or marriage with, any
member of the Company.

I never directly, or indirectly, made any application to the Court for
an increase of my salary, but in 1860 it was raised from. 1000?. to f
1300Z., and so continued until the year 1877, when it was raised to
1800?. ; so that I have only received my present salary for about five
years.

The office which I hold is one of great trust and responsibility; its
duties are very onerous and laborious, and the Court of Assistants hav-
ing become convinced that the duties had so much increased that I could

240

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Goldsmiths' no* Pei'^orm them alone without the sacrifice of my health, appointed

Company. my son to be my assistant.

I have reason to believe that the Court of Assistants were of opinion
when they last raised my salary, that for a long period I had been
under-paid. Bo that as it may, they well knew what my services had
been, and what they continue to be, and they thought fit, for the short
period during which in the course of nature I can continue to hold my
office, to grant me what no doubt is a liberal remuneration.

I now propose, on behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company, to submit to
the Royal Commissioners some observations 011 certain legal questions
which have been raised during the taking of evidence before the
Commission, and on the legal position of the Company.

It was alleged by one of the witnesses (Mr. J. Beale) that the original
charters of the Companies were invalid as being beyond the power of
the Crown to grant. This contention was rested on the 13th (not the
16th) section of Magna Charta (evidence, question 828), whereby it was
enacted, or rather declared, as follows : —

" The City of London shall have all its ancient liberties and free
" customs as well by land as by water ; furthermore we will and grant
" that all other Cities and Boroughs, and Towns, and Ports shall have
" all their liberties and free customs. " The City of London was, it should
be remembered, at the date of Magna Charta (A.D. 1215) already in-
corporated, and the declaratory clause cited, whilst it confirms the cor-
porate rights of London, and all other Cities and Towns, does not
otherwise abridge the power of the Crown to grant Charters to Com-
panies for the regulation of particular Industries. But it is said that the
right of search granted to the Goldsmiths' Company (as well as to other
Companies) by the Charter of Ed. 4 is " not consistent with the liberty
" of trade ; the right of search was granted and was bad, and if that is
" bad the Charter is bad " (Ev. 829). But even assuming the right of
search is inimical to trade, it does not follow that the Crown could not
grant it ; nor, again, if the right of search be inimical to trade, and for
that reason could not be validly granted, does it follow that a Charter
professing to grant it is void altogether. It is, however, unnecessary to
make a'ny lengthened observations on the allegation that the Charters
were ultra vires. They have now been acted on for centuries, and any
objection to their initial validity could not certainly, after such a lapse
of time, be successfully sustained (Ev. 986 — 990), and with reference
to the Goldsmiths' Company in particular, Parliament has repeatedly
recognized the validity of their Charters. Thus the 12 Geo. 2. c, 26.
contains a recital that the " Wardens and commonalty of the Mystery
' of Goldsmiths of the City of London are, and have been, a guild, or
' corporation, time out of mind, with divers privileges confirmed and
' enlarged by several Charters from his Majesty's royal predecessors,
' Kings and Queens of this realm, amongst other things for the search-
' ing, assaying, supervising, marking, and regulating wrought plate in
' order to ascertain the standard thereof, for the good and safety of the
' public :" so far therefore as regards this Company, any objection to
the validity of their Charters, on the ground of an illegal right of search
having been conferred, seems to be absolutely unfounded.

II.

Another witness (Mr. E. J. Watherston) expressed an opinion that

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 241

the Charters of the Companies have been forfeited by their dissociation, Goldsmiths'
either wholly or in part, from the crafts with which they were originally Company,
connected (Ev. 1014), or by the distribution of their funds for purposes
foreign to those originally intended (Ev. 1074). This opinion, at all
events, so far as concerns the severance between crafts and Companies,
appears to be shared by Mr. J. R. Phillips (Ev. 1331). With regard to
the severance between the crafts and companies, it is unquestionably
true that in fact there is, more or less, such a severance. It arises in
the Goldsmiths' Company, as in others, from the method in which, from
a very early period, the freedom of the Company has been acquired. If
" servitude " had been the only method of acquiring it, the severance
would, no doubt, have never taken place. But from a very early period
it could also be acquired by (a) patrimony and (£) redemption. Every
freeman's son born after such freeman was admitted to the freedom is
entitled to be made free at twenty- one years of age, and any person duly
proposed, balloted for, and approved, is empowered to buy his freedom.
Those systems of obtaining the freedom of the Companies were notorious
long before the date of many of their confirmatory Charters, and, inas-
much as they necessarily involve the incorporation of non-trade members,
the fact of their existence cannot be a ground of forfeiture of the
Charters. Nor could it be a ground for questioning the title of the
Companies to gifts of testators and others made with knowledge of the
prevailing practice. With respect to the Goldsmiths' Company, there can
be no doubt that at the date of the Charter of the 17th of James I.,
which confirmed to this Company the bulk of their estates, the character
and composition of the Company had become substantially what they are
now. As to the alleged diversion of the property and functions of the
Companies from trade purposes, that cannot, under the circumstances of
the case, be objected against the Goldsmiths' Company. They have
been invested by Statute with important functions, and it cannot be
urged against them that they have in any particular failed in their duty.

III.

But it is further suggested that the Charters of themselves constitute
a trust (Ev. 350), and that the Companies are bound to make a public use
of the money which belongs to them (Ev. 1282-1284). Their property
is alleged to be " in no sense private property" (Ev. 1321). "All the
' Corporate property," said Mr. J. E. Phillips (Ev. 1381), "is coupled with
' trusts, and I base that opinion not only on my own knowledge, which
' is very humble in itself, but upon the opinion of Lord Selborne, the
' present Lord Chancellor, with regard to the property of the Inns of
' Court, which are not incorporated." The analogy thus suggested
between the Inns of Court and the Companies is, it will be found,
entirely without any basis, either of fact or of law. It is an analogy
moreover distinctly repudiated by the Lord Chancellor. In his evidence
before the Commission (Ev. 1680) he observed upon this point in. the
following terms : — " If I am permitted to say so, I see that a gentleman
who has appeared before this Commission has referred to a speech
which I made in the House of Lords about the Inns of Court, as if it
were to be inferred from that, that I thought the Inns of Court and
the City Companies were in part conditione ; I do not think so at all,
the reasons that lead me to think the Inns of Court a public Institu-
tion have no application whatever to any Company, or at all events to
the only one I know, that is the Mercers' Company, not the slightest."
What then is the true legal position of the Companies ? The answer is
given in clear and unmistakable language by the high authority just

212

KOYAL COMMISSION.

Goldsmiths' quoted. They arc "absolute and perfect masters of their own property."
Company. . . ..." In point of law the City Companies are absolutely entitled to their

" property in the same manner and as fully as a private owner would be,
" and under no trust Avhatever. Of course it will be understood that I
" do not speak of estates which have been given to them on any special
"trusts." .... There may be a greater moral responsibility, but not any

greater legal right. . . . . " They are ancient institutions ; the funds

" which I call their own property were derived as far as my knowledge
" extends from their own subscriptions and gifts by their own
" members and others, intended to be for their absolute use ; and
" although I do not think the present generation ought to put those
" gifts into their pockets, yet on the other hand I cannot admit
" fora moment that they are upon the footing of public trusts." (Ev.
1682-1684), and again (Ev. 1695), the Lord Chancellor stated that he
knew of no legal limit to the control of each Company over its property
(not subject to any special trust), nor of any "equitable limit, in the
" legal sense of the word equitable." In the case of the Attorney-General
v. the Fishmongers' Company (6 Bea. 550) nothing can be more emphatic
than the language of the Master of the Rolls. " The argument," he says,
might be very well, provided you were not encroaching on a revenue,
which, according to the construction which it appears to me ought to be
put upon this codicil, belongs as private property to this Company. If
the testator has fixed on certain salaries which fail to provide for the
fulfilment of his intention it is, no doubt, very much to be regretted,
but you cannot, at the expense of the Company to whom the testator
has given a beneficial interest, take that interest from them." It is
impossible usefully to add anything to these expressions of opinion. At
the same time it may be permitted on behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company
to claim for themselves what the Lord Chancellor claimed for the Mercers,
that they have always administered their funds for charitable and useful
public purposes. They cannot acknowledge any legal or equitable obli-
gation with regard to property not impressed with specific trusts ; but
they most cordially assent to the Lord Chancellor's view, that " the City
" Companies, assuming them to be, as I believe them to be, in law abso-
" lute and perfect masters of their own property, as distinct from that
" which they hold on trust, could do nothing better with their property
" than promote objects which were for the public interest " (Ev. 1682).
That has been their practice in the past, and will be their practice in the
future.

IV.

Again, Mr. Beale contends (Ev. 698-834) that the Companies are public
because they are " Municipal," but if this were a correct view of their
position, his contention would be opposed to a long series of decisions in
the Court of Chancery. The cases referred to by Mr. Longley (Ev. 350)
may be taken by way of illustration. Thus in Attorney-General v. The
Corporation of Carmarthen, Cooper 30, it was decided that a Court of
Equity will not interfere to prevent misapplication of Corporate funds, as
distinct from funds held by a Corporation on express trusts ; and in Mayor
of Colchester v. Lowten, 1 Ves. and Beames 220, the same rule was laid
down and acted upon, Lord Eldon refusing to interfere to prevent the
alienation of Corporate property not affected by charitable trusts.
Whether, therefore, the Companies are regarded as " Trading " or
" Municipal," the attempt to attach the doctrine of trust to their general
funds equally fails.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 243

It remains to add. a few words upon the true legal position of the Cora- Goldsmiths'
panics, and more particularly of the Goldsmiths' Company, with regard Company,
to the property which they hold. Much that is applicable to that Com-
pany is no doubt applicable to others, and the following observations,
which directly apply only to it, may be taken, in many respects, as
illustrative of the position of all.

It will be seen from the remarks already made that there is absolutely
no foundation, either for the suggestion that the Charters of the Company
are invalid, or that they have been forfeited. The Company is unques-
tionably a lawful subsisting Corporation. But then it is said that the
mere fact of their property being " Corporate " in some way affects their
right to deal with it. Property, however, does not become public simply
because it belongs to a Corporation. If that were the case it might be
asserted that the property of every Joint Stock Company is on the footing
of a public trust.

There is no authority whatever, it need hardly be said, for such a pro-
position. Numerous cases have dealt with the question of a Corporation's
right to use, under certain circumstances, the surplus or increment of
trust property. But in all it has been assumed that a Corporation or
Company might hold property for its own benefit, and the only point
for discussion has been whether, upon the technical interpretation of a
donor's or testator's intention, the Corporation or Company were entitled
to use for their own benefit such surplus or increment. This, of course,
depends upon the language of the benefactor, whose intention must, if
possible, be discovered, either by reference to his action during his life-
time, or in some other way. Attorney-General v. Brazenose Coll.,
2 Cl. & F. 295. Attorney-General v. Skinners' Company, 2 Eus. 407.
Attorney-General v. Dean of Windsor, 8 H. L. Cases 369.

It is unnecessary, however, to do more than refer to this class of cases, for
it is not alleged that the Goldsmiths' Company have, in any instance,
improperly devoted to their own use any property, or the surplus income
of any property, left or given to them upon any specific trust. They have
throughout duly administered all their trust estates in accordance with the
principles laid down for the guidance of trustees in the above cases, to
Avhich may be added the following additional authorities. Attorney-
General v. Mayor of South Molton, 5 H. L. C. 1. Attorney-General v.
Mayor of Beverley, 6 H. L. C, 310.- Attorney- General v. Gains College,
2 K. 150. Attorney-General v. Drapers' Company, 2 Beav. 508.
Attorney-General v. Coopers' Company, 3 Beav. 29. Merchant Taylors'
Company v. Attorney-General, L. E. 6 Ch. App. 512, per James L. I., at
p. 518. Attorney-General v. Wax Chandlers' Company, L. E. 6, H. L. 1.

In early times, when property was frequently given by deed or will
to provide for masses and prayers for the souls of deceased persons,
Corporations were often chosen as the trustees of such purposes on account
of their perpetuity, and much property came to the City Companies in this
way. At the Eef ormation all such uses were put an end to by Act of Par-
Hament, and all property held upon trust for such purposes was vested
in the Crown. The Goldsmiths' Company thus suffered in common
with others a large diminution of their estates. A very considerable
part of their present property was bought back by them from King
Edward the Sixth, and has thus become vested in them under circum-
stances which absolutely forbid the notion of its being encumbered with
trusts of any description. This grant of Edward the Sixth was confirmed and
enlarged by an Act of Parliament of 4th of James the First, and the Com-

R 2

244 BOYAL COMMISSION.

fioldsmitlis' pauy, therefore, hold the bulk of their property by nothing less than a
Company. Parliamentary title. It seems almost superfluous to add, but it is the
fact, that lands held by the Fishmongers' Company under similar cir-
cumstances, and confirmed to them by the same Act of Parliament, were
held by Lord Langdale to be the absolute property of the Company and
subject to no charitable trusts whatever (Attorney-General v. Fishmongers'
Company, 2 Beav. 151). In respect of these large portions of the Com-
pany's estates, the title is clear, the documents of title speak for themselves,
there is no room for any presumption to spring up, and unless at the
moment when the Company purchased the property from the Crown a
trust was impressed upon it, there can be none now. Neither the grant,
however, nor the statute confirming the grant, contains a word in qualifica-
tion of the absolute ownership they profess to convey, the old trusts for
superstitious uses had been abrogated by the legislature, the whole value of
the property originally appropriated to those uses had been vested in
the Crown, and the purchase money for the new grant formed part of the
general Corporate property of the Company. It could not have repre-
sented anything held in trust for superstitious uses. There is no
evidence whatever, and no ground for supposing that it represented any
other trusts.

The case cited is one of great authority, and gives the sanction of
express decision to the view enunciated.

The Company have from time to time sold portions of their property,
and their right to do so has been the subject of consideration by the
most eminent and learned conveyancers, including the Conveyancing
Council of the Court of Chancery, and in no instance, so far as I am
aware, has a doubt been entertained of their power to make a good title
to the property sold.

The attack made on the Companies is not directed to their administra-
tion of property held by them upon special trusts, but rests on the
assumption that all their " Corporate " property is " public," Avhether it
was acquired by them for charitable purposes or for purposes connected
with trade, or by gift or purchase expressly for the benefit of the Com-
panies themselves. The baseless character of this assumption has been
already, it is submitted, sufficiently indicated. No authority can be
cited for it, and the comparative absence of direct authority the other
way may be accounted for by the circumstance that no lawyer has hither-
to ventured seriously to maintain it. In the recent case of Brown v.
Dale (9 Chanc. Div. 78) the decision recognizes the unlimited control of
a trade Society or Guild over its property. There, upon a sale of land,
it was held that the members of the Society for the time being were
entitled to divide the proceeds in equal shares, there being no rules or
provisions as to its disposition. The Court thus treated the members
exactly as though they were partners in a private adventure.

VI.

In conclusion, the Goldsmiths' Company venture to submit the follow-
ing legal propositions to the notice of the Commissioners.

1. — The Company were by Eoyal Charters legally created and are now
a legally subsisting Corporation.

2. — The Charters were not ultra vires.

3. — The Charters have not been forfeited either by the partial seve-
rance of the Company from the Craft, or by any improper diversion of
the property of the Company. There has been no improper diversion by
them of their property.

4. — The control of the Company over property acquired by them by

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 245

gift or purchase and not expressly affected by any special trust, is absolute, Goldsmiths'
and they are not fettered in its use by any legal or equitable obligation. Company.

Whilst thus insisting upon their legal rights the Company desire to
repeat that they have always recognized the propriety in dealing with
their own property of striving to promote objects of public interest,
importance and utility. They beg leave upon this matter to refer to the
answers they have given to the Commissioners' inquiries.

I am, Gentlemen,

Your obedient Servant,

WALTER PRIDBAUX,
Clerk of the Goldsmiths' Company.

OBSERVATIONS WHICH SIR FREDERICK J. BRAMWELL AND MR. PRIDKAUX
DESIRE TO ADDRESS TO THE COMMISSIONERS ON BEHALF OF THE
GOLDSMITHS' COMPANY.

Mr. Prideaux desires, in the first place, to refer to the printed letter
addressed by him on behalf of the Goldsmiths' Company to the Com-
missioners in November last ; he desires either to read that letter to the
Commissioners, so that it may be embodied in his evidence, or that it
may be printed as an appendix to his evidence, and as having been
referred to therein by him.

He desires to make a correction at page 31 of the letter. The case
referred to there is the Attorney-General against the Grocers' Company,
and not against the Fishmongers' Company (6 Beav. 520).

Sir Frederick Bramwell and Mr. Prideaux desire to refer to the
returns made by the Goldsmiths' Company to the Commissioners in
answer to their inquiries. Those returns they believe to be as full and
as complete as it would be possible for the Company to give to the
inquiries of the Commissioners ; and the Goldsmiths' Company desire, in
referring to those returns, to rest thereon their claim, not only not to be
interfered with, but to a favourable report on the part of the Commis-
sioners upon the state of things regarding the Company which by those
returns is disclosed.

•
Evidence affecting the Goldsmiths' Company.

The evidence given affecting the Goldsmiths' Company in particular is
of the most contemptible kind, a great deal of it is absolutely untrue, as
is shown by the letter above referred to.

The witnesses against the Livery Companies in general really appear to
be only three persons, viz. : — Mr. Beale, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Gilbert.

Mr. Beale is certainly the chief assailant. He speaks with the greatest
confidence, appeals to Magna Charta, and brings against the Companies
charges of malversation of the grossest kind.

All three of the Avitnesses appear to have been writers in the public Mr. Beale.
papers, or in periodical publications, through which they have en-
deavoured to create an opinion prejudicial to the Livery Companies.

Mr. Beale says he is the writer of articles signed " Nemesis," in the
Weeltly Dispatch, and " Father Jean," in the Echo.

Mr. Phillips says he has written articles which have appeared in Mr. Phillips,
various periodicals upon questions which in this Commission are being
considered, and that he is the author of letters signed " Censor."

Mr. Gilbert states that he was consulted by some of the guardians of Mr. Gilbeit.
one of the poorer parishes in the city, and asked by them to write a

UOYAL COMMISSION.

Is Mr, Bealo
trustworthy ?

His misrepre-
sentations.

Mr. Phillips ;
Lord Sel-
borne's cor-
rection of.

Mr. Wather-
ston.

No endow-
ment from
the Crown.
Property
created by
the subscrip-
tion gifts and
devises of
members.

pamphlet upon this subject, and after he had done that he wrote some
articles in the Contemporary Jteview, The Fortnightly, and The Ninc-
t« ntlt Century, and a couple of books upon the question.

With regard to Mr. Beale, we think we may ask the Commissioners to
consider whether he is trustworthy. We ask them to compare his state-
ments with the returns which have been made by the several Companies,
and thereby to ascertain whether these statements are correct. The
memorandum sent to the Commissioners on the part of the Merchant
Taylors' Company will show how entirely he has misrepresented the
case of Donkin's Charity, and he has stated that the site of the Grocers'
Hall is included in Keble's Trust, meaning that it was subject to the
trusts of Keble's will, whereas it will be found from the returns of the
Grocer's Company that Keble's will was made more than a hundred years
later than the time when the property was acquired by subscriptions
from the members of the fraternity. These are two of many statements
which might be referred to as examples of Mr. Beal's inaccuracies ;
others will appear in the course of the observations which I propose to
make.

With regard to his evidence on the subject of the invalidity of the
charters of the Company, and of their title to their general corporate
property, we need only observe that he has shown himself to be entirely
ignorant of the law ; and with regard to Mr. Phillips' opinion thereon,
whose opinion, considering that he is a barrister, might appear to be of
some value, we desire to call attention to his misrepresentation of the
effect of the speech made by Lord Selborne in the House of Lords in
1877, and to the correction which he received from the Lord Chancellor,
delivered to him on the 21st of June, 1882, in his Lordship's evidence
before the Commissioners.

With regard to the evidence of Mr. E. J. Watherston, a disaffected
member of the Goldsmiths' Company, who has informed you that he
desired to disestablish the Company, we will say no more than what has
been stated in the letter addressed to the Commissioners in November
last.

Recommended appropriation of the Corporate Property by the State
or some Public Body.

The Commissioners have been asked by these witnesses, either directly
or indirectly, to recommend the appropriation by the State, or the trans-
fer to some person or persons (it does not appear clearly whom) of the
general corporate property of the Company. And this demand has been
made entirely on the assumption that the general corporate property of
the Livery Companies is impressed with a trust. This is an entirely
unfounded assumption. There is no ground for it whatever ; in proof
of which we appeal confidently to the opinion of the Lord Chancellor,
given before the Commissioners, and to the legal decisions which have
been delivered from time to time on the subject ; consequently if the
assumption upon which the demand has been made is unfounded and
fails, the demand itself must fall to the ground, and it is manifest that
the property of the Companies cannot be dealt with, or the revenues
thereof appropriated, except by what would be tantamount to an act of
confiscation.

The Goldsmiths' Company received none of their property by way of
endowment from the Crown, or from any person or persons outside the
Corporation itself. Its property was originally created by subscriptions
and contributions from amongst the members themselves, and from gifts
and devises made to them by members of their own body.

From the funds so acquired, a very considerable portion of their pro-

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 217

perty was purchased from the Crown, after it had become vested in the Purchase from
Crown by the statute of the 1st of Edward the Sixth, and there is no Edward VI.
more ground for interfering with it than there would be for the State
to dispossess those landowners whose ancestors, after the abbey lands
became forfeited, received grants of them from the Crown. If there
really be any question as to the right of the Company to deal as it pleases
with its general corporate property, the Companies claim that the ques-
tion be decided by a court of law in the due administration of justice,
and not by the opinion of Messrs. Beale, Phillips, and Gilbert.

Original intention of Foundation.

The original intentions of the founders of the Company are shown
by the Company's returns : the protection of their trade or mystery was
one of them, but there can be no doubt that there were other objects of
a charitable and social character. In point of fact it was (to use the old
name) a fraternity, and hospitality and social enjoyment amongst them-
selves were amongst its objects. It is clear that there has been, by an
unbroken practice of at least five centuries, an indefinite and arbitrary,
but a substantial, portion of their income applied to hospitality and
entertainments. The expenditure in the year 1367 of 211. 8s. 9d. upon
a single entertainment, the value of money and the amount of the then
property of the Company being taken into consideration, is an outlay
which may compare with the costliest entertainment of modern days ;
and from that time down to the present such an. application of a part
of the Company's income has been habitual and continuous.

Entertainments.

Upon the subject of the cost of these entertainments there has
been the grossest exaggeration ; and, indeed, the publications of the
assailants of the Companies which preceded the appointment of the
Commission are full of erroneous and prejudicial statements which
never ought to have been made.

We will mention a few of them. In a book entitled " Municipal " Municipal
'London," published in 1876, we find it stated at page 52 that " in London:"
' those Companies where admission to the governing body is a matter 1"correct
' of seniority, it is customary for members to enter their sons on the S
' rolls of the Company before they are breeched, so that they may have
' substantial benefit from it in their early manhood." This is mani-
festly untrue, for no man can be admitted to the freedom and enrolled
a member of any of those Companies until he is twenty-one years of
age. Then at page 53 it is stated that " no advantage is, as a rule, now
" offered to any member of the particular trade who may wish to become
" a member of the Company, but he would be required to pay as much
" as anyone else." This is untrue as regards the Goldsmiths' Company,
for a member of the trade or craft only pays half the sum paid by a
person who does not belong thereto. Then at page 56 it is stated that
" it is a matter of common repute that the estates of Companies are Especially as
" often leased to members at absurd rentals, enabling the lucky lessees to sub-letting;
" to make an excellent profit in re-letting them." Upon this assertion
we wish specially to remark.

The Commissioners, by their interrogatories, asked us to give an
account of our property and of the leases under which it was held,
Avith the name of the lessee or occupier, and it was asked ivhether he was
a member. After having read the passage last referred to in the work
entitled " Municipal London," we can now understand what induced

248

ROYAL COMMISSION.

and advan-
tages of mem-
bership.

Connection
with trade.

Pensions

Entertain-
meLts.

Mr. Gilbert.

the Commissioners to make this inquiry. Now, although we cannot see
any objection to a lease being granted to a member at the market value
of the day, yet as a matter of fact, in the case of the Goldsmiths' Com-
pany, Mr. Pridcaux, in his long experience, does not know of any case
in which any portion of their property has been leased to a member ;
and we believe the same may be said of the other principal Companies.
The statement, therefore, is a very calumnious one.

Advantages.

The author, in the same page, speaks of the advantages which a
member of the Court of a City Company obtains. He speaks of the
salary as if it was one of a very large amount. Now, a member of the
Court of the Goldsmiths' Company, if he be neither a warden nor a
member of the Committee, were he to attend every court in a year,
would receive under 50/.

The writer then says, " in addition to their salaries they sometimes
" find a bank note delicately secreted under their plates." So far as
regards the Goldsmiths' Company,' this is untrue, and we do not believe
there is any foundation whatever for it as regards any other Company.

He then says that relations may be educated in the Company's schools
and then accommodated with exhibitions in the University free of
expense.

The Goldsmiths' Company have established seventy-six exhibitions
at the Universities, which are given by competition and not by favour,
and I never knew of any one who was related to, or connected with, a
member of the Court of the Goldsmiths' Company who held one of
these exhibitions.

Furthermore, the writer says, at page 68, that " the Charters of all
" the Incorporated Companies expressly state them to be composed of
" working members of the different trades or mysteries which they
"represent." This, again, is incorrect. At the time when the later
charters were granted, a great number of the members of the fraternities
were notoriously persons who did not belong to the trades whose names
the Companies bear, and at the date of the letters patent of James I. of
the 24th of July, 1619, by which the king confirmed to the Goldsmiths'
Company the possession of all the property which they then possessed,
specifying the houses and tenements in a particular manner, neither the
members of the Corporation nor of the governing body were exclusively
members of the trade. Indeed, there is every probability that the
majority of the members were not connected therewith.

At page 73 of the same book, the writer says, speaking of the Gold-
smiths' Company : " It is commonly reported, with what truth we know
" not, the pension of a decayed Goldsmith is in some cases as much as
" 3001. a year." An examination of the returns made by the Gold-
smiths' Company will show how utterly unfounded this statement is.

Again, at page 85, we find the following passage in a note : " It is
" said that the Goldsmiths expend more than 30,000/. per annum in dining,
" and the Fishmongers, Ironmongers, Clothworkers, Skinners, and
" Grocers are not far in the background."

An examination of the returns of the Goldsmiths' Company will show
that the expenditure on entertainments, including, of course, wines, on
an average of ten years has been under 60001. a year, or about one-
eighth part of the total income of the Company.

Many of these erroneous statements are repeated in Mr. Gilbert's book ,
entitled "The City," published in 1877. This writer, moreover, quotes
a letter from the Weekly Dispatch, signed " Nemesis," in which the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 249

writer says of the Goldsmiths' Company that it has a total assumed
income of over 150,OOOZ. per annum, of which we have no account
except as regards certain properties which he specifies, and of these
properties he mentions the following : —

6 houses at Alb. Hay,

5 „ at Halle, and

6 ,, at Malton,

of which houses or places AVO, never heard, nor have we the smallest idea
to what properties he alludes.

Mr. Firth's Propositions.

In the Avork intituled " Municipal London," the Avriter sums up his
case against the Livery Companies in nine propositions, all of Avhich are,
either partially or entirely, unfounded, except so far as they contain
matter of opinion.

Connection with Municipality.

The first proposition is that " the Livery Companies are an integral Integral pirt
" part of the Corporation." &£**"*'

This is directly contrary to the decision of the judges delivered in a
judgment in error in 1775, Avhich reversed the disfranchisement of Mr.
Alderman Plumbe upon a prosecution of the common serjeant in the
Lord Mayor's Court, for refusing to summon the livery of the Gold-
smiths' Company, of which he had been at the time prime Avarden, to
attend at Guildhall to hear his Majesty's answer to the humble address
and remonstrance of the Corporation of London, in the mayoralty of
Mr. Alderman Beckford, on which occasion Lord Chief Justice de Grey
is reported to have said : " Thus far Ave knoAv that the constitutiou of
" the City of London does not contain these Companies. I mean origi-
nally and from their charters and all prescriptive rights : it is by sub-
sequent action that they came noAv to bear the relation they do to
these Companies as livery. The livery are not formed out of their
corporate body ; some of them are supposed to have existed imme-
morially. They are not created by the king, but if it was a grant
from the king they are not essential to the constitution, but might
exist independently of it ; therefore, whatever their constituent parts,
" their obligations, duties, powers, customs, and rights are, either as
" altogether or as individuals, they are no part of the city customs, but
" a subordinate detached and independent body — I mean independent
" with regard to their original institutions." And in another part of his
judgment the Lord Chief Justice says : " Much less have we judicial
"knowledge of the particular subordinate rights of fraternities, com-
panies, and guilds Avhich make a part of the city, though not a part of
" the Corporation of the city originally, nor of their subordinate poAver,
" duties, and offices."

N"OAV, Avith regard to this matter, AVO have to make a very grave com- Misrepre-
plaint. It is this, that Mr. Beale in his evidence before the Commis- ?£nt!*uo[' "f
sioners has actually represented that the judgment Avas in favour of the
Corporation instead of the Goldsmiths' Company.

By question 824 he was asked by the hon. member for Chelsea,
" Have you read the decision in the case of the Eefractory Companies in
" 1775, when betAveen the Corporation and the Goldsmiths' Company
" the question Avas contested 1" to which he ansAvered "Yes." He was
then asked, " What was the effect of that decision ? " to AArhich he replied,

250

KOYAL COMMISSION.

Position of
Companies as
regards the
municipality.

" The Companies were found to be in tho wrong, and that they were
" an integral part of the Corporation, and it is fully set out in your o\vn
" book, ' Municipal London ; ' " and on referring to " Municipal London,"
page 43, we find in a note it is stated that in the case of the trial of the
Refractory Companies in 1773, " the Warden of the Goldsmiths' Coni-
" pany was successfully prosecuted in the Mayor's Court for inattention
" to a summons to Common Hall on other than election business."

The truth is that an information of disfranchisement was filed against
Mr. Alderman Pluinbe in the Mayor's Court, and a verdict given for the
plaintiff. The defendant obtained a writ of error, and the judgment was
reversed by a Court of Error on the occasion above referred to. It is
manifest that if Mr. Beale's evidence, and the statement in " Municipal
London," had passed unnoticed and uncorrected, the Commissioners might
have been entirely misled.

The fact is, that the liverymen have the right of voting for some of
^e c^v °fficers (n°t all) if they are also freemen of the city of London ;
but a citizen may be a freeman and a, liveryman of a company without
being a freeman of the city of London, and it is possible that none of the
members of a company might be free of the city. Some of the companies
have no livery, and that this was so, so far back as the middle of the
17th century, is shown by the recitals in an Act of the Common Council
passed on the 4th of November, 1651, which are as follows : — " Whereas
" by the ancient charters granted and confirmed to this city, the election
" of the mayor, sheriff, and other officers of the said city ought to be by
" the citizens or commonalty, Avhereby it is evident that the commonalty,
" either personally (if without confusion it might be done) or by their
" representatives chosen by them for that purpose, were to have votes on
" all such elections ; but of later times the masters, wardens, and liveries
" of the several companies of this city have used and taken upon them,
" with the exclusion of all other citizens, to make the said elections,
" which practice of theirs seems to be grounded upon an Act of Com-
" mon Council, made the 23rd day of September, in the seventh year of
" King Edward IY., before which time the same elections had been made
by a certain number of persons chosen out of every ward for that pur-
pose, as appeareth by an Act or Order of the Common Hall, made in
the twentieth year of King Edward III., whereby to avoid incon-
veniences which happened before that time in general assemblies of the
citizens, the method of elections by representatives was appointed.
Now, forasmuch as divers Companies of the citizens of this city have no
livery at all, and so have no manner of vote in the elections by liveries,
and for that by the constitution of most of the other Companies, the
" liveries thereof are not chosen by the whole brotherhood, but by a few, as
" namely by the wardens and assistants only, and thereby the greatest
*•' part of the citizens, members of those Companies, are also excluded from
"having any vote, either in person or representation in the elections
" before mentioned ; and so that great privilege of choosing their mayor,
" sheriffs, and other officers is wholly taken away from them to their
" great grief, occasioning thereby their often complaining."

Before the year 1835 no person could be admitted to the freedom of
the city who did not belong to one of the trade companies, but by a
resolution of the Court of Common Council of the 17th of March, 1835,
this condition was repealed, and it is no longer necessary that a freeman
should be a liveryman, or a member of one of the city Companies.

This first proposition of the author therefore we maintain is entirely
unfounded, and is directly contrary to a legal decision cited by him
in support of it.

LONDON CUT LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 251

Public Trust Property.

The second proposition is, that " The property is public trust property,
" and much of it is available for municipal purposes."

This we submit has been shown to be unfounded by the remarks which
we had the honour to address to the Commissioners in November last,
and by the preceding statements.

London Tradesmen and Artisans.

The third is, " The Companies are trustees of vast estates of which
" London tradesmen and artisans ought to be the beneficiaries, but such
" trusts are disregarded."

This is untrue, for all the trusts reposed in the Companies have been
faithfully fulfilled.

Estates applicable to charitable uses.

The fourth proposition is, " The Companies are also trustees of estates
" applicable to charitable uses. They fail to apply to such uses the funds
" fairly applicable to them."

This, again, is untrue. With regard to the Goldsmiths' Company, we
appeal confidently to the report of Mr. Hare, which has been sent to the
Commissioners, a report made after an examination, at the hall of the
Company, into all the charities vested in the Company, which examina-
tion extended over a period of upwards of three months.

Connection with Trade.

The fifth proposition is, " The Companies were incorporated to benefit
" trades, to train artisans, and to repress bad workmanship. They
" perform none of these functions."

The Goldsmiths' Company notably perform all these functions at the
present time. They are entrusted by statute with the supervision of the
trade, and they help to train artisans by offering prizes for excellence in
the design and execution of works in the precious metals.

Companies to be Members of Trade.

We know of no law which would compel the Company to admit any
person a member of it, unless he were entitled to become a freeman by
servitude or patrimony ; and that they have admitted members, irrespec-
tive of trade, from time immemorial, is notorious.

Companies subject to the control of the Corporation.

That some sort of control was exercised by the Corporation in ancient
times there is no doubt. It has long ceased to be exercised. The
Municipal Corporation Commissioners, in their report of the year 1837,
say : " The Corporation possesses a very slight, indeed hardly more than
" a nominal, control over the Companies."

252

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Companies subject to the control of the Crown.

This is not true. The Companies are not subject to the control of
the Crown. The Goldsmiths' Company have stated in their returns, at
page 58, that it is an established principle of law that the Crown cannot
derogate from its own grant, and that when a charter has once been
granted, the Crown cannot afterwards interfere with the operation of its
provisions, or with the privileges, rights, and liabilities incident to a
corporation. This statement, we contend, is a true representation of the
law ; and, with regard to the assertion that the Companies continue to
hold the lands granted to them on condition that they performed certain
duties, we have to remark that it does not appear that any lands were
granted to the Companies by the Crown, excepting those for which they
paid, and that the lands that are held by the Companies, and which
constitute their general corporate property, were, for the most part, given
to them by members of their own body, either upon trusts which have
been duly performed, or without any trust for their general corporate
purposes, and many of these gifts and devises were made at times when
most of the Companies had ceased to perform any duties whatever.

Lands in hands of Corporations.

The ninth and last proposition is that " The continuance of a large
" amount of land in the heart of the city and in the north of Ireland in
" the hands of corporate and unproductive bodies is a hindrance to
" commerce and a loss to the public revenue."

Upon this we have to remark that there is nothing to prevent a cor-
poration from changing the investments of their property.

If they were prevented from alienating their real property, there might
be some ground for the opinion here expressed ; but they can sell in the
same manner as any private proprietor. As to the public revenue, we
have always considered that it would be right for corporations like those
of the city of London to pay succession duty at stated periods.

This ninth proposition having been stated, the writer concludes with
the remark that "if these propositions are established by the report
" of such a commission, there will not be much doubt as to what
" ought to be done with the Livery Companies ;" and so he dismisses
the case, apparently with perfect confidence as to the result.

D fferenco
between
Franco and
England.

Entertainments.

To refer again to the subject of expenditure made on entertainments
and hospitality, we wish to remark that entertainments, such as those of
the Livery Companies, not only afford much enjoyment to the members
of the Companies themselves, but that they do real good in bringing
together people of different classes and of different opinions. They are,
in point of fact, English institutions ; and the difference betAveen the
effect which is produced amongst Englishmen by differences of opinion,
on matters of politics especially, from that which exists in the nations of
the Continent, especially in France, may, we think, be traced to a great
extent to the habit which Englishmen have of meeting together for pur-
poses of good fellowship and conviviality. When a man who has ren-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 253

tiered great services to his country abroad, returns to England, one of the
first things that Englishmen do is to give him a dinner, which affords to
a vast number of people an opportunity of seeing and hearing him. The
Livery Companies of the city of London have enrolled amongst their
members some of the most eminent men in England in all the professions.
These men are frequently entertained with other persons at their halls,
and it cannot be denied that these entertainments give them an oppor-
tunity of exercising an influence upon the community at large.

Mr. Prideaux remembers two eminent Frenchmen, each of whom, on 9lpi^i?.1n8 of
separate occasions, after having dined at Goldsmiths' Hall, remarked to garret and
him how much he regretted that there were no such institutions as these M. de Lesseps.
Companies in France. Those two persons were the late M. Odillon
Barret and M. de Lesseps.

In mentioning these entertainments we feel constrained to allude with
indignation to a passage in Mr. Beale's evidence before the Commis-
sioners.

Mr. Beale says, in answer to Question 726, "A dinner at Goldsmiths' Mr. Beale.
" Hall is not a very elevating sight, and I think that the emptying of
" the halls is a still less elevating sight."

This remark is gratuitously insulting. A dinner at Goldsmiths' Hall
is conducted with as much decorum as any dinner of any body of
gentlemen in the kingdom. It is not likely that Mr. Beale was ever
asked to a dinner at Goldsmiths' Hall. Certainly he was never asked
by any member of the governing body. We can only regard the above
remark as a calumny of his own invention.

Mr. Phillips.

Before quitting the evidence of Messrs. Beale, Phillips, and Gilbert, we
have to remark upon certain other passages therein. Mr. Phillips states
he is the author of two articles in magazines, one in The British Quarterly
Review, the other in Eraser. He is also the author of articles in
papers signed " Censor." In answer to Question 1470 he says : " Never
" in my life by one word that I have ever written have I suggested any
" dishonour to any single member of those Companies."

This may be literally true. He has been too cautious ; for to have
singled out and named a member and imputed dishonour to him would
have rendered him liable to the law of libel ; but in one of his publica-
tions is the following passage, viz. : " The conduct of the Companies has
" been such in their trusts as, if they had been private individuals, would
" have subjected them to be treated as criminals."

And of the Goldsmiths' Company he says, "It would be the easiest
" thing in the world to multiply instances of this kind which show a
" dereliction of duty and a meanness which is truly despicable."

If this is not imputing dishonour, we know not what dishonour is.

Education.

One of the points made by the three witnesses has been that what the
Company have done in the promotion of objects of public utility, and
especially of education, has been done of late years in consequence of the
agitation which was instituted by themselves, or the persons whom they
represent. In refutation of this, the Goldsmiths' Company appeal con-
fidently to their own history. Company

At the commencement of this century the income of the Company w.is P°°r at fc''e
very small. By good management from that time to this it has gradually mentTof the
increased, and the charities of the Company, and their expenditure upon century.

254 ROYAL COMMISSION.

objects of public utility, have, during the whole of that period, been com-
mensurate with the increase of their income. As to education, it appears
to have been always a favourite object of the Company. The voluntary
expenditure upon Stockport school from the year 1830 to the year 1850,
and also that on the schools at Crouier and Bromyard, as stated at page 56
of the Company's returns; the establishment of seventy-six exhibitions
at the Universities, as also stated in the same return ; the aid given to
the Society for the Promotion of the Higher Education of Women, and
the prizes for the encouragement of technical education in the design
and execution of works in the precious metals, established by the Company
twelve years since, are evidence of this.

As it has The history of the Company's exhibitions furnishes a striking illus-

has^eerTm" ^1>a^on °^ mv assertion that the expenditure of the Company in charity
charitable. ^as grown with its gradually increasing wealth. The first exhibitions
were instituted in the year 1822, when three of 201. each were established
at each university. In 1828 the number was increased to five, and the
amount to 25/. per annum. In 1829 the number was increased to six at
each University. In 1834 it was resolved that a gratuity of 201. be given
to every exhibitioner who shall have graduated in honours. In 1837
three additional exhibitions were established at each University, and the
amount was increased to 301. a year. In 1839 two more were established
at each Universily. In 1846 one more at each University. In 1849
five more were established at each University. In 1855 an exhibition
of 50/. was established for a scholar of the City of London School. In
1860 an exhibition was placed at the disposal of Mr. Chase, the Principal
of St. Mary Hall, for the encouragement of students at that hall. In
1865 the exhibitions were increased to 501. a year. In 1871 ten more
exhibitions were established at each University. And in 1876 the like
number ; so that at the present time there are thirty-seven at Oxford and
thirty-seven at Cambridge, besides an exhibition at St. Mary Hall, and
one for a scholar of the City of London School.

The Company have given the Commissioners what they asked for in
presenting them with a detailed account of the expenditure of the Com-
pany for ten y_ears. They would be perfectly ready to give such a state-
ment for the last thirty years ; and such a statement if given would show
a gradually increasing charity expenditure, made out of the general cor-
porate property of the Company, which has been continuous and com-
mensurate with its increasing income.

In order that the Commissioners might have an opportunity of judging
for themselves of the value of the expenditure upon general objects of
charity and public interest so made, the Company have given for each
year, as an appendix to their account, a list in detail of their donations,
and they feel that they can confidently appeal to these details in proof
of the care and discrimination with which the objects of their charity
have been chosen.

Working classes benefited by the Company.

It has been the object of Mr. Beale and his friends to try to represent to
the industrial classes at those public meetings of radical clubs which
he has told the Commissioners he has frequented, that the working classes
of the metropolis in some way or other would be benefited by the transfer
of the corporate property of the Livery Companies from the Companies to
some other body or trust, and used in some way for their benefit. We
think, if the working classes listened to the counsels of a safer adviser,
they would find that, instead of this being the case, a great deal of money
which is now expended by the Companies either directly or indirectly for

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 255

their benefit would be withdrawn from them, and that they would not
be likely to get an equivalent. Look at the expenditure in support of
hospitals, dispensaries, Avorking men's clubs, refuges, homes for Avorking
boys, orphan asylums, reformatory institutions, deaf and dumb persons,
families of men who have suffered from explosions in mine?, working lads'
institutes, shipwrecked mariners, homes for incurables, surgical aid
societies, and the pension society, asylums, and benevolent institutions
connected with the trade whose name the Goldsmiths' Company bear.

Before we quit the subject of the donations made by the companies,
•we wish to call attention to the following passage in Mr. Phillips's article
in the Neiv Quarterly Magazine, viz. : " Not a five-pound note is voted
" by a single one of the eighty odd companies which is not ostentatiously
" advertised in every popular newspaper. Little do the public think that
" this show of charity covers a mal-administration of trusts and a
" reckless disregard of charitable intentions such as find no parallel. The
" fact is, that in many cases these votes of money to charitable purposes
" are neither more nor less than conscience money." All this is utterly
untrue. The Goldsmiths' Company never advertised a donation made
by them, and we do not believe that any other Company has done so.
Some of these donations no doubt get into the public papers, but, in
nine cases out of ten, we believe it would be found that the advertisement
has come from the charitable institution benefited, and that it has been
mentioned with a view to stimulate and encourage the charity of others.

As to the mal-administration of trusts, charged by the author, there is
not the shadow of a pretence for the accusation. The whole passage
contains a calumnious charge, for which there is no foundation — a charge
which no public writer should have made without having ascertained
that there were sufficient grounds for it.

With regard to the expenditure on the poor of the Company, which Carefulness of
is made by the Company as trustees of several charities, we wish to state F°mp^"y ™
that the greatest care is taken in the investigation of every application for distress re-'
relief. After each case has been visited and inquired into by a responsible Heved.
officer, a written report is made to the standing committee of the
Company, and, when the case comes to be considered, the applicants
are made to attend, if able to do so, in order that inquiries may be made
of the applicants themselves. We desire to produce to the Com-
missioners the books containing the written reports upon these cases for
the last ten years. It is impossible, we believe, for greater care to be
taken in the administration of the trusts reposed in the Company for the
benefit of their poor. The amount of good done, and of real suffering
and undeserved want which is relieved by these charities, is very great ;
and as a proof that they are administered with care and discrimination,
and so as not to weaken the spirit of self-dependence, we may mention
that the number of members of the Company of this class who apply for
assistance has been for some time gradually diminishing.

ROYAL COMMISSION'.

SKINNERS' COMPANY.

MEMORIAL.

Skinners' Hall,

Wth April, 1883.

To the Secretary to the City of London Liver// Companies' Commission.

" SIR, — In reply to your letter of the 10th of November last, in which
the Commissioners inquire what is the intention of the Skinners' Com-
pany with regard to the evidence and statements orally given to the
Commissioners, and affecting the Companies, it seems to the Skinners'
Company that the return made in 1881 in answer to the Com-
missioners' queries was rendered so fully that it is not necessary to
trouble the Commissioners to hear witnesses on their behalf ; but they
desire to submit the following observations, which, being mainly directed
to controvert statements made by various persons taking an unfavourable
view of the constitution, administration, and proprietary rights of the
Company, will, the Company trust, receive at the hands of the Commis-
sioners attention and publicity at least equal to what has been accorded
to such statements.

The only evidence which appears to affect the Skinners' Company with
reference to the trusts committed to their care is contained in the ap-
pendix to Mr. Lucraft's evidence on the 13th day, viz., the 19th of July,
1882, in reference to the gift of Margaret Audley.

Mr. Lu craft states that the sum of 700?. was given to be spent in
land, and the income to be applied to charitable purposes. This is not
correct. The Company were at liberty to expend the sum of TOO/, in
land or otherwise as they might choose, no reference being made in the
bequest to the application of the income, whether for charitable pur-
poses or otherwise ; but it was made a condition of the acceptance of the
gift that the sum of 351. was to be paid annually to the parish of Hackney.
The Company at first declined the gift, but accepted it on being pressed
by the parish of Hackney to do so, and the payment has been annually
made by the Company to the parish ever since, as stated in their return
— Part I. — Letter L, Charities.

But the attention of the Company has been especially called to the
print of evidence given before the Commissioners on the 12th of July
last, generally with regard to the nature of the title by which the Livery
Companies of London became owners of estates in the county of London-
derry, Ireland, in the 17th century, and particularly with respect to the
management by the Skinners' Company of the Pellipar estate in that
county, and their recent negotiations with the tenantry there.

The important question of ownership, by this and other Livery Com-
panies, of estates in Londonderry has been separately dealt with in the
accompanying short historical account of the mode in which those estates
were acquired. It entirely disposes of the assertions (1) that the Com-
panies are not private owners, but trustees of the estates for public
purposes ; and (2) that what has been called the purchase money was
raised by a tax on the citizens of London.

The recent negotiations Avith the tenantry are referred to in the

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 257

minutes of evidence of the 12th of July last, questions Nos. 1897 to 1905, Skinners'
and the answers given by Dr. Todd, a solicitor of Londonderry. Company.

That witness professed to describe from personal knowledge the mode
in which negotiations were carried on between the Company and the
tenants, with a view to fixing a fair rent, instead of having recourse to
the Land Court. His statements are not true, and, if allowed to pass
unchallenged, they will probably be commented upon hereafter by
speakers and writers to the Company's prejudice.

It may possibly be not out of place to revert to the question of rent as
settled between the Skinners' Company and the tenants some few years
ago, in order to lead up to an adequate description of these negotiations
with which Dr Todd finds so much fault, and for which the Company
do not hesitate to claim some credit, both as to the principle under-
lying such negotiations and the method of carrying them into effect.
Without going back to the time when the Pellipar estate, like many
others in Ireland, was let on lease and managed by the resident lessee,
the Company wish to state that the lease to Mr. Ogilby expired in 1872,
and the Company then took steps to manage the estate for themselves.
As nearly thirty years had elapsed since the estate was valued, and as no
alteration of rent has been made for a much longer period, notwithstand-
ing the rise in all agricultural produce in Ireland, it seemed reasonable,
and in accordance with the custom of the country, that a re-valuation
should be made. The estate Avas re-valued, and the Company felt
satisfied that the then existing rental might be fairly raised ; and having
found that great difficulty would arise in settling with the tenants indi-
vidually, the total number being upwards of a thousand, and because the
tenants had always been dealt with as a whole, it was resolved to divide
the holdings into three classes, and fix a uniform but classified rate of
increase for each class, notifying the increase of rent to each tenant
personally by written notice, as being necessary in law, and in order that
any tenant who chose might have an opportunity to state any circum-
stances which should be a reason for not agreeing to the alteration.

Such increase did not take effect until the year 1877. The rental of
the estate was then raised from 11,600Z. to 13,OOOZ., the Government
valuation being 13,200/. The only special objection made to the increase
was by the lessees of a large grazing farm, who eventually brought a
claim against the Company, but failed ; the farm was shortly afterwards
let to another tenant, who came forward, unsolicited, and offered the
rent which the previous tenants had declined to pay.

It is well known that the seasons following 1877 were more or less
bad, and accompanying these bad seasons the agitation commenced, which
eventually affected those parts of Ireland which had been hitherto settled
and orderly. It was then that large arrears of rent began to accrue ; and
the Company allowed abatements of rent in the years 1879 and 1880, as
was stated before the Commissioners when Dr. Todd was examined.

In the autumn of the year 1881, after the Land Law (Ireland) Act
had been passed, but before any applications to the Land Court under
the Act had been heard, several memorials from tenants on the Pellipar
estate were forwarded to the Company, praying for large reductions of
rent. The Company saw that, under the Act, if they and the tenants
individually could arrive at a fair valuation, it might be possible to have
all over the estate a rental fixed upon a basis and by a mode having the
authority and sanction of a legally constituted court of arbitration.

Accordingly they issued a circular letter to the tenants, suggesting to
those who proposed to apply to the Land Court, that, before doing so,
they should furnish the Company, through their agent, with the grounds
upon which they individually proposed to show that their rent should be

258 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Skinners' altered. The Company felt that there would be very many tenants who
Company. would at once see that if they were ultimately obliged to resort to the
Land Court their cases would be considered separately there, and that it
ought not to prejudice their claims in Court if they made separate appli-
cations to their landlords first. The result was that some hundreds of
the tenants did individually write letters to the Company, stating reasons
in favour of a reduction of rent ; and the Company took steps to ascer-
tain the value of each holding, with the view to entering into an agree-
ment with the tenant as provided by the Act. They felt that this course
might preserve a good feeling between landlords and tenants, might
save expenses, and relieve the block in the Commissioners' Court, which,
even in the autumn of 1881, threatened to arise, and so assist in giving
effect to the intentions of the Legislature. Simultaneously with the issue
of this circular letter, some fifty or sixty notices from tenants on one
part of the estate were served upon the Company for their cases to be
heard in court. This was mainly done at the solicitation of Dr. Todd,
who took upon himself to attempt to dissuade the tenants from settling
their rents amicably with the Company.

Early in 1882 the Company determined to send over to Ireland a
senior member of their governing body and the clerk of the Company, to
ascertain, by personal interviews with the tenants who had written
letters, whether they would enter into agreements for a judicial rent for
fifteen years under the Act, without having recourse to legal proceedings.

These gentlemen, having gone over to Dungiven in March, 1882,
intimated by messages to such tenants that they would be glad to receive
them at the agent's office on certain days. The tenants attended as
requested, almost without exception, and were received in a small room
in the office at which they were in the habit of attending, and with as
little ceremony as possible. The only persons present who were strangers
to them were the two gentlemen from London. The resident agent and
the surveyor, who have been more than fifty years on the estate, and
against whom no tenant has ever made complaint, were present ; and
Mr. B. H. Lane, a solicitor well known in the district, who resides at
limavady, and acts as the Company's legal adviser in regard to the estate,
was also there on most days. In no case was there any semblance of
complaint by a tenant or his neighbours that undue pressure had been
put upon him to agree to a rent. The visit was an experiment to carry
out the clear intention of the Act of 1881.

On this occasion about 140 tenants were seen, and agreements made
with fifty-three ; but subsequently in August, that is, some weeks after
Dr. Todd's evidence had been given in London, and before it had been
brought to the knowledge of the Company, the same two gentlemen
went again to Ireland to continue the work commenced in March. On
this occasion they saw upwards of 200 tenants, and effected agreements
with about 125.

It is not true, as stated by Dr. Todd, that the tenant was " not allowed
" to have solicitor, counsel, friend, neighbour, or anybody with him "
during these negotiations. It is not true that pressure was put upon any
tenant to settle. The conversation was, almost without exception, carried
on between the tenant and one person representing the Company.

In answer to Questions 1903 to 1905, Dr. Todd misrepresents what
took place. As a matter of fact, when a tenant expressed his willingness
to agree to the proposed rent, he retired from the room where the con-
versation had taken place into an outer office full of other tenants waiting
for admission, and signed the statutory form (as required by the Act) in
the presence of a poor-law guardian or minister, sometimes in the office,
sometimes in the witness's house.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 259

The foregoing is a fair description of the negotiations. Dr. Todd knew Skinners'
nothing personally of what took place. In making the proposal and in Company,
carrying it out, the Company have neither sought to dissuade any tenant
from litigation who has served any notice under the Act (but several
tenants who had served notices have come in voluntarily and entered
into agreements) ; nor, on the other hand, have they put any pressure
upon tenants to agree to the terms which have been suggested after care-
ful consideration of the provisions of the Act. The Company trust that
before many months have elapsed the rents of all the agricultural holdings
on the estate will be fixed by the mode which has been described, unless
tenants are solicited to enter the Land Court in large numbers. There
are nearly 1000 agricultural tenants on the estate. Voluntary agreements
are being made as opportunity arises for the agent to confer with the
tenants. At the present time about 310 tenants have entered into agree-
ments, and the rents of some sixty others have been recently fixed by the
Land Court.

In Part 4, Return A., already submitted by the Company to the Com-
missioners, under the head of "Explanatory Notes and Remarks," a
general statement is made as to what has been expended by the Company
for the tenants upon the estate ; and it was therefore a matter of some
surprise to the Company to find that Dr. Todd said, in answer to Ques-
tion 1894, that the Company had spent in no "single instance a
" single sixpence in agricultural improvements, or given the slightest
" benefit to their tenantry." They would here repeat that they support
and repair, as they believe liberally, all the schools on the estate recog-
nized by the National Board of Education. They have erected and re-
paired school buildings, and make annual grants towards the salaries
of the teachers. They devote, as occasion requires, the money received
from the sale of the advowsons on the estate under the Irish Church
Act, 1869, towards the purchase of glebes and repairing and maintaining
churches, and towards erecting chapels and ministers' houses. They
make annual grants to the clergy and ministers of the different religious
denominations, and to the medical officers of dispensaries. They sub-
scribe to various charities and societies, and make weekly or other
allowances to poor persons connected with the estate who have been left
desolate or have become infirm. They construct foot-bridges and main
drains. They also contribute frequently towards the repairs of river
banks and the making of turf roads, on the basis of contributing half the
estimated cost of any such work, the tenants lending horses and doing
a portion of the labour under the direction of the surveyor of the estate.

In no case within the Company's knowledge has any tenant left the
estate to become an agricultural occupier elsewhere in Ireland. In many
cases during the last few years strangers have come from other places to
be tenants on the Pellipar estate.

In the return already sent in reference was made to the support given
by the Company to recent railway projects. The Company agreed to
support these two undertakings (by guaranteeing five per cent, interest
upon sums of 20,000£. in one case, and 5000Z. in the other), shortly
after they had resolved to raise the rental as already stated, believing
that such works would open up those districts which are at present under
a disadvantage for carrying farm produce to market, and that in many
ways they would tend to the prosperity of the inhabitants, without
bringing any pecuniary advantage to the Company.

Before quitting this subject it may be added with reference to the
statement made by Sir Thomas McClure, M.P., on the 12th of July (on
which occasion he assumed that the tenure by the Companies of their
estates in Londondrry was impressed with a trust, and gave it as his

s 2

260 BOYAL COMMISSION.

Skinners' opinion that the Companies would best fulfil their alleged trusts by sell-
Company, jng to their tenants), that when he himself applied to the Skinners' Com-
pany to sell their estate to him, the Company received memorials from
the tenants then, as well as on other occasions, asking them not to sell.
Indeed, there is abundant evidence that the tenants have advantages
under the Companies as landlords which a private owner, buying in order
to secure a profit-rent, would not allow to his tenants ; and this fact
should be especially borne in mind when so many hostile statements,
frequently untrue, are being made with respect to the management of
the estates, while no allusion whatever is made to the Companies' many
acts of generosity to the very men who are induced to turn against
them.

The petition of March, 1881, to Mr. Gladstone, abounding in misstate-
ments (and which the Company would forbear to notice, were it not
placed upon the proceedings of the Commission on the introduction of
Sir Thomas McClure), is signed by one of the Company's tenants with-
out authority to write on their behalf, and is an unfortunate example of
the manner in which it is attempted to misrepresent the facts.

In conclusion, with respect to the contention which some of the wit-
nesses who have appeared before the Commission desire to raise with
regard to the position of the Companies as owners of property, viz., that
they were created by the Crown for trade purposes, that they held and
still hold their corporate property on trust for trade purposes, and that
when they ceased to be composed of trade members, and to exercise trade
functions, they ceased to be entitled to hold property or to exist, I am
desired to state that the Skinners' Company consider that they have
already sufficiently met this contention, so far as it affects them, in ad-
vance, by the concise history forwarded with their Eeturn to the Com-
missioners' queries, which was compiled with much care from charters,
grants, 'certified copies of public records, wills, deeds of bequest, and
books of the Company, extending over a period of several centuries, and
which there has been no attempt to controvert. I am directed, however,
to point out to the Commissioners shortly that, as appears from that
history, the Skinners' Company was an existing body, owning large pro-
perty and exercising important functions, before the grant of any Royal
Charter whatever ; that the earliest charter of the Company, that of
Edward III., recognized those facts, and simply regulated its position in
the commercial polity of that day ; that no evidence can be produced
which goes to show that at any time the whole or even a majority of the
members of the Company were trade members, but that all the evidence
proves the contrary ; that attempts actually made by "artesan skinners"
to establish a connection between the Company and the trade always
failed ; and that, notwithstanding that the Company has from the very
first dealt with its corporate property as its own, absolutely and for all
purposes, and the Courts were open to any complainant, the Company
has never been adjudged to hold that property for trade purposes or
subject to any trust whatever, nor has the Company's control of that
property ever been in any manner limited.

While of opinion that the allegations, general and special, which affect
them, have been fully met (such allegations appearing to consist mainly
of incorrect inferences from incomplete and inaccurate information), the
Skinners' Company will be happy to still further elucidate any point
upon which the Commissioners may desire additional information.

I have, &c.,

E. HERBERT DRAPER, Cleric.

LONDON CITY LIVEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 261

A SHORT HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OP THE CONNECTION OP THE LIVERY
COMPANIES OF LONDON WITH THE COUNTY OP LONDONDERRY, IRE-
LAND, HAVING SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE TlTLE OP THE SKINNERS*

COMPANY TO THE MANOR OF PELLIPAR, IN THE SAME COUNTY.

ONE of the witnesses who gave evidence before the City of London

Livery Companies' Commission in July, 1882, professes to show, in

paragraphs 1 and 2 of a printed statement handed in by him, the object

of the scheme devised on the confiscation of the estates of the Ulster

Earls ; and after quoting a State Paper issued by the Crown in 1608,

intituled "A Collection of such Orders and Conditions as are to be

4 observed by the Undertakers upon the distribution and plantation of

' the escheated Lands in Ulster," asserts that, " these Orders and Con-

' ditions, popularly known as the ' Articles of Plantation,' together with

' the various other public declarations of the King and Privy Council

' on the subject of the Plantation, are the bases and limits of the Title

' by which the Companies hold their Irish Estates."

This assertion is entirely incorrect, the fact being that these Articles
were issued by the king in reference to the general scheme of planting
the whole of the six northern counties, Armagh, Tyrone, Coleraine,
Donegal, Fermanagh, and Cavan, and state that " It was thought con-
" venient to declare to all his Majesty's subjects the several quantities
" of the proportions which should be distributed, the several sorts of
" Undertakers, manner of allotments, the estates, the rents, the tenures,
" with other articles to be observed, as well on his Majesty's behalf, as
"on the behalf of the Undertakers." They were issued before any
proposition was made to the City of London, and were not addressed to
the City or Companies by name, nor were they in any way applicable to
incorporated bodies or to the work of plantation afterwards undertaken
by the City on behalf of the Companies.

The Crown subsequently proposed to the City to undertake the
plantation of the county of Derry, and directed to the City a State
Paper, intituled, " Motives and Eeasons to induce the City to undertake
" the Plantation in the North of Ireland."

This paper did not in any way allude to the before-mentioned Articles
of Plantation ; but, after stating many matters, as to the products of the
country and the mercantile advantages to be gained by the undertaking,
and suggesting how easily the towns of Derry and Coleraine might be
made almost impregnable, and proposing the allotment of certain quan-
tities of lands for commons to those towns, it suggested " That the whole
" of the territory and county betwixt them, above twenty miles in
" length, might be planted with such Undertakers as the City of London
" should think good for their best profit."

The proposal was at first rejected, but upon the reconsideration of it
being pressed by the Crown it was again communicated to the Companies
with a request to them " to assemble together a competent number of the
' gravest and most substantial men of their several Companies to consider
' advisedly of the said project, every Company to nominate four men
' apiece of their several Companies, of best experience, to consider and
' set down such reasons, orders, demands, and other circumstances in
' writing as is fit to be remembered, required, or performed in the under-
" taking of so worthy and honourable an action."

262 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Connection of The Companies having accordingly reconsidered the proposal, do not,

tho Livery however, appear to have entertained it favourably ; but after further cor-

,ompanies respondence and interviews with the Privy Council a Committee repre-

Londonderry. senting the Companies went to view the place of the proposed Plantation.

On their return the Committee presented their report, referring (inter

alia) to " a request by them made to the Eight Honourable Sir Arthur

" Chichester, Knight, Lord Deputy of Ireland, to be resolved of certain

" doubts for the good of the City if they shall proceed in the intended

" Plantation, with his Lordship's answer under his hand to the same."

A further Committee was appointed to consider all circumstances and
matters concerning the proposed Plantation, and they reported they had
propounded to themselves four general heads under which they had
" handled every particular in its proper place [namely],
" 1st. What sums of money should be expended.
" 2ndly. What land and privileges should be demanded.
" Srdly. What things should be performed.
" 4thly. How all should be managed and ruled."
Several further interviews took place between the representatives of
the Companies and the Privy Council ; and, the terms of the former
being acceded to, a formal Agreement was, on the 28th of January, 1609,
entered into between the Crown and such representatives, by which the
Companies undertook the proposed Plantation.

This Agreement does not make the slightest allusion to the before-
mentioned Articles of Plantation, or motives and reasons, or mention or
suggest any trust for any person whatever. On the contrary (after
providing for the sites of the towns of Derry and Coleraine and the lands
to be laid thereto, and making provision as to woods, churches, and
glebes), the whole tenor of it is to secure everything agreed on to the
Undertakers in perpetuity for their sole profit. And, to give the greater
effect to this, it provides that " they should have seven years to make
" such other reasonable demands as time should show to be needful, but
" could not presently be foreseen."

Between the date of this Agreement and the Charter of 1613, King
James the First requested that several small matters stipulated for by the
Undertakers might be relinquished to the Crown, and the request was
conceded ; but, except in the matter of these small concessions, the
Agreement remained in full force up to the time of the Charter being
granted, and such Agreement formed the sole contract between the
Crown and the Companies.

The Agreement having been perfected was read at a Common Council
held at the Guildhall on the 30th of January, 1609, and it was there-
upon ordered " That for the better ordering, directing, and effecting of
" all things touching and concerning the said Plantation, and business
" thereunto belonging, there should be a Company constituted and
" established within the City of London, which Company should consist
" of one governor, one deputy to the governor, and four-and- twenty
" assistants, and that the governor and five of the said assistants should
" be aldermen of the City of London, and Mr. Kecorder of the City
" should likewise be one of the same assistants, and the deputy and the
" rest of the assistants should be commoners of the same City."

This Company (better known as the " Irish Society ") carried on the
business of the Plantation, receiving from time to time from the several
Companies advances of money for the purpose, until some time in the
year 1610, when it was proposed that the lands should be divided
amongst the Companies ; but the proposition remained in abeyance until
December, 1613, when it was resolved to carry it into effect. To accom-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 263

plish this it was agreed that all the moneys expended should be divided Connection of
into twelve portions ; that each of the twelve principal Companies should the Livery
represent one portion, having associated with it so many of the inferior Companies
Companies as, according to the sums disbursed by each, would make up Londonderry0
one twelfth portion ; and that a survey of the lands and hereditaments
of the Plantation should be made, and a division thereof effected into
twelve like portions, as nearly as circumstances would permit.

Commissioners were sent to survey the Plantation accordingly, and
after the lands and premises had been surveyed, a division of the greatest
part thereof was made into twelve lots, numbered from One to Twelve.
These lots were drawn for by the twelve principal Companies. Lot
number Twelve was drawn by the Skinners' Company as chief, having
associated with it the Stationers', Whitebakers', and Girdlers' Companies,
the sums disbursed by such four Companies making xtp a full proportion
of one-twelfth of the total moneys expended.

The Skinners' Company took possession of this twelfth portion (being
as is hereinafter mentioned that now known as the Manor of Pellipar),
but no formal grant or conveyance was made of it to the Company until
after the Charter of King James had been granted.

The residue of the lands and hereditaments, being principally the
towns of Deny and Coleraine and the ferries and, fisheries, were con-
sidered incapable of division, and remained vested in the Irish Society
for the benefit of all the subscribing Companies.

On the 29th of March, 1613, King James the First, by Charter,
created the city of Derry and the lands and hereditaments thereby
granted, into a county by itself, to be called the county of Londonderry ;
and for ordering and governing the said county, constituted " The Society
" of The Governor and Assistants, London, of The New Plantation in
" Ulster, within the realm of Ireland," and ordained that the Society
should at all times be able, and in law capable, to receive and possess
lands and hereditaments, and to grant lands and hereditaments by the
same name. The Charter then granted the lands and territories by their
special description to the Society, " to hold and enjoy the same, with all
" profits, &c., to the aforesaid Society and their successors, to the only
" proper use and behoof of the said Society and their successors for ever."

The Society so constituted by the Charter was the same body as was
created by the City under the name of a Company, and is generally
known as the Irish Society, as already mentioned.

To enable the before-mentioned resolution for a division of the lands
and hereditaments amongst the Companies to be carried into effect, the
king, by letters patent, dated the 30th of September, 1615, granted the
Irish Society and the Companies a licence to hold the lands in mortmain,
" to the end that the Companies might be encouraged to proceed and
" finish the Plantation, and in future tymes reape some gain and
" benefit of their great travailies and expenses taken and bestowed
" therein."

On the llth of July, 1616, the Irish Society, by deed, created a manor
of all the lands, tenements, and hereditaments now held by the Skinners'
Company, by the name of the Manor of Pellipar ; and by deed dated the
22nd of March, 1617, the Society granted the said Manor of Pellipar,
and all profits arising out of it, to the Skinners' Company, to hold "to
" the only use and behoof of the said maister, wardens, and comunaltie
" of the misterie of the Skinners of London, their successors and assigns
" for ever," and the grant contains a covenant on the part of the Society
for quiet enjoyment by the Skinners' Company of the manor, lands, and
hereditaments, and receipt of the rents thereof to the Company's own
use and uses for ever.

264 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Connection of During the troublous times in the reign of King Charles the First,
B Livery certain proceedings were taken in the Court of Star Chamber for repeal-
wkh^county of *n« ^e a^°ve Charter or Letters Patent, but it becomes unimportant to
Londonderry, relate these in any detail, for two reasons, — first, that by a vote of
the House of Commons of October, 1641, it was resolved that the
sentence in the Star Chamber was unlawful and unjust ; and, second,
that King Charles the Second, by Charter dated the 10th of April, 1662
(after a recital that King Charles the First had given his directions for
the restoration to the Irish Society and the Companies of their lands, &c.,
originally granted by the Charter or Letters Patent of 1613, but that his
royal intention had not taken effect in consequence of the wars and
troubles in Ireland), re-granted to the Irish Society the lands and here-
ditaments formerly granted by the Charter of 1613.

The Irish Society, following the same course as had been pursued
after the Charter of 1613, again executed a conveyance of the Manor of
Pellipar to the Skinners' Company, dated the 5th of June, 1663.

The above Charters, Letters Patent, and conveyances, constitute the
basis of the Company's title to their Irish estates, and in no one of them
is there any allusion or reference whatever to " The Articles of Plan-
tations " or the " motives and reasons " referred to by the witnesses
from Ireland who gave evidence before the Commissioners in July,
1882.

In the answer to questions numbered from 1824 to 1955 continuously,
reference is made to the "Provisions of the Charter," and it is
asserted that the Companies' Irish estates are trust estates, and that
the moneys expended upon the Plantation were raised by a tax upon
the citizens.

With regard to the assertion that the estates are trust estates, the
Skinners' Company state with confidence that there is nothing whatever
in any of the documents under which the Companies derive their title
which could be construed as, either directly or indirectly, creating any
trust. Moreover, the documentary evidence already referred to shows
that in return for the moneys expended by them, the profits were
intended to be derived by the Companies only. It may also be observed
that there is no instance known to the Company of the estate of any
individual undertaker who took, subject to the articles, being held to be
subject to any trust.

With regard to the assertion that the moneys expended on the
Plantation were raised by a tax on the citizens, even if it were true, such
fact would not in any way create a trust for the tenants on the estate, or
militate against the Company's claim to be absolute owners of the estate.
The City, however, in a petition presented to the House of Commons in
1641, stated (as is the fact) "that they, the City of London, never
" undertook the said Plantation, or, as to the use of the City, disbursed
" any money thereabouts, but that their name was only used for the
" better transaction of that business, and only as a means to forward the
" Plantation, and raise moneys by and from the several Companies, which
" otherwise could never have been effected."

The money so raised and contributed by the Skinners' Company was
temporarily levied from the members of the Company in accordance with
a recognized custom, and the books and records of the Company show
repayment to members of the several sums advanced by them.

In conclusion, it may be mentioned that several Companies have,
at different times, sold their Irish estates, and have (as is well known)
been advised by eminent counsel that they were able to give a good title
for the purpose. In like manner the Stationers' and Whitebakers'

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 265

Companies have, within the last few years (as already stated in the Connection of
Company's Return to the Commissioners), sold their interests in the the Livery
Pellipar estate to the Skinners' Company, who gave a large consideration ^{| count* of
for the same, relying upon the fact that such Companies were entitled, Londonderry!
for their own use, to a share of the rents and profits of the estate
in proportion to their quota of the contributions made by the four
Companies at the time of the division in the year 1610.

Skinners' Hall, London,
April, 1883.

MERCHANT TAYLORS' COMPANY.

MEMORANDUM.

THE Royal Commissioners to inquire into the condition of Livery
Companies having sent to the Merchant Taylors' Company, for their
perusal, the evidence taken on the first eight days of their inquiry, the
Company deem it to be their duty, no less than their right, to point
out substantial mi-statements of fact, and erroneous conclusions drawn
from them, which two of the witnesses have laid before the Com-
missioners.

1. That the Merchant Taylors' Company have appropriated moneys of

which they were trustees ;

2. That they have also misconducted themselves in their capacities of

landlords,

3. And as governors of their school ; and this conduct is rendered all

the more heinous, as in so acting they are doing violence to the
rights of the London poor.

It is obvious that the purpose of some of the witnesses is to represent
the Livery Companies as corporations created by the poor, and for the
special benefit of the poor ; as being the recipients of wealth accumulated
from yearly contributions levied upon the poor freeman in former cen-
turies. This representation, the Merchant Taylors' Company have here
to submit, has no historical foundation. These guilds in their initiation
were promoted, and during their continuance have been fostered, by the
middle as distinct from either of the other two classes ; individual members
may have ascended from a lower to a higher class in society, but the
guilds themselves have continued to be, as they now are, middle-class
institutions.

266

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Merchant

Taylors'

Company.

Clode'a Me-
morials ot th3
Merchant
Taylors' Com-
pany, p. 214.

Their relations with the Company may be either those of beneficiaries
of a trust created for them by men of the middle class, in which capa-
city they may be honestly said to have received the whole, if not more
than the whole, of what is due to them ; or they may be considered as
the recipients of a bounty which the Company, in recognition of the
duties of the rich towards the poor, have voluntarily and spontaneously
made to them, but in neither case can these voluntary benefactions be
allowed to ripen into a legal claim upon the funds of the Company.

As has been before stated, the allegation that the Company must be
considered as the heirs of the accumulated contributions of the poor in
former times has really no historic foundation. That the Company used,
under the name of " quarterage," to levy contributions upon the whole
of their members, including the freeman, who were generally of the
poorer class, is perfectly true, as will be seen from the 13th Ordinance;
but it is also equally certain, that so long as any portion of these con-
tributions were so raised from the poor, the whole, and not only the
proportionate part which had been derived from the freemen, was
expended upon the poor ; and so far from the Company being in pos-
session of any accumulations derived from such a source, they are annu-
ally out of pocket by the transaction, as, while the wholesome custom of
contribution has been discontinued, the Company's disbursements under
this head continue.

I. — To revert, then, to the first of the special charges against the
Merchant Taylors' Company, viz. that they have appropriated
moneys of which they Avere trustees.

As the answer to this charge involves principally the correction of
certain misstatements of Mr. Beal, this may be perhaps the best place
for the Company to explain how it is that they come to attach so much
weight to Mr. Beal's utterances as to deem it necessary to devote no
small portion of this paper to answering them.

In the first place, Mr. Beal speaks in a certain sense ex cathedra ; he
is, in the opinion of one at least of the Koyal Commissioners,1 the lead-
ing author upon municipal matters, and, from his unique collection of
literature upon the subject, he is not only justly thought to be in pos-
session of the means of acquiring accurate information, but also, when
he gives it, it is usually received as such : he lectures also to the work-
ing classes upon this subject ; and as the audiences are crowded,2 and are
reported to be so unanimous as to " assent universally to the ideas there

1 Mr. Firth thus speaks of him at page v. of his preface to his work, "Municipal
' London :" — " The author has to express his deep obligation to Mr. James Beal,
1 who may be justly regarded as the father of municipal reform. It is to his energy
' and patriotism that the present advanced condition of the question is mainly due ;
' and if ever from existing chaos there should come forth a London Municipal Govern -
' ment worthy of that name, it is to him that the thanks of the citizens should be
' given."

2 " 509. I have lectured at all the working-class clubs throughout the metropolis
' for years past, and in every case they universally assent to the ideas there
•expressed."

" 513. The Eleusis Club is 1000 strong."

" 514. The Hammersmith Club has 460 members, that is the smallest, I think."

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES3 VINDICATION. 267

" expressed," it is a satisfaction to feel that in stopping error here, it is Merchant
stopped at the fountain-head. Taylors'

In the second place, the Commissioners themselves appear to have ComPany-
accepted, to some extent, his assistance, if not guidance, by giving him
peculiar facilities for prosecuting his inquiries into the affairs of the City
Companies with a view to framing his indictment against them ; and the
man intrusted with such a task should be proved, not only to be honest,
which, in Mr. Beal's case, needs no demonstration, but accurate, which
Mr. Beal certainly is not.

Upon what evidence, it is asked, does this first charge rest? Ap-
parently upon the misdoings of the Merchant Taylors' Company in regard
to Doiikyn's Charity.

It is proposed to give, first, Mr. Beal's version of this affair, and then
the true one, remembering always that even for an erroneous misstate-
ment in such a matter there can be little excuse, as the whole history of
this case is public property, and not only public property, but this very
case of Donkyn's Charity has been singled out * by Mr. Beal himself for
especial study, as a leading one upon the whole question of charitable trusts.

So far as any connected account can be garnered from Mr. Beal's
somewhat incoherent statements, it would seem that a more than usually
vigilant Attorney- General 2 haled the recalcitrant Company to the judg-
ment-seat, and did not relax his grasp until the Company had disgorged
the whole of their ill-gotten gains. Since that day Mr. Beal inclines to
think that the race of Attorney-Generals has declined, and that it will be
a long time before we have another of equal pugnacity.

The true facts are as follows :—

Robert Donkyn, by his will, dated 1570, gave to the master and
wardens of the Merchant Taylors' Company, in fee, certain lands and tene-
ments, with their appurtenances, to the intent as to the rents and profits
thereof, to make certain specific payments thereout ; and he directed the
whole of the residue of the rents to be gathered into the Company's
stock, to repair and, if need be, rebuild the said tenements at their
discretion.

The year after Donkyn's death, after providing for all the specific
payments, there remained a residue of 9/. 13s. in the hands of the Com-
pany, which was carried to the Company's corporate account, and, until
1862, this was regularly done ; at the same time it should be said that
all the expenses of repairings or rebuildings were discharged out of the
same fund.3

Now, in the first place, it should be noticed, in passing, that at the
time when the residue was carried to the corporate account, viz. in the
year 1571-2, it is more than probable that the Company were absolutely
right in so disposing of it, for the question of what should be done with
residues in such cases seems to have been decided for the first time in
1610.*

In the second place, it should be noticed that, even supposing they

1 " 915. I have read Donkyn's and the Wax Chandlers," &c.

* " 657. Look at the case of Donkyn : the public were represented, and the Attorney -
" General made a great fight."

"911. Q. Who is to begin all this [i.e. litigation to stop the misappropria-
' tion of trust moneys] ? — A. The Attorney-General began Donkyn's case antJ
' won it."

"741. Q. Surely, if it is public property, the Chancery Division of the High Court
' of Justice would enforce its being applied to public purposes ? — A. Take the case
' of Donkyn's Charity as an example; but where will you get an Attorney-General to
' fight a battle again like that ? "

8 The annual residue for 1880-1 was 1811. 2s. 2d.

* Thetford School Case, 8th Keport, 130b.

268

ROYAL COMMISSION.

were wrong, it was in the power of the Crown, under the Statute of
Elizabeth (43 Eliz. c. 4.), to call them to account, and to have a full
inspection of all their deeds for that purpose ; and the fact that the
Crown, at a time when it kept a viligant eye upon the doings of the
City Companies, never thought it worth while to interfere with them, is
some, if not conclusive, evidence that their disposition of it was right.

Coming to later times, we shall find that, so far from the Company's
keeping back or concealing anything in this matter from Commissioners
or others appointed to inquire into their disposition of this income, they
have always been ready and willing to make such a disposition of it as the
law or its officers should deem right, and (even incredible though it may
seem to Mr. Beal) have themselves instituted those proceedings against an
unwilling and recalcitrant Attorney-General which Mr. Beal supposes
the vigilant Attorney-General to have instituted against them.

This is literally true. The Merchant Taylors' Company were plaintiffs,
not defendants, in the case of Donkyn's Charity.

How this came about the following short history of the facts will
show : —

The Koyal Commissioners may be reminded that from 1828, in which
year the Commissioners of Inquiry, acting under 58 Geo. III. c. 91,
printed their report relating to the Merchant Taylors' Company's chari-
ties, Donkyn's will, and the dealings of the Company with the property
devised under it, have been absolutely piiblic property ; and that if,
after such a full disclosure, no action was taken against the Company, it
can only be accounted for by the supineness of the Attorney-General,
according to Mr. Beal's theory, or, what is perhaps more probable, by
the fact that the point as to the disposal of the residue was not so clear
as to warrant any proceedings against them.

The year 1853 saw the appointment of the present Charity Commis-
sioners ; and it is, perhaps, not unreasonable to imagine that if any fla-
grant act of misappropriation was taking place, they were the persons,
armed as they were with the very fullest powers of search and discovery,
and having the reports of the Commissioners of Inquiry before them,
to correct the error and place matters upon their right footing. It cer-
tainly never occurred to the Company, who saw what was going on else-
where, to account for the Charity Commissioners' inaction by assuming
that they, in company with the Attorney-General, were suffering from
an inordinate lethargy ; they thought, perhaps unreasonably, but still
perfectly honestly, that no reform was made in their administration of
the charity because none was needed, and they still went on carrying the
residue, whatever it was, to their corporate funds.

At last, in 1862, the present Charity Commissioners issued their order

for Mr. Hare, their inspector, to examine into all the charities held by

the City guilds ; and, in performance of this duty, Mr. Hare, in or

prior to January, 1863, came to the Company's hall ; he saw the will

in question, and in the year 1864, in his report to his Board, writes as

follows : " The construction always adopted by the Company, and which

' seems to have been acquiesced in by the Commissioners of Inquiry, is

' that the residue, after keeping the estate in repair, is given to the Com-

' pany for their own use ;" and he then adds, that " it may be a ques-

' tion for the consideration of the Board whether the actual construction

' of this gift should be determined by any legal proceedings, and whether

' the Company should be required to render the account of the estate as

'of an endowment wholly charitable."

But the Court of the Merchant Taylors' Company, desirous of doing
what was right, did not wait for this report, as, in fact, they never knew
of its existerice until Mr. Hare referred to it in his evidence before the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 269

Royal Commissioners. The doubts contained in that report Mr. Hare Merchant
mentioned verbally to the Company's officers as early at least as 1863 ; Taylors'
whereupon the Court, on the 28th of January of the same year, ordered on
the residue to be held intact for the charity as from the 25th of Decem-
ber, 1862, and empowered their clerk to consult Sir R. Palmer as to the
proper construction to be put upon Donkyn's will.

The opinion of Sir R. Palmer was given in the ensuing March, and
was to the following effect : " That, subject to the provision for the twelve
" poor men and twelve poor women (the donees of the specific payment
" mentioned above), the Company are to be considered as trustees of the
" property, and, as such trustees, bound to render to the Charity
" Commissioners an account of the rents and profits arising therefrom."

The Merchant Taylors' Company lost no time in acting upon the
opinion here expressed, and, as early as April of the following year, had
submitted to the Charity Commissioners, for their sanction, a scheme
disposing of the whole of the residue to charitable purposes. This scheme,
however, the Charity Commissioners did not feel able to accept, on the
ground that it proposed to devote the residue in question to persons of
a higher class than the original recipients of the charity ; and, in January,
1865, they referred it back to the Company for reconsideration.

It would not be unreasonable to imagine that, upon the refusal of this
kind, made at a time when the Company were under no legal obligation
to defer to the opinion of the Charity Commissioners, the Company
would consider that their duties were at an end, and that it remained for
the Commissioners to take the initiative in any further proceedings ;
but so far from this being the case, the Company cheerfully accepted
the decision of the Commissioners, and applied themselves to the task of
seeing how best they might meet their wishes.

With that object in view, a conference was held with the Charity
Commissioners, in which it was suggested and conditionally agreed that
a convalescent home should be established by the Merchant Taylors'
Company, to be ultimately supported out of two funds — those of Donkyn Tlie history of
(which are the subject of the present memorandum) and of the prison this Fund,
fund (the history of which fund is with the Royal Commissioners) — so Memorials,
soon as the equitable rights affecting the same should be decided. P- ^36.

At the close of the year 1869, the Corporation of London notified their
intention of obtaining parliamentary sanction for the use of the prison
fund to establish a reformatory for boys, which led the Merchant Taylors',
with other Companies, into a parliamentary contest, in the session of 1870,
to protect these funds from the Corporation representing the ratepayers
of London.

However, not daunted by these difficulties, the Company, in January,
1869, appointed a special committee to consider and select a site for a
convalescent home. This committee consulted Dr. Gull, Mr. John
Birkett, and other medical authorities as to its position as inland or sea-
side ; and then, carefully considering nine different sites offered to them,
ultimately selected Fitzleet House, Bognor, where the home is now
established.

This estate was purchased and taken possession of by the Company
early in the year 1870. The house was immediately converted into a
home, with thirty-six beds, now increased to fifty, and opened as such
on the 5th of July, 1870, for poor patients from any of the London*
hospitals.

As the Merchant Taylors' Company had then pledged themselves to
carry on a convalescent home, how, it may be asked, was it that they
subsequently appealed to the Court of Chancery for the proper construc-
tion of Donkyn's will 1 The answer almost suggests itself when it is

270

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Merchant

Taylors'

Company.

Merchant
Taylors' Com
pany v. Attor-
ney-General.
11 Equity
Cases, p. 35.
Ib., 6 Ch.
App. p. 517.

noticed that the Wax Chandlers' case, which was decided in August,
1869, wholly altered the law, and gave, as it was thought, all residues
<!<• vised in similar terms to the trust devisees. Obviously such a question
could not be left in doubt, and, under these circumstances, the Company
placed the papers again before Sir K. Palmer and Mr. M. Cookson, who,
in April, 1 870, wrote as follows : —

" We are of opinion that this case, though in some repects more
favourable to the contention of the Attorney-General, is not substantially
distinguishable from the Wax Chandlers' case ; and that accordingly the
Merchant Taylors' Company must, while that case remains law, be treated
as entitled to the property devised to them by Mr. Donkyn's will, or its
present representatives, for their own benefit, subject only to such deduc-
tions as are specifically mentioned in the will.

" In coming to this conclusion, we have taken into account the order
of the Charity Commissioners of the 25th of February, 1870 (to which
our attention was called in consultation), and which treats the accumula-
tions lately invested in the purchase of the house at Bognor as trust
property. Having regard to the terms of that order and the facts stated
in the case, that since Christmas, 1862, accounts of the receipts and pay-
ments in respect of the entire property have been rendered to the Charity
Commissioners, we think it expedient that the Company should obtain
an authoritative declaration on the point raised by the case, through the
medium of the Court of Chancery. This may be done by filing a Bill
against the Attorney- General, for which, the claim of the Company being
adverse to the charity, the leave of the Commissioners need not be first
obtained.

" ROUNDELL PALMER.
"MONTAGUE COOKSON.

" Lincoln's Inn, April 9th, 1870."

A Bill was accordingly filed, and the case was decided by the court of
first instance on the 3rd of November, 1870, and of appeal in April,
1871, declaring in both instances that the residue was a trust estate.
The words in which these judgments were given furnish a justification
. to the Company, if such be needed, for their having taken the case
before the courts for decision. In the lower court the judge (Lord
Romilly) expressed his opinion that the litigation " raised a question
" which it was desirable to have settled ;" and in the higher court the Lord
Chancellor (Hatherley) described the case " as one of very great nicety,"
in which he came to this " conclusion with considerable hesitation."

To complete the statement of facts as to the prison fund, it should be
mentioned that Parliament, in the session of 1870, threw out the Bill
promoted by the Corporation of London ; and then came the question
of appropriating these funds to charitable purposes, which had to be dealt
with by the Court of Chancery. This was done in 1873, by the reported
case of Prison Charities, in " 16 Equity Cases," p. 145, which resulted
ultimately in a transfer of these funds to the credit of the convalescent
home.

The Company did not, as it will be seen, wait for this decision before
establishing that home, although the scheme for that purpose was not
finally approved and sealed by the Charity Commissioners until the 6th
of March, 1872.

What, then, could any trustees, individual or corporate, do, more than
the Merchant Taylors' Company have done, to carry out a beneficent
object ; and where does Donkyn's case furnish a justification for Mr.
Beal's contention that a new municipality should be originated to take
the City Companies by the throat and deal with them ?

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 271

II. — To revert to the charges of their misconduct as landlords. Merchant

Taylors

The other witness, to whom reference has been made, is Mr. W. Company.
Gilbert, who has requested the Commissioners to take his evidence. He
assures the Commissioners that " he has given a good deal of attention
" to the City generally, including the Companies ;" and his mission is to
show that " he has formed and expressed a strong opinion as to the
"action of the City Companies in connection with the poorer population
" of the City."

In general terms he accuses the City Companies of " driving the poor
" out of their districts." Whenever a " house is destroyed and a new
" one is erected, in almost every case, especially with regard to those of
" City Companies, a clause is inserted that no person shall be allowed to
" sleep upon the premises, thereby totally prohibiting the poor (though
"why only the poor1?) from returning."

In specific terms he formulates his accusation against the Merchant
Taylors' Company " by an example, to explain better what he means."

He states his facts thus : that in Coleman Street the Merchant Taylors'
Company own a property which, some ten years ago, they leased at
2300?. a year " under a condition that the whole building should be
" pulled down and about 200,0002. expended in building chambers, with a
" strict clause in the lease that no one should be allowed to sleep upon
" the premises."

When cautioned by one of the Royal Commissioners, lest he should
be imputing blame to the Company upon imperfect information, he
repeats his accusation " from his own personal experience " as a director
in a large Assam Tea Company, which, by-the-bye, has on another occa-
sion enabled him to furnish the Royal Commissioners with other infor-
mation. It is suggested by the same Royal Commissioner that the
leaseholder, and not the freeholder, has inserted this condition ; but as
his accusation against a City Company, and his raison d'etre for appear-
ing before the Royal Commissioners, would fall to the ground if Mr.
Gilbert accepted this (almost obvious) explanation, he answered, " IsTo ;
" the freeholders would not grant the lease except upon that condition."

Now, whether the leaseholder has or has not inserted such a condition
is not known to the Merchant Taylors' Company ; but they do know
that the terms in which the Inhabited House Duty Act is framed did 32 & 33 Viet,
formerly, until the Act was amended, oblige persons letting premises c- \\f'^'
for offices or warehouses to insert such a stipulation, not against the poor, ^g ,s ^ '
but to escape this very heavy taxation.

The facts are these: —

The premises in question, prior to the re-letting referred to, were used
as offices and warehouses, in which it is not probable that any persons
resided, more than the occupiers required there for their employments.
Be that as it may, the Merchant Taylors' Company did not seek or desire
to alter in any way the purpose for which the premises should thereafter
be used.

In the years 1875 to 1881 they granted ordinary building leases of 18^> July 14.
these premises to A. A. Croll, Esq., at a ground rent, and with a covenant Jg!^' j^f6^
for an expenditure, not of 200,000?., as Mr. Gilbert asserts, but of iggi' Feb 20
20,000?.

Whether Mr. Croll built offices or warehouses, with or without resi- '
dences for the rich or poor, was a matter as to which the Merchant
Taylors' Company made no stipulation whatever ; and it may be added,
that neither in this nor in any other case, when granting a building
lease, have the Company ever inserted such a covenant as Mr. Gilbert
affirms them to have included in the leases in question.

272

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Merchant

Taylors'

Company.

III. — As governors of their school.

Before adverting to the statement of Mr. Gilbert on this head, the
Merchant Taylors' Company may be excused if they preface these remarks
by a short statement of their recent action as governors of that institu-
tion. This statement, it is hoped, will furnish reasonable justification,
if such be needed, for their not having contributed as largely as other
guilds have done to the Technical Institute.

Kightly, as they venture to think, the Merchant Taylors' Company
recognized in 1866 an opportunity of largely increasing the usefulness of
their old school as a high-class day school for the benefit of the residents
in and about London. These matters are stated plainly in the Master's
letter of the 23rd of June, 1866, to the governors of the Charter House,
which is printed at length, p. 426 of the Company's memorials ; but the
paragraph to which attention is invited is as follows : —

" In conclusion, I have only to add, that the Company desire — what-
ever may be the result of this communication — that I should express to
the governors their thanks for the opportunity offered to them of
becoming the purchasers of their estate.

" All that the Merchant Taylors' Company have it in desire to do is
to supply the want which obviously must arise — unless the governors of
the Charter House are prepared to make some provision for it — after their
relinquishment of that sphere of usefulness which, for upwards of 250
years, within the City of London, and partially towards its citizens, the
governors of the Charter House have occupied — a want arising from no
fault in the citizens of London, but necessarily resulting from the removal
of an ancient educational establishment far beyond the walls. To aid in
the supply of this want (so far as their corporate means will allow) is the
only motive that has induced the Merchant Taylors' Company to give
such anxious consideration to the proposals of the governors. How far
the Company may be enabled to accomplish this object is dependent in
some degree upon the result of this negotiation ; but, whatever the result
may be, I shall ever feel conscious that my colleagues and myself have
manifested every desire to meet the proposals of the governors of the
Charter House in a candid and unselfish spirit."

At that date, and when the " Royal Commissioners on the Public
Schools " reported the annual cost of the school to the Merchant Taylors'
Company was (say) 2000/. per annum, they were left free and untram-
melled by the Parliamentary enactments which were extended to the
other schools, the subject of that inquiry. The confidence thus reposed in
them by Parliament, the Merchant Taylors' Company venture to think,
has not been abused. Since that date they have sold their Irish estate,
and devoted the proceeds thereof, with other moneys, to the purchase of
the site and erection of the school in Charter House Square at a cost of
91,600Z. They have increased the number of scholars from 250 to 500
boys : and their annual expenditure has been increased from 2000£. to
7724:1. These figures, it is hoped, will satisfy the Royal Commissioners
that the Merchant Taylors' Company are not indifferent to the cause of
education for the middle class of London residents.

But to advert to Mr. Gilbert's charge against the Company.

It is not, as against Eton and other public schools, alleged that the
Company's school was instituted for paupers ; but it is insinuated that
it was founded for the sons of working tailors, for Mr. Gilbert, on being
asked " if a proportion of the Merchant Taylors' fund should be applied
" for the benefit of the tailors generally?" he replies, "Yes; and that
" used to be the case. If you look at Machyn and Stowe's diaries, you
"will find they give a description of a dinner at Merchant Taylors' Hall,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 273

" and also describe the Merchant Taylors' School, in which there was Merchant
" not a boy in the school that was not the son of a tailor." Taylors'

The dinner will not probably be thought worthy of further notice by ComPany-
the Royal Commissioners, though that allegation might be easily
answered ; but the statement in relation to the school is one of graver
moment.

As authorities for this strange assertion, Mr. Gilbert refers the Royal
Commissioners to two authors, both of whom were members of the
Merchant Taylors' Company ; but before dealing with these, let it be
noted, as dates are material, that the school was opened in the year 1561,
under statutes framed by the Company. Though the number was limited
to 250 boys, it was laid down in Rule 25 that " children of all nations
and countries indifferently " should be taught, and as proof that children
of different social grades should be accepted, Rules 5 and 6 should be
referred to, as these provided that 100 should be taught freely, 50 pay-
ing 10s. a year, and 100 paying 11. a, year. There is not a scintilla of
evidence in these statutes or elsewhere that the Company had any inten-
tion whatever of founding a class-school for tailors' sons.

But to refer to the authors quoted, Machyn's Diary closes, as will be
seen on referring to it, in the year 1562-63, that is, within a few months
after the school had been opened. Had he made the assertion imputed
to him, its veracity might reasonably have been doubted, and the fact
questioned whether 250 sons of tailors could have been found instanter,
at the opening of the school doors, eligible to enter. But leaving this
question for others to decide, it is certain that Machyn made no such
assertion as is imputed to him. He does refer to " tailors' sons," so that p. 91, and see
he had his eye upon the craft, but his reference is not to the " scholars," note, p. 345.
but to the "wardens " of the Company, who in the year 1555 he notes
to have been all " taylors' " sons.

Stowe, in his " Survey," which work, it is presumed, Mr. Gilbert
means by his reference to it as a " diary," is equally silent on the subject,
and well it is for Stowe's reputation as a chronicler that he makes no
such ridiculous assertion.

Wilson, in his school history, which an author of Mr. Gilbert's repu-
tation cannot be ignorant of, asserts that in 1567 the scholars came not
only from the districts adjacent, but from the counties of " Oxford,
" Northampton, Dorset, Somerset, and even York ;" and this is nearer Vol. i., p. 34.
the truth. However, the parentage of many of the earliest scholars in
Merchant Taylors' School is biography within the ken of any tyro in
history, and had the witness shown his authorities (if he ever found
them) to any such friend, it is to be hoped that he never would have
committed himself to the statement he has made to the Royal Com-
missioners.

For conclusive proof it may be mentioned that the Merchant Taylors'
Company possess a printed record of all entries in the school register from
its opening until 1699, thus covering a period long after Stowe's death
in 1605, and every page of this register furnishes a contradiction to Mr.
Gilbert's assertion. Taking the first ten years, up to 1571, as a test
period, one tailor's son only, " William Hodgson, son of Robert, tailor,"
is entered, viz. on the 12th of July, 1566 ; and not even the majority of
the scholars are " Merchant Taylors," though this term would not, having Printed as 195
regard to the terms of Henry VII. 's charter, necessarily show the father of Memorials,
to have been a " taylor." 1

Passing from Mr. Gilbert's evidence, the Company confess that they

1 This register has been carefully compiled by the Rev. Charles J. Robinson, M.A.,
one of the former scholars of the Merchant Taylors' School, and is on the eve of
publication.

274

EOYAL COMMISSION.

Merchant

Taylors'

Company.

have commented upon it with some degree of severity ; but they hope
that their criticism will not bo taken for detraction : it was necessary to
proclaim with no uncertain note the fallibility of one who claimed to be
an expert upon the subject of municipal reform, and to bring to the
consideration of the subject a judgment ripened by his researches into
the usage prevailing in all the capitals of Europe besides our own. If
Mr. Gilbert has allowed himself to be betrayed into such misstatements
with regard to subjects upon which it is possible for any one to form a
correct opinion, is it unreasonable to ask that his statements elsewhere
should be tested and weighed before being accepted as facts 1

But a word in conclusion. The Company wish it to be distinctly under-
stood that in thus entering the arena of controversy they come not as
defendants, since their conduct as a Company needs no defence, and as
for their reputation as honest men, they are content to leave it in the
hands of the Commissioners ; but they come rather to dispel the cloud
of prejudice and aspersion which seems to envelop the consideration of
their case, and which is mainly due to the intemperate and inaccurate
statements of their detractors. Mindful of this, they have confined
themselves to a bare, and they hope a conclusive, contradiction of material
facts, and have never descended, so far as they know, to the language of
extenuation. Their war is with error, not with individuals, and they
hope that no word in the preceding pages is calculated to give offence to
any one who is honestly and earnestly endeavouring to promote the
public good, even though it should be at their expense.

It is, however, with some difficulty the Company candidly admit that
they have brought themselves to include Mr. Beal in this category, since
errors, which in one of less pretensions to knowledge would be venial,
from his mouth can be considered little less than reckless ; in such a case
omission is more apt to be suppression, and misstatement distortion.

Whatever misgivings, however, they may have had upon this score
they have been able to dispel l>y considering that perhaps, after all, Mr.
Beal is not to be taken at his own valuation, and that though he has
assumed the role of omniscience with an airiness and jauntiness such as
are seldom seen in one who is alive to its duties and responsibilities, his
claim to the title has yet to be established.

JAMBS PENNING,

Master,
In behalf of the Master and Wardens.

Merchant Taylors' Hall,
Threadneedle Street,

10th of August, 1882.

SALTERS' COMPANY.

SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT.

THE Sal tors' Company beg to remark that the first recorded evidence of
their existence is dated in 1394, when it was licensed by Kichard II., in
the joint title of the Guild or Fraternity of Brethren and Sisters of
Corpus Christi and the Company of Salters.

This combination of the religious and trading elements, together with
other circumstances referred to in their return, render it highly probable
that this Company was never exclusively a community of traders.

LONDON GIT? LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 275

Moreover, it would appear that this, as well as other guilds, could not gaiters'
have existed for the sole purpose of benefiting the particular trades from Company,
which they derive their names ; for the right of freedom by patrimony
has prevailed from time immemorial, and this would necessarily introduce
many members who would follow other callings.

Statements have been made which suggest that the funds entrusted to
the Companies for charitable uses have been misapplied. So far as the
Salters' Company is concerned, it may be stated that suits instituted
against the Company, and designed to prove a breach of trust, have
failed ; and the returns of the Company show that the sums expended on
the charitable trusts under the Company's administration have consider-
ably exceeded the amount which has been received from the Trust
Estate.

With regard to the income derived from their Corporate Estate, a large
proportion has been always devoted to works of benevolence and public
utility, to the promotion of education, and the support of aged, poor, and
deserving members of their Guild.

The Salters' Company may avail themselves of this occasion to state
that, in addition to the educational grants alluded to in their report, they
have now brought into practical operation a scheme which for some time
past they had in contemplation, having for its object the promotion of
the education of the sons and daughters of their own members, by grants
of money, varying in each case from 201. to SOL per annum. The
advantages offered by this scheme are much appreciated, the freemen and
liverymen having readily availed themselves of it.

Statements were made by witnesses who tendered evidence on the
twelfth day, that the Companies' estates in Ireland are Trust Estates:
that the purchase-money was not taken from the funds of the Corpora-
tion or of the Companies, and that the tenants have been invariably rack-
rented.

In reply it may be stated that the conveyance of the estate to the Com-
panies was absolute and without any covenant of trust ; that the Companies
at first declined to have any dealing with the property, but were ulti-
mately persuaded, by representations on the part of the Government, that
the undertaking would conduce to their profit. That there is no doubt
the Companies provided all the money ; and so far as regards the Salters'
Company (and probably the other Livery Companies), the amount
required was raised, partly from their corporate funds, and partly from
loans from individual members of the Company.

There is evidence that these loans were in process of repayment from,
the corporate funds of the Company, several years afterwards. As to the
estates being rack-rented, the rents of the Salters' Company have always
been, in the aggregate, under the Government valuation. Tenant-right
interests are readily saleable ; and the witnesses generally admit that the
tenants are, on the average, better off under the Companies than under
private landlords.

It has also been implied that the Companies have not promoted the
interests of their tenants by expenditure of income derived from the
estate.

In reply to such suggestions, the Salters' Company beg to place before
the Commissioners the following particulars of their expenditure during
the last twenty-eight years.

T 2

276 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Palters' STATEMENT OF EXPENDITUBE ON IMPBOVESIENTS, &c., from 1853 to 1881.

Company. Rural T()wn o{

Districts. Magherafelt.

£ s. d. £ «. d.
On School Building and Repairs . 3220 0 1 2576 18 4

„ Support of Education
, Church Buildings, Parsonages, &c.
, Ministers of Religion and Church

Sustentation Fund
, Main or Arterial Drainage .

Improvement in the Breed of Cattle

Farm Roads, Pavements, &c.

Water and Gas Supplies .

Puhlic Buildings, Repairs, &c. .

Charitable and other Donations .

5823 17 3 6801 8 2

2443 12 9 6064 17 0

3452 13 6 2315 0 0

4429 2 5 409 15 1

193 11 3

5775 02 734 1 9

126 36 G91 9 9

2129 19 10

1096 2 11 2165 1 9

£26,560 3 10 21,486 11 8

* ^ .

Total £51,046 15 6

The above expenditure is exclusive of any outlay from which the
Company derive profit, and the cost of management is not included.

Mr. Andrew Brown, a tenant on the estate, who gave evidence before
the Commission, also on the twelfth day, complains that an appeal which
was made against an advance of twenty per cent, put on a portion of the
estate in bad years, was rejected.

This augmented rent was an addition of twenty per cent, on a small
section of the Town-park holdings, which had been reduced ten per cent,
in 1855, and not increased when the rentals of the agricultural holdings
were raised ten per cent, in 1866.

The aggregate annual accretion of rent from this source amounted to
about 150Z., and simply placed all town-parks and agricultural holdings
on the same footing.

Mr. Brown adds that a recent appeal for reduction of rent was also
rejected.

It is true that the Company declined to adopt a general reduction of
their moderate rental, which, for agricultural holdings, is about ten per
cent, below the Government valuation ; but they promised to take into
consideration individual applications for relief, and to determine them on
their respective merits. This decision has been acted on, and in several
instances remission of rent has been granted, and pecuniary assistance
afforded to needy tenants.

Mr. Brown further says that from 1854 to 1866 " there are many
li'ving witnesses to prove that none but the tenants do anything to their
farms."

The facts are that a sum of 16,560£. 6s. Qd. was expended on the rural
districts, and 12,283Z. 5s. IQd. on the town of Magherafelt, in improve-
ments during those twelve years ; the money spent in the town being
in excess of the entire rent received from the town holdings.

Only a fraction of the above expenditure, viz., 1500J. for mills and
mill-dams, was in any degree remunerative to the Company.

Mr. Brown also affirms that from 1866 to 1882 the agricultural hold-
ings have not in any way been improved by the landlords. The answer
to this accusation has been already given in the previous statement, where
the cost and character of the improvements effected are enumerated.

LONDON CITY LIVEBY COMPANIES* VINDICATION.

277

EXPENDITTJBE from 1853 to 18G6.

Rural To\
Districts. Magh

£ #. d. £
)n School Buildings .... 1533 11 7 2591
Support of Education . . . 1865 13 6 1791
Church Buildings, Parsonages, &c. . 2153 12 9 5588
Ministers and Church Susteutation
Fund ....,- 4fi7 in 0 37n

vn o
erafi

*.
4
19
14

0
1
14
5
3
13

f
At.

0
G

0
G
0
5
8
0

Main or Arterial Drainage
Farm Roads, Pavements, &c.
Water and Gas Supplies
, Public Buildings, Repairs, &c.
, Charitable and other Donations
, Hills and Milldams .

. 3407 2 8 149
. 5019 1 11 263
— 239
483
. 613 9 0 867
. 1500 5 1

Salfcers'
Company.

£16,560 6 6 12,283 5 10

These sums are of course included in the previous Statement of
Expenditure from 1853 to 1881.

IRONMONGERS' COMPANY.

SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT

Presented to the Royal Commissioners appointed to inquire into the City
of London Livery Companies.

THE Ironmongers' Company, having carefully read the statements to the
Commissioners, do not consider it necessary in any way to refute the theories
propounded in those statements with respect to the duties of the Livery
Companies, but desire merely to put the Commissioners in possession of
certain facts with a view to correct misstatements which have been
published. It is quite clear from the records in the possession of the
Company, that their mystery was established as a guild upwards of 100
years at least before incorporation by charter in 1463.

These guilds had their origin in Anglo-Saxon times, and were com-
munities of persons associated together for purposes of mutual fellow-
ship, protection, and support, called into existence by the exigencies of
those times ; and naturally those having a common trade made common
cause, and were attached to each other by common interests. There is
no record of funds or land coming to them from any source external to
their own body. Their property has all been acquired by contribution
or bequest of members.

In 1457 they, out of their own private funds, subscribed money for
the purchase of land and a hall for the meeting of the members.

In the 3rd Edward IV. (1463), all the freemen of the mystery and
art of ironmongers were incorporated by royal charter in general terms,
without special duties of any kind being imposed, as appears from the
charter sent out in Return, part 1, B. j and neither by this charter, nor
by any subsequent charter, is there directly or indirectly any declaration
of a trust.

Lands and funds have from time to time been left to the Company
by members of their body and others, subject to certain express chari-

278 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Ironmongers' table trusts, and these the Company have faithfully discharged to the
Company. present time ; and in many cases in which these funds have been
exacted by the Crown, they have been replaced by subsequent contri-
butions of the livery from their individual private funds, so that the
objects of the trusts should not suffer ; and this Company respectfully,
but firmly, protests that no one outside their own body has either legal
or moral right to participate in any property other than that which is
actually impressed by the donor with a trust, and the whole of which
is administered under the supervision of the Charity Commissioners.

Questions 728, 827-9.

It has been contended before you, that the whole of the charters are
bad, because the king had (according to the witness's construction of
the sixteenth section of Magna Charta) parted with his right to grant
charters conferring the right of search. Assuming, however, this con-
struction to be correct, the contention falls to the ground in the case of
this Company, as no such right is directly or indirectly conferred by
any of the charters ; and the records of the Company show that statu-
tory legislation for the protection and regulation of the iron trade was
enacted in the reigns of Henry IV., Kichard III., Henry VIIL, and
Edward VI., and that on certain occasions this Company have laid abuses
of the trade before the Common Council, that they might deal there-
with, this Company not having the power in itself.

Amongst its own commonalty only this Company exercised super-
vision and control of trading, but, as none of the trade joined the Com-
pany other than of their own free will and for their own good, obedience
to such control can only be regarded as voluntary, and not as infring-
ing the liberty of the subject, contrary to the provisions of Magna
Charta.

Question 39.

It has been suggested that " the connection of the Companies with
" the arts, crafts, and trades which, according to the terms of their con-
" stitution, they are designed to comprehend, should be restored." In
reply, it may be stated that not one of the several charters and con-
firmations by which the Ironmongers' Company is constituted designate
any craft or trade. Whatever connection this Company may have had
with the trade was outside its constitution.

Questions 74 and 1324.

More than one witness states that in many, or nearly all the old,
charters, the Companies were endowed with power to hold land, con-
trary to the statute of mortmain, for the benefit of the poor. So far as
the Ironmongers' Company is concerned, this statement has no founda-
tion ; the licence is granted in every case without condition of any
kind.

Question 106.

The bequest of money for a dinner, as alleged in this question, is
erroneous. There has been no such bequest.

Question 674.

The statement in the reply to this question, viz. " you have raised the
" fees of admission to a price which no artisan can pay," is not correct,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 27

as any boy of fourteen may be bound apprentice for a nominal fee of Ironmongers'
II. 7s. Qcl., who, when he has served his apprenticeship, may be admitted Company,
on the payment of 37. 5s. 0<7. for fees and stamp duty.

Question 863.

This Company is entirely independent of any control by the City (if
thereby is meant the Corporation) or by the Crown, other than as sub-
jects of the Throne ; in fact, notwithstanding a servitude of seven years
is required by the Corporation, they have, in the interest of those desirous
of being admitted to their freedom by apprenticeship, made it optional
with the apprentice to serve for five years only.

Question 1351.

There is no known instance in the records of the Ironmongers' Com-
pany of any one being compelled to join the guild. It has always been
a voluntary act, and the statements made by the witness in this and
the following answers are not founded on fact so far as concerns this
Company.

Questions 865-74 and 1412-23.

The right of electing the chief officers and of making ordinances for
the good government of the City was claimed by the Livery Companies
in the reign of Edward III., and obtained by them actually in contra-
vention of an order made in the twentieth year of that reign, by which that
right was restricted to the representatives of the wards ; thus showing
that they acted in furtherance of their private interests, independently
of and not as subject to the Corporation, as alleged by Mr. Beal ; not
as discharging a public function conferred on them, but as exacting
a voice in the election of their officers for their own protection. In
17 Kichard II. (1384) these rights were withdrawn, and the previous
practice of choosing the common council by the wards, instead of the
mysteries, was reverted to.

Questions 1445-6.

In the Ironmongers' Company the rule is, that no freeman is allowed
to change the copy of his freedom, but chiefly (i.e. solely) hold of his
fellowship.

Questions 1423-4.

It has from time immemorial been the custom of the Ironmongers'
Company to admit to the freedom by patrimony, and for many cen-
turies to admit by redemption ; the assumption, therefore, is strongly
against the witness's statement, that at the time of the grant- of the
charter there was not any member who was not a member of the trade.

STATEMENT

On evidence given on the I2th of July, 1882, before the City of London
Livery Companies' Commission concerning the Irish estates of the
Livery Companies.

THE statement made by the deputation that the Irish estates were
granted to the Companies subject to public trusts is not true.

280 ROYA.L COMMISSION.

Ironmongers' In the beginning of the reign of James I. a considerable part of Ulster
Company. ]iad become vested in the Crown by act of attainder consequent on the
rebellion in the previous reign. The country being then in a most
disturbed condition, a project was set on foot in 1608 for planting and
establishing a Protestant colony in the north of Ireland. Certain con-
ditions (viz. those set out in the appendix to Dr. Todd's evidence) were
issued by the Privy Council, in accordance with which his Majesty's
subjects were invited to undertake the project. Though many private
individuals offered to become undertakers, the Crown, in view of the
magnitude of the scheme, deemed it advisable, in July, 1609, to offer
the undertaking to the City of London on the same conditions. This
offer was declined.

In August, 1609, a committee was appointed by the City to conduct
negotiations which had been re-opened by the Privy Council, and which
resulted in the City undertaking the Plantation on articles of agreement
entered into with the Privy Council on the 28th of January, 1609 (O.S.),
and set out in the Schedule hereto. It is these articles, and the charter
subsequently granted by James I. on the 29th of March, 1613, which
may be said to " form the limits and bases of the title by which the
" Companies hold their Irish estates," and not " the articles concerning
" the English and Scotch undertakers " as set out by Dr. Todd.

The Committee recommended that a Company be constituted in
London, and that the undertaking should be managed in Ireland by
direction from the Company in London. On the 30th of January, 1610,
the Common Council ordained, in accordance with such recommendation,
that a Company be instituted in London in order to carry out the plan-
tation ; and on the 29th of March, 1613, this Company was incorporated
by charter under the name of " The Irish Society ;" therefore the fact of
the Society being " a corporate body and non-resident " cannot now be
alleged as a reason for State interference.

The sums required for the plantation were raised " by way of Com-
" panics of the City and in Companies by the poll."

The Court of the Ironmongers' Company ordered each member " to
" pay his proportion, and further ordered that the proportions of those
" unable to pay should be taken up at interest, and the Company to bear
" the same." There is no evidence that money was raised from any but
members of such of the Companies as joined in the undertaking, and the
money so raised was paid, not to the Crown, but to the Chamberlain of
the City, for the purposes of the plantation.

In July, 1611, on the occasion of a further levy by the City of a sum
of 10,000£. for carrying on the plantation, notice was given that if the
money should not be paid, the defaulting Companies would forfeit their
claim to the amount already disbursed towards the said plantations.

The Coopers' Company, one of the Companies associated with the
Ironmongers' Company in the undertaking, being unable to pay their
contribution, the Corporation directed the Chamberlain to pay it : and it
was declared that " the City is to receive all the benefit and profit as well
" already due as hereafter shall grow due to the said (' Coopers' ') Com-
"pany by the said plantation of Ireland."

On the 13th of September, 1615, a licence in mortmain was granted
by James I. to the twelve Companies respecting their Irish estates,
wherein one of the reasons for granting such licence is " that the Oom-
" panies may in future reap some gain and benefit of their great travails
" and expenses taken and bestowed thereon"

The Manor of Lizard was created by the Irish Society on the 15th of
October, 1618, and a conveyance of this manor to the Ironmongers'
Company from the Society was executed on the 7th of November, 1618.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 281

By this deed the Society did " fully, clearly, and absolutely grant " Ironmongers'
the Manor of Lizard, and all the rents, advowsons, tithes, and all other Company,
profits whatsoever, except timber, &c., at the yearly rent of 11?. 6s. Sd.,
to the Ironmongers' Company, their successors and assigns for ever, to
the only use and behoof of the said Company.

In 1630 Paul Canning, who was then a member of the Ironmongers'
Company, and their agent in Ireland, sold his estate in England for
2000?., and spent it in planting and stocking the Company's estate, and
also at his own charge built a church.

The charter to the Irish Society granted by James I. was revoked in
the reign of Charles I. by decree of the Star Chamber in Hilary Term,
1638, and all the estates were escheated to the Crown ; but in 1641, on
the petition of the Corporation, Parliament, upon mature consideration,
resolved that "the sentence in the Star Chamber was unlaAvful and
" unjust, and that the citizens of London, and those of the new plantation,
" and all under-tenants, and all those put out of possession, should be
" restored to the same estate in which they were before." In this peti-
tion it is set forth that 150,000?. had been expended on the plantation by
the Irish Society and the Companies in addition to any outlay by the
tenants.

In 1656 the Lord Protector, by letters patent, restored and confirmed
the Irish Society as originally ordained under the charter of James I. ;
and in 1662, 14th Charles II., letters patent were issued, containing,
with but little alteration, all the clauses of the charter of James I. ; and
the renewed grant from the Society to the Ironmongers' Company of the
Manor of Lizard, dated 13th of May, 1663, recites, that "the king takes
" into consideration the vast siims of money the Society and the several
" Companies of London had laid out and disbursed in their building and
" planting."

The Manor of Lizard, as originally created, contained 38,470 acres
(English), and the estate was apportioned by the undertakers as
follows : —

Acres.

Church lands and glebe 12,403

Freeholds at quit-rents 13,742

Eetained by the Company 12,325

In 1842 the Company's estate contained 12,686 acres, then valued, by
the well-known valuators Messrs. Nolan, at 5610?. per annum, and let at
5509?., chiefly on yearly tenancies to the tenants actually in occupation
at the expiration of the last lease which had been granted by the Com-
pany on lives.

In 1860 the estate comprised 12,735 acres, and was again valued by
Messrs. Nolan at 7055?., and in 1863 the annual rent was fixed at 6718?.

The present annual rental of the estate is 7100?. There are now only
four leases on the estate, the tenants preferring yearly holdings, of which
there are 541 (see Original Return A., 2, 9, question 5, page 45). The
population at the last census numbered 1583 males and 1808 females ;
total 3391.

In 1764, in consequence of a report to the Company of the harshness
with which the tithe was exacted from the tenants, the Company
redeemed it for 1115?. and extinguished it solely in the tenants' interest ,

The tenants for many years were supplied by the Company with lime
at a nominal price, and with timber, slates, roofing and draining tiles,
also with large quantities of quick for fences, and young trees for shelter,
besides grants of money for iron gates and pumps ; and the Company
make a considerable outlay on the construction and upkeep of roads,
bridges, and fences, altogether averaging upwards of 625?. a year, in

282 EOYAL COMMISSION.

Ironmongers' addition to an annual expenditure of 4007. on schools, churches, charities,
Company. exhibitions, and clergy of various denominations. The Company also
subscribed 2007. towards the preliminary expenses of the Deny Central
Railway, and guarantee 51. per cent, interest on 5000Z. of the stock for
twenty-three years if necessary, and are now paying it, and they gave
the land required for the railway without charge, and this amounted to
forty acres.

The memorial to the Eight Hon. W. E. Gladstone, dated 18th of
March, 1881, and purporting to be signed by George Williamson on behalf
of the Ironmongers' tenantry, has been read to the principal tenants by
the agent, and they say they none of them ever heard of the memorial,
also that the statements therein are untrue so far as concerns the Com-
pany's tenantry, and that George Williamson was not to their knowledge
authorized to represent the tenantry. One of the tenants, the Rev. Mr.
McCay, who has been examined before the Commissioners, denies any
knowledge of the memorial.

As to the statements in the memorial, it is not the fact that the under-
tenants held from the middlemen from year to year ; they held on lease
from the middlemen for forty-one years or three lives ; the last lease com-
menced in 1798 for the Bishop of Meath's life, who died in 1840. Since
then the tenants have virtually held from valuation to valuation at
intervals of upwards of twenty-one years, and in effect such a holding as
.a tenancy at will is not known on the estate.

It has been previously shown what is the rental of the estate since it
came into hand in 1840 ; and to enable the Commission to form an
opinion as to the fairness of such rents, it may be stated that Griffiths'
valuation in 1852 was based on the average of produce as shown in Table
I. ; and the actual prices realized in Belfast market for thirty-one years,
1850—1880, average as in Table II.

TABLE I. — GRIFFITHS.
Wheat. Oats. Flax. Pork. Butter. Beef. Mutton.

7/6 4/10 6/11} 82/. /7 35/6 41/-

TABLE II.— 1850— 1880.
10/lOf 7/7£ 9/11* 43/2 I/- 64/2 68/6

In 1703 the best beef fetched 3s. Qd. per 120 Ibs. in Dublin market,
and in 1725 had risen to 16s. per cwt.

No increase of rent has occurred on this estate for twenty-two years,
and the present rental is more than 61. per cent, below Griffiths' valua-
tion ; it is therefore evident that the tenants have reaped the full benefit
of the increased market value of produce.

When the estate came into hand in 1840 there was no tenant-right
. existing ; but in 1860 the Company established a tenant-right equivalent
to ten years' purchase of the rent, and yet within the last year tenant-
right has realized from eighteen to fifty years' purchase.

SCHEDULE.

Articles agreed upon the xxviii. daie of Januarie betweene the Eight
honble the Lords of his Matie" most honble Privie Councell, on the Kings
Matie' behalf, on the one pte, and the Committees appointed by act of
Comon Councell, on behalf of the Maior and Comunaltie of the cittie of
London, on the other pte, concerning the plantacon in pte of the Pro-
vince of Ulster.

1. Imprimis, it is agreed that xxtie thousand pounds shall be levied,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 283

15,000h to be expended on the said plantacon, and 50001' for the Ironmongers'
clearing away of private men's interest in things demanded. Company.

2. Agreed that at the Deny 200 houses shall be built and room left

for 300 more, and that 4000 acres lying in the Derry side shall
be laid thereunto; bogg and ban-en mountains to be no parcel
thereof, but to go as waste for the cittie.

3. The Bisshoppe and Deane of ye Derrie shall haue conuenient

plotts of ground for their states of their houses at the Derry.

4. Agreed that Colraine shallbe built on the very same ground of the

abby side, that 100 houses shall be built and room left for 200
more, and 3000 acres of land shall be laid.

5. Agreed that measure and account of land shall be after the

Balliboes.

G. Agreed that the rest of the territory and entire countie of Colraine,
estimated at 20,000 acres, be cleared from all pticular interest
except the Bishop anfl Deane of Derry, and except certain
porcons of land to be assigned to three or four Irish gentlemen
at the most now dwelling and settled in the countie of Colraine,
who are to be freeholders.

7. Item, it is agreed that the woods and grounds of soil of GHancan-

Kerne and Killetroughe be wholly to the cittie, and the timber
used for the plantacon.

8. Agreed that the lands within the woods of Glane and Killtroughe,

which stand charged as surveyed lands, be undertaken by them
- in like form as Colraine.

9. Agreed that the cittie shall haue the patronage of all the churches

in Derry and Colraine.

10. That the 7000 acres of land to the cittie of the Derrie and town

of Colraine shall be in fee-farme at the rent of liii" iiiid.

11. And to be held of the King in free burgage.

12. The residue of all the lands and woods to be undertaken to be

holden of the King in comon socage.

13. The customs of all goods imported to be exported, &c., to be

enjoyed by the cittye for 99 yeares within the citty of the
Derrie, town and county of Colraine, and ports and creeks
thereof, paying yearly to his Matie vi" viiid as an acknowledg1.

14. That salmon and ell fishing of the Ban and Loughfoyie, and all

other fishing so far as Loughfoyie floweth, and the Ban to
Loughcagh, shall be in perpetuitie to the cittie.

15. The cittie shall haue liberty to transport all prohibited wares

growing upon their own lands.

16. The cittie shall haue the office of Admiral in the coasts of Triconell

and Colraine, and all royalties belonging thereto ; and if their
shippes and goods be wrecked at the sea in Ballesman or Older-
flute, and in all other coasts, &c., alongst and betweene saved
and reserved to themselves.

17. That the cittie shall haue like fishing and fowling upon all the

coasts as other subjects haue.

18. That no flax, hemp, or yarne unwoven be carried out of the ports

of Derrie and Colraine without licence from the cittie officers,
and that no hides be transported raw without licence.

19. That the cittie and town of the county of Colraine be freed from '

all patents of privileges heretofore granted to any pson, and
that hereafter no pat of privileges be granted to any pson within
the said county, &c., and that they be freed from all taxes and
impositions of the Governor of those pts.

20. That the cittie shall have the castel of Colmore and the lands

284 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Ironmongers' thereunto in fee farme, they maintaining a sufficient ward of

Company. officers.

21. The liberties of the cittie of Derrie and Colraine shall extend three

miles every way.

22. That the cittie shall have such further liberties to the Derrie and

Colraine as upon view of the charters of London, the Cinque
Ports, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, or the cittie of Dublin, shall be
found fit for those places.

23. That all particular men's interest in and about Derrie and the

counties of Colraine, &c., be cleared and offered to the cittie
(except as is excepted in 6th art.).

24. That sufficient forces shall be maintained by the King for safety

of the undertakers for a conuenient tyme.

25. Agreed for settling all things touching the said plantacon, his

Matie will give his royal assent to Acts of Parliament here and
the like in Ireland to passe.

26. The cittie to have time for seven years to make such other reason-

able demands as time shall show to be needful.

27. Lastly, that the cittie shall w1 all speed set forward the plantacon,

as that 60 houses be built in Derry, and 40 at Colraine by
the 1st of November, which shall be in the year of our Lord
1611.

April, 1883.

CLOTHWORKERS.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE EVIDENCE GIVEN BY THE WITNESSES BEFORE THE
EOYAL COMMISSION APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO THE CITY OF
LONDON LIVERY COMPANIES, ESPECIALLY so FAR AS THE SAME

RELATES TO, OR AFFECTS, THE CLOTHWORKERS' COMPANY.

I. As to the Foundation and Object of this, and the other City Com-
panies, or Guilds, or Oilds.

These are stated in the passage from the 2nd report of the Commis-
sioners under the Municipal Corporations Commission of 1834, which
was drawn up by Sir Francis Palgrave (a high authority on such
subjects), and which is quoted by Mr. Hare in his evidence before the
present Commission. (Answer to Question 26.)

It appears from this passage that the Companies were not trading, but
trade societies, and their object was : —

(a.) To protect the consumer or employer against the incompetency
or fraud of the dealer or the artisan (as Mr. Froude, " History of
England," vol. i. p. 42, speaking of cloth, says, " to ensure that the
cloth put up for sale was true cloth of true texture and full weight"),
and to secure a maintenance to the workman by preventing his being
undersold in the labour market by an unlimited number of competitors.

(b.) To act as a domestic tribunal for the settlement by arbitration of
disputes between man and man, thus diminishing hostile litigation, and
promoting amity and good-will.

(c.) To perform the functions of a benefit society (and, it should be
added, of a burial club), from which the workman, in return for his
contributions, might be relieved in sickness, or infirmity, or old age, and
have his burial expenses paid.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 285

(d.) To serve as institutions, as in the nature of a modern club, in ciothworkers'
which individuals of the same class and their families assembled in Company,
social intercourse.

They had also a religious element. They had a patron saint, who, in
the case of the Ciothworkers' Company and of their predecessors the
Fullers and Shearmen, was the Virgin Mary. They attended religious
services, and the funerals of deceased members. They had chaplains
who performed obits (or obiits) and masses for the souls of the dead.
They held chartered feasts and entertainments on specified days. They
also took part in the pageants of the middle ages.

The statement made by Mr. Beal, in his pamphlet " The Eelief of the
Ratepayers' Burdens," that " guild was originally a name applied to the
quarter of the town where men and women practising a particular trade
lived," is incorrect. The name (see Herbert on the "Twelve Great
Livery Companies," vol. i. pp. 1 — 3) is derived from the Saxon
" Gildan," to pay, denoting an associated body or brotherhood, because
every member was " Gildar," i.e. to pay something towards the charge
and support of such body.

Of the above-mentioned objects : —

(a.) That for ensuring to the consumer or employer excellence in the
wares by means of searches, and to the workmen protection from
unlimited competition, has long fallen into disuse. Mr. J. E. Phillips
(answer to Question 1385) puts the year 1688 as the date when what
he calls the severance of the Guilds from the trades began, with the
avowed object of treating as public property all the estates acquired by
the Companies previously to that time, those since acquired by them
being, as he states, few in number. But there is no ground for assigning
that date, and Mr. Froude, in his " History of England," vol. i. p. 30,
describes the decay of this organization for the maintenance of fail-
dealing as having taken place in the reign of Elizabeth. It is mentioned
by Mr. Hare (answer to Question 27) that Queen Elizabeth sent to the
Mercers' Company to know why silks were so dear, and marvelled much
to learn that only one or two of the Company knew anything about silks
at all. And it appears from the books of the Ciothworkers' Company
that of the five persons named as Master and Wardens in the Charter of
Queen Elizabeth, A.D. 1560, one only was a clothworker by trade. This
Company went through the formality of appointing searchers up to the
year 1754, when the practice was finally discontinued ; but it had in fact
been a mere form for upwards of 100 years previously, the legality of the
rights of control over trade monopoly having come to be questioned.
Indeed, in the case of the Ciothworkers' Company (of Ipswich),
(Godbolt, tit. 351, p. 254), which was decided soon after the death of
Elizabeth, that is to say, in the twelfth year of King James L, such
rights were held to be void, having been superseded by statutes regard-
ing trade passed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The cloth manufac-
ture, moreover, had begun to leave the City of London for Norwich
and Ipswich, and for the west and the north of England.

(b.) This object, viz., that of arbitration, has also for some time fallen
into disuse, mainly for the reason that the Company had no means of
enforcing their award. But, so recently as the year 1881, the Company
were appealed to by artisans in the cloth manufacture in Yorkshire, to
interfere to obtain from their employers the redress of an alleged griev-
ance in a dispute between them and their employers. The Company,
however, declined to do so, considering that they could not usefully
intervene.

Objects (c.) That for providing for the assistance of sick and infirm

286 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Cloth workers' and decayed and aged members, and for the expense of the burial of
Company. ju)or (lcceased members.

And (</.) That of providing for the social intercourse of the members
including, in the case of this Company, the poor freemen and free-
women, who to the number of 200 or thereabouts are entertained in the
Livery Hall on every St. Thomas's Eve, the 20th of December) have
always been and are fulfilled by the Company.

II. As to the legal position of this and the other Companies.

It has been alleged on the part of the Companies that they were
Corporations by prescription, having the before-mentioned objects for
centuries before they were incorporated by Eoyal Charter, and that, even
if their charters could be cancelled or avoided, they would retain their
character of Corporations by Prescripton, to which the legal processes of
" Sciro Facias " or " Quo Warranto " could not apply.

On the other hand, it is contended that the Companies lost their
character of Corporations by Prescription by accepting the Royal
Charters.

But there certainly is authority for the proposition that a Corporation
by Prescription may continue as such, notwithstanding that it obtains a
charter from the Crown, in the incorporating part of which words of
creation only (such as "grant"," &c.) are used, those words being capable
of being taken, not as conveying a fresh grant, but as operating to con-
firm something previously enjoyed by the grantees. ("Grant on Corpora-
tions," pp. 32 and 33, and the cases there cited, including " The King
against the Corporation of Stratford-upon-Avon," 14, East's "Reports,"
p. 348.)

However, it is denied that the charters are liable to be revoked or
avoided.

The grounds suggested for such liability are —

(a.) That they contain clauses, such as those giving the right of
search, which were illegal in the first instance as being in restraint of
trade, and contrary to public policy, and inconsistent with Magna
Charta.

But one part of a charter may be good and the other parts void or
voidable. ("Grant on Corporations," pp. 40, 41, and the authorities
there referred to, including " SackvUle College Case;" T. Raymond's
"Keport,"pp. 177-78; and "The East India Company against Evans
and Others," I. Vernon's " Reports," pp. 305-8 ; and " Lord Mulgrave
against Sir John Mounson," Freeman's (Chancery) " Report," p. 17), pro-
vided that the void or voidable clauses are independent clauses, and that
the king was not deceived in the substance of his grant, which was not
the case with regard to these charters. Indeed, at the date of the later
ones, it must have been well known to the Crown that the rights of
control over trade had fallen into desuetude or were incapable of
being exercised. Therefore, if the clauses conferring those rights were
illegal, the incorporation and the other valid clauses would still remain in
force.

(6.) That the Companies having ceased to be connected Avith the
trades (Mr. Beal says, " having ceased to trade ; " but this expression is
incorrect, the Companies never did trade, certainly the Clothworkers'
Company, as a Corporation, never did), the purposes for which the
charters were granted have failed and the charters have ended.

But the rights of control over the trades were not the only purposes
for which the charters were granted, and the disuse by the Companies
of those rights could not put an end to the charters. However, in
addition to technical legal argument, which it is necessary for the Com-
pany in this and other instances to advance in reply to those of the like

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 287

nature used against them in the evidence before the Commission, the Clothworkors'
Company rely, in answer to these suggestions of the invalidity of the Company,
charters, on the fact (as pointed out by the Earl of Derby, in his
questions 986-89) that the question has never been tested, though
there has been every opportunity of testing it for an indefinite time
past.

III. As to the Charters of this Company.

A volume containing the charters of this Company and the grants of
land and tenements made to them, including the Act of Parliament
of 4 James I., accompanied the returns of the Company. Their first
charters are, that granted to the Fullers by Edward IV., in the twentieth
year of his reign, A.D. 1480, and that granted to the Shearmen by
Henry VII, in the twenty-third year of his reign, A.D. 1507-8. These
Corporations were united and reincorporated under the name of the Cloth-
workers' Company by charter of Henry VIII., in the nineteenth year of
his reign, A.D. 1527-28.

The Company's licences in mortmain are contained in their charters,
which empower them and their successors to hold lands and tenements,
notwithstanding the statutes of mortmain or any other statute or ordi-
nance. Moreover, this and the other Companies are exempted from the
operation of the statutes of mortmain as regards their lands and tene-
ments in the City of London devised to them by citizens resident in the
City, and paying " scot and lot," by the custom of London. This
custom is stated by Lord Chancellor Cottenham, in the case of " The
Attorney-General against the Fishmongers' Company (Preston's Will),"
5 Mylne and Craig's " Report," p. 19, as follows : — " By the recognized
custom of the City of London, citizens, though they could not convey
lands in mortmain, were entitled to devise them in mortmain, and the
Corporations were entitled to accept the lands so devised, whatever
might be their value."

IV. As to the Constitution and Membership of the Company.

The membership of the Company is, and has always been, acquired —

(1) By Apprenticeship (fee nominal).

(2) By Patrimony (fee nominal).

(3) By Purchase or " Redemption."

It is contended by Mr. Firth, M.P., in his work "Municipal London,"
p. 59, and also by the witnesses, Mr. Beal and Mr. Phillips, that in the
creation of the Companies, membership was restricted to the craftsmen.
Even if this had been the case it would soon have ceased to have been
so by the operation of patrimonial succession. But it is not the fact as
regards the Clothworkers' Company and some other of the Companies,
e.g. the Haberdashers' and Merchant Taylors'. The charters of the
Clothworkers' Company provide in express terms for the inclusion in the
Corporation of persons not belonging to the mystery ; that is to say, of
" the brothers and sisters of the freemen of the mystery or art, and
others who, of their devotion, shall have wished to belong to the
Fraternity or Gild." Mr. Firth, in his work, p. 59, quotes in support
of his aforesaid contention the words in the Clothworkers' Charter of
9 Charles I., which declare that "all persons, 'tarn indigenes quarn
alienigense,' who then used or should thereafter use the mystery of
Fullers, Shearmen, or Clothworkers, within the City or suburbs, should
be one body politic." But he omits to cite the subsequent clause in the
same charter, giving power to increase and augment the commonalty, and
to receive, make, and constitute into it " whatsoever persons, as well
natives or aliens (' tarn indigenas quam alienigenas '), whom they shall
be willing to receive into the same." There are, and always have been,
freewomen of this Company. - The Livery of the Company are chosen

288 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkcrs' by ballot from out of those persons who possess the freedom of tho
Company. Company by the Court.

It is to bo observed that, in fact, among the freemen there are artisans
practising businesses cognate to that of clothworking, for instance,
" packers " and " pressers."

V. ^.6* to the Government of the Company.

The governing body are, the Master, elected annually (generally
speaking in rotation according to seniority) from the members of the
Court of Assistants who have not passed the chair (any one who declines
to serve, paying a fine), and four Wardens, two of whom are elected
every year out of the Livery (generally in rotation according to seniority,
excepting any who are disqualified by bankruptcy or insolvency, or
some other good cause ; the Company considering this mode of election
as the most fair and most beneficial in operation, obviating, as it does,
canvassing, and the resort to any undue influence), and serving as Junior
Wardens the first year, and as Senior Wardens the second year (at the
end of which they are taken on to the Court), and about thirty-five
Assistants. The emoluments of the members of the Court are derived
only from their fees for attending the Courts and the Committees. This
mode of remuneration is objected to by Mr. Firth, and by some of the
witnesses ; but it is the one usually adopted by Companies and public
bodies, and it is preferable to a fixed salary, for the fees are not paid to
those who are absent, or do not come in due time, and the members of
Court, who are generally men actively engaged in professions or business,
could not be expected to give up the best hours of the day without
being remunerated (Mr. Gilbert, in answer to Question 1563, says he
would not like to do so), and the amount of the fees (between 651. and
SQL per annum) is a moderate compensation for the amount of time
given and work done.

The Courts are held on the first Wednesday in every month (except
September). They last for three hours at least, often longer. The
ordinary course of transacting business is given for the information of
the Commission. The Master and Wardens meet at two o'clock for the
purpose of binding apprentices and admitting freemen. At half-past two
the general business of the Court begins.

1. The Acts and Orders of the last Court are read by the Clerk, and
having been put from the chair and adopted, are signed by the Master.

2. The Court then considers various matters, not set out on the paper of
agenda, which are brought to its notice by the Clerk and the Master.

3. Next it considers Petitions for Casual Relief, and Funeral Allow-
ances, to poor members and their widows. 4. Then it receives and
discusses the Keports of the Standing Committees, " The Trusts," " Tho
Estate," " Finance," and the Minutes of the Auditors. 5. Next come
any special motions of which notice has been given. 6. Then appli-
cations for aid on behalf of various charitable and other institutions
and bodies (any grant exceeding twenty guineas being made the subject
of a notice of motion for a subsequent Court). 7. Next the Seal of the
Company is affixed to any deeds or documents requiring it. 8. Then
elections are made to any vacant posts, scholarships (boys and girls),
exhibitions to the Universities and Colleges (including those for women)
— the reports of the examiners being read and considered — almshouses,
pensions, &c., &c. 9. General business.

The Court is composed of several clergymen, one or two barristers and
solicitors, physicians, professors, architects, and men who are, or have
been, engaged in business (including several who arc, and whose
families have for generations been, engaged in businesses, such as
" calendarers " and " pressers," being subsidiary processes of the cloth-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 289

working trade, and whose experience is very valuable), estate agents Clothworkcrs'
(whose practical knowledge is also very useful), and several gentlemen Company,
interested in science and art and antiquarian pursuits. By men so vary-
ing in professions and attainments, the different questions which arise at
the Courts are discussed with great ability and moderation. Decisions
are taken by show of hands (except the elections, which are always by
ballot). The members of the Court are mostly connected with the
Company by patrimony. Some few were originally admitted by
"Redemption" or "Apprenticeship." There is no political or party
influence or bias. The constitution of the Court is regulated by the
byelaws last ratified by the judges in 1639.

The Company notices the charges brought, or suggested, against
members of the Courts of the Companies by Mr. Firth, M.P., in his said
work, and by some of the witnesses, that they vote themselves pensions,
and make use of the charities or patronage for their own private
benefit, and obtain leases of the estates at a low rental and relet them
at a profit ; only for the purpose of giving an emphatic denial to them.
No liveryman, or member of the Court, can receive any 'pension or alms,
without resigning his position and returning to that of a simple freeman.
With reference to the case of a former clerk of the Company mentioned
by Mr. Phillips (answers to Questions 1283 — 1316), the account given
by him of the irregularities of which that person was guilty is correct
(indeed it is, as stated by him, taken from the book of Mr. Alsager, pub-
lished in the year 1838 for the use of the Court), but from those irregu-
larities, and the exposure of them by Mr. Alsager, who became Master
in 1836-37, great and lasting benefit has resulted to the Company, by
the thorough investigation of their affairs and accounts, both as regards
their Corporate and Trust property, which were then placed on a proper
footing, the permanency of which was secured by the institution of
Standing Committees. That clerk (Mr. Phillips is incorrect in saying
that he was dismissed ; he died in January, 1837) was able to take
advantage of the influence and knowledge possessed by him in consequence
of the permanency of his office, which he had held for many years, while
the Master and Wardens, who were then the only executive body, only
held office for one year and two years respectively, and were not able to
acquire during those periods a sufficient supervisory knowledge of the
Company's affairs. This was remedied by the creation of Standing
Committees, consisting of the most experienced Members of the Court
(the chief of them being "The Trusts and General Superintendence
Committee " and "The Estate Committee "), one half of the members of
which, including the Chairman, are more or less permanent, the other
half being elected annually (the Master for the time being is ex officio
a member of all the committees, but does not act as chairman) . By
means of these committees, including especially the Chairman and
Master, and of the auditors, a constant and careful supervision is
exercised over the clerk and the other officials, and over the affairs and
accounts of the Company, which are now on the most excellent basis.
The Master and Chairman of the Committees attend at the Hall generally
twice a week at least, and a recurrence of any such improprieties is now
rendered impossible.

VI. As to the property of the Company and the Administration
of it.

(1) The Corporate Estate.

(2) The Trust Estate.

(1) As to the corporate property, the Company maintain, in contra-
diction to the witnesses (Messrs. Hare, Beal, and Phillips in particular),—
That it is not public property (so far as by that is meant property to

290 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkers' or in which the general public or any section of the public outside of the
Company. members of the corporate body has any right or interest), and

That it is not subject to any trust, charitable or otherwise, but
That it is the absolute property in law of the Company.
In support of these propositions the Company rely
On the cases of " The Attorney- General against the Corporation of
" Carmarthen," Cooper, p. 30, and " The Mayor of Colchester v. Lowton."
1, Vesey and Beames, p. 226, mentioned by Mr. Longley in answer to
Question 350, in which cases it was held that every civil corporation
(and not merely a municipal corporation) had full power at law to alienate
its property, and the Court of Chancery had no jurisdiction to restrain
such alienation.

On the case of "Dale v. Brown," referred to by Sir R Cross in Ques-
tion 976, and reported (though more shortly) in the " Law Eeports of
Chancery Division," p. 78, where it was decided by the Master of the
Kolls, Sir George Jessel, that the existing members of the Company,
Society, or Fellowship of the Fullers and Dyers of Newcastle were
entitled to sell their property and divide the proceeds among them,
to the exclusion of any inchoate or future right or expectation of mem-
bership.

On the statement of the present Lord Chancellor, in answer to Ques-
tion 1684, that in point of law the Companies are, in his opinion, abso-
lutely entitled to their property, and under no trust whatever ; and the
other subsequent statements by his lordship to the like effect.

On that of Mr. Hare, who, in answer to the Question (244) whether

' he would consider when a Company was empowered to purchase land

' contrary to the statutes of mortmain, and did so purchase it, being at

' that time any active trade organization, that that ought not to be

' available for the trade 1 " says, " No ; it has been taken by the Company

' and held by the Company during a long period, by which a title would

' be gained by prescription ;" and the reply of Mr. Longley to Question

330, on the admission by the same witnesses that the corporate

property is not subject to any charitable use or trust.

On the precedents, in addition to that of the before-mentioned case of
the Fullers and Dyers of Newcastle, established by the division by the
Doctors of Doctors' Commons and the Serjeants-at-Law of their property
amongst themselves; the case of Serjeants' Inn Mr. Phillips indeed
attempted to distinguish from that of the Livery Companies, on the
ground that they were not incorporated ; but Lord Selborne, in his
speech in the House of Lords, quoted by Mr. Phillips in answer to
Question 1284, refused to accept incorporation as any test as to whether
a body is public or private, and reiterates this in his reply to Lord
Coleridge's Question (1686), while in his reply to Question 1680 he
repudiates the inference drawn by Mr. Phillips from his said speech, that
his lordship thought the Inns of Courts (which he did consider a public
body) and the Companies are in pan conditione, saying that he does not
think so at all.

Moreover and especially, the Company rely on the fact that they
have for centuries leased, sold, and otherwise dealt with their corporate
property without any interference. An instance of a sale occurs in their
records as early as the year 1550, at which time they sold land at
Greenwich belonging to them, as well as property in Queenhithe.

They have ' also frequently made sales under the compulsory powers
of Acts of Parliament with the cognizance of the Court of Chancery,
and their title has been laid before the most eminent conveyancers, in-
cluding the Conveyancing Counsel of the Court, and approved by them

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 291

and the proceeds of such sales have been handed over to the Company Clothworkcrs'
without obligation of reinvestment. Company.

In 1871 they sold their Irish estate.

Their corporate property in England was acquired by devises, made in
very many instances after they had ceased to exercise the rights of
control over trade, and in almost every case by members of the Company,
who were well acquainted Avith the mode in which they dealt with their
property, and by purchases made out of their own internal revenue and
income, and as regards the large portion of their property known as the
"Obit" or "Chauntry" lands, comprised in the Letters Patent of 4th
.Kd ward 'VI., A.D. 1550 (including their Hall), and those comprised in
the Letters Patent of 17th James I., by purchase from the Crown of
he charges existing thereon, and to these " Obit " or " Chauntry " lands
they have a Parliamentary title under the Act of Parliament of 4th
James I., A.D. 1606-7.

The following entry occurs in the books of this Company. Vide
Court lathAprOi 1607.

" This daie also Sr Henry Monntague, Eecorder of
" the Cittie of London came & declared to this Com- Towcbin^e
" pany that there is a Byll pferred to the Parlvament the bill in
"bowse touchinge th'assurance of the landes & tene- the pliam'.

"ments belonginge to the severall Companyes of this
te /"i*j j* • *• K • i i i ciGGrincrc

Oittie, certen rents yssuinge out of wch said landes the landes

" and tenements lymited to supersticious uses were in question
"purchased by the said sevrall Companyes of Kynge of concealement.
" Edward the sixte in the fourthe yeare of his raigne.
" The iudges and greatest Lawyers of this land then beinge of opinion
" that onely the rents ymployed or lymitted to supsticious uses were the
'•' Kynges. But not the landes whereout those rents were yssuinge yet
" in these tymes the very landes have bynne & yet are in question.
"And certen patentees in the tyiue of the late Queene have gonne
" about, and yet doe, to entitle the said late Queene and the Kynges
" Matie that now is to the said lands and tenements (onely for theyr
" private gayne) as landes concealed from the Crowne, not caringe to
" bereave a nomber of poore people in this Citty & elsewhere in the
" Kyngdome of theyr beste and cheifest relief e & mayntenance & by
" means of those patentees have drawen from the said scvrall Companyes
" many greate somes of money for composicon wth the said patentees
"for the said landes. The rents whereof the Companyes had formerly
" purchased of the said late Kynge Edward the sixte. And so the
" saide Companyes havinge payed fyrst to the Kynge & after com-
" pounded wth the said Patentees for the saide rents and landes sevrally
" for all the money they have departed with have at this pnte (of
"assurance) neither rents nor landes. And thereuppon the said Sr
" Henry Monntague shewed vnto the Company how beneficiall the
" passinge of that byll in Parliament might be in generall to the whole
' Cittie & in pticular to every private Company. And did advise that
'soe good mcanes of peace and quiet for the establishinge of theyr
' landes to them and theyr successors in succeedinge tymes was not to
' be reiected but to be embraced. And wth all desired to know the
' purpose and detcrminacoii of this Company whether they wolde ioyne
H wth j.jie restc of the Companyes & contribute to the chardge of passinge
" the said byll or desiste and stand vppon theyr owne defence. Where-
"vnto it was answered that this Company althoughe they knew theyr
" landes to be as cleare and free from question as any other Company
" in London yet in respecte of the generall good wch (as is declared) by

u 2

292 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkers' " possibilitie may come to the whole Cittio and to the Company cs
Company. « jn pticuler they will not leave theyr bretheren but ioyne wth them
"in psequucon of the said Byll & in contribucon to the chardges
" thereof after a reasonable rate accordinge to the proporcon of the
" dannger they stand in case of concealement or purchase of rents lymited
" to supsticious vses."

Lortl Chancellor Cottenhain, speaking of the Letters Patent of 4th
Edward VI. and the Act of 4th James I., says in the case of tha
" Attorney-General v. the Fishmongers' Company " (Knesworth's Will),
5 Mylne and Craig's "Report," p. 16, "The result is that the Company,
" by means of the Letters Patent and the Act, obtained all the title
" which the Act 1 Edward VI." (for vesting in the Crown lands, &c.,
held for superstitious uses) "would have given to the Crown," and
again in the " Attorney-General v. the same Company " (Preston's Will)
5, Mylne and Craig, p. 24, " It was immaterial whether the Crown actually
"seized the land itself or only the rents, the Letters Patent of 4
" Edward VI., and the Act 4 James I., having had the effect of giving
to the Company all that the Act of 1 Edward VI. gave to the king,"
and (at p. 18) " To dispose of rights or property upon any evidence,
" however apparently clear, against a title and course of dealing of 400
"years, would be full of danger, and no judge, not destitute of that
" degree of prudence and discretion which is essential to the administra-
" tion of all system and law, but particularly to that of equity, would feel
"justified in doing so, if any reasonable suggestion could be made recon-
"ciling the history of transactions long since passed away with the
" enjoyment of the property ;" and he marked his sense of the impro-
priety of the institution of the information in that case by ordering the
relators to pay the costs. In connection with this subject reference may
be made to the case of "Peel's Will," in the year 1602, iri the King's
Bench, Duke 95, 4 Coke 113, "Duke's Charitable Uses," p. 469, in
which the Crown claimed certain houses in London, devised by one
Peel, alias Pele, to the Clothworkers' Company, to the intent that they
for ever should pay to such priest as should pray for his soul in the
Parish Church of Chilham, 9Z. 6s. 8d. for his salary, adjudged that " the
"king will not have the houses, for they were not given to find a priest
" but to pay a priest a certain sum."

The Act of 2 William and Mary, referred to by Mr. Beal (answers to
Questions 830-31), restored and confirmed to this, and the other Com-
panies, all the lands, &c., "which they lawfully had, or had lawful
" right, title, or interest of, in or to," at the time of the judgment in
Quo Warranto in the 35th year of King Charles II. Mr. Beal lays
stress on the word " lawfully " (which he erroneously states to be placed
within inverted commas in the Act, but this is not so in the king's
printers' copies of the statute), his suggestion being that, as the Com-
panies had no lawful title to their estates at the time of the Quo
Warranto, the Act gave them none. But for the reasons before stated,
the Company had undoubtedly a lawful title to their estates at that time,
and the Act gave a further Parliamentary sanction to such title.

It is necessary to mention one particular ground on which the allega-
tion by the witnesses that the corporate property is "public " or muni-
cipal is attempted to be supported, viz., that the Companies form an
integral part of the Corporation of London, and are in fact themselves
municipal corporations, because —

(a.) No person could be a freeman of the City Avho was not a
freeman of one of the Companies.

(&.) The liverymen elect the Lord Mayor and the other great

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 293

officers of the Corporation in Common Hall, and vote for the Clofchworkcrs'
election of Members of Parliament for the City. Company.

(c.) The Corporation exercises control over the Companies and
their property.

(a.) Since 1835 it is not true that no one can be free of the City who
is not free of one of the Companies. It is true that the freedom of the
Companies carries with it an inchoate right to the freedom of the City,
but it is not obligatory on freemen of the Companies to take out the
freedom of the City. By Act of Common Council, passed the 9th of
March, 1836, it was enacted that the apprentices of such of the freemen
of the City as are not free of any society, guild, fraternity, or company
of the City, shall, being bound before the Chamberlain of the City,
according to the forms of the indenture of apprenticeship for apprentices
of the City and duly enrolled, according to the custom of the City, at
the expiration of the apprenticeship, be admitted to the freedom of the
City.

(b.) It is true that the Liverymen are entitled to vote for the Lord
Mayor, the Sheriffs of London and Middlesex, the Chamberlain, Ale-
conners, the Bridgemasters, and the Auditors of the Bridge House
accounts. (Under 11 George I., c. 18, § 1.) But they do not elect
the Aldermen, the Common Councilmen, or the Town Clerk and other
municipal officers (being precisely the officers whom, if they had formed
part of the municipality, they would have been entitled to elect). They
are also entitled to vote for Members of Parliament for the City, but the
franchise is restricted to such of them as are free of the City, and have
been so for one year, and reside within twenty-five miles of it, and have
paid their livery fines, and have not received back such fines in part or
all, or had any allowance in respect thereof, or within two years before
have requested to be, and have been, discharged from paying taxes, or
within that time received alms (Putting's "Laws of London," p. 83
et seq.). This franchise is properly referable to the property qualifica-
tion possessed by the liverymen by their being interested in property
within the City (which is a county of itself) in their own corporate right,
and is analogous to the 40s. freehold franchise in counties. For the City of
London is a county of itself, and therefore has its Sheriffs, its Lieu-
tenants, its County Court or hustings, and other institutions similar to
those in other counties (Pulling, p. 16, a) . The Lord Mayor derives the
office of Lieutenant or Viceroy from the Crown, and he has all the powers
of a Lord Lieutenant within his county (Pulling, p. 19). The officers for
whose election the liverymen vote are likewise county officers, just as
freeholders of a county still elect the " Coroner." Some of the Com-
panies have no livery.

(c.) It may be true that the Court of Aldermen, as magistrates, did
claim to exercise some sort of irregular control over the Companies.
For instance, by an order of the Court of Aldermen, dated the 27th
of July, 1697, it was directed that "no person should for the future
" be called to take upon himself the livery of any of the twelve higher
" Companies, who was not possessed of an estate of 1000/., or of those
"of the inferior Companies unless he was possessed of an estate of
" 500Z." But, in the case of the " Vintners' Company v. Pafrey," 1 Burr, .
235, this order was pleaded and was demurred to, and was afterwards
given up on the ground that it was not known what authority the
Lord Mayor and Aldermen had to make the order. It may be true
likewise that when in the times of irregular taxation and exaction of
money by the Crown (e.g. " ship money ") the sovereign made a re-
quisition on the City for money, the Lord Mayor sent a precept to

291 110YAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkors' the Companies to furnish their quota. But the Crown often made a
Company. requisition, not through the Corporation, but directly, on particular
Companies, to furnish money. Herbert mentions many instances of
this having been done by Queen Elizabeth and other sovereigns.

But it is admitted by Mr. Beal and Mr. Phillips, there is no known
instance of interference on the part of the Court of Aldermen with the
property of the Companies during the last 200 years. Mr. Beal, indeed,
was by Question 824 asked by Mr. Firth, M.P., "Have you read the
" decision in the case of the refractory Companies in 1775, when between
" the Corporation and the Goldsmiths' Company the question was con-
" tested?" and replied "Yes." He was then asked, "What was the
" effect of that decision 1 " to which he answered, " The Companies were
" found to be in the wrong, and that they were an integral part of the
"Corporation, and it is fully set out in your own book, ' Municipal Lon-
" 'don.' " This is a serious misstatement of the fact. The passage referred
to is in " Municipal London," p. 43, where it is stated by Mr. Firth that al-
though the Common Hall is now only called together for election purposes,
there appears but little doubt but that it might be convened for other
purposes, and in the note (*) he adds : — " This would seem to have
" been finally settled in the case of the trial of the refractory Companies
" in 1773, when the Warden of the Goldsmiths' Company was success-
" fully prosecuted in the Mayor's Court for inattention to a summons to
" Common Hall on other than election business " (vide report of this case
Lawyer's Magazine, July, 1773). It is true that such a decision was
obtained in the Mayor's Court on the 14th July, 1773, in proceedings by
the Common Sergeant of the City of London, plaintiff, and Samuel
Plumbe, Esq., Prime Warden or Master of the Company of Gold-
smiths, defendant (it is also reported in the "Annual Eegister," vol.
16, pp. 188-91), but Mr. Beal and Mr. Firth ought to have known that
this decision was not " final," but was reversed on appeal in the year
1775. This appears in Herbert's well-known book on the twelve great
Companies (p. 55, note), where he says: — "Ever since Alderman Plum-
"ber's [Plurnbe's] case in 1775, who was Master of the Goldsmiths'
" Company, and refused to attend a Common Hall on the precept
" of the Lord Mayor (Beckford) to present to the Crown a petition
" for redress of grievances (and which refusal was sanctioned by the
" Court of King's Bench), several of them have uniformly declined to
" attend Common Halls unless for election purposes." The Lord Chief
Justice de Grey is reported as having stated in his judgment on the
appeal, " Thus far we know that the constitution of the City of London
"does not contain these Companies." In fact, the constitution of the
City consists of three distinct branches, viz., the Lord Mayor, the Court
of Aldermen, and the Court of Common Council, which have been com-
pared to the three branches of the British Constitution (" Pulling's Laws
"of London," p. 16, a), and in the Chamberlain of London's case,
Leonard, parts 3 and 4, p. 264, it was laid down by Fleetwood (Justice)
that " The custom of the City is that the Mayor and Aldermen, and four
" persons chosen out of each Ward by the Commonalty, may make or-
"dinances which they call Acts of Common Council, and they shall
" bind every citizen and freeman," and that the, Companies do not form
part of the constitution of the City, though they are no doubt intimately
connected with it, appears from the notable fact mentioned in "Hume's
"History of England" (vol. viii. p. 308), that the Convention summoned
after the final flight of James II. was composed of all the members who
had sat in the House of Commons during any Parliament of Charles
II., and to them were added the Mayor, Aldermen, and fifty of the Com-

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 295

mon Council, which was regarded as the most proper representative of Clothworker.
the people that could be summoned. Company.

As is mentioned by Mr. Beal (answers to Questions 701-4), at the
time of the passing of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1835, the
Companies were unanimously advised by high legal authorities (Lord
Abinger (then Sir James Scarlett), Sir William (then Mr. W. W.) Follett,
and Mr. W. R. Rennall) that they were not municipal corporations, and
it is difficult to understand how they could be so, as they are not a city
or a borough.

It is right particularly to refer to the argument put forward by Lord
Coleridge (in Questions 350 and the following ones) that the Charters
of themselves constitute a trust. His Lordship asks Mr. Longley (Ques-
tion 350) whether it has ever been decided that the charters consti-
tute no trust. Mr. Longley refers to the " Attorney-General v. The
"Corporation of Carmarthen," and the " Mayor of Colchester v. Lowton."
His Lordship says (No. 351) : " That does not quite answer my question ;
' those are municipal corporations. I am supposing the case of a corpora-
' tion created by charter for a particular purpose not invested Avith
" municipal authority or a municipal corporation, but a corporation with
' a special object, has it ever been decided that the charter so creating .
' them and pointing out to them that object, creates no trust ? " Mr.
Longley replies that he is not aware of any authority on the point. It is
submitted the more proper form of question would have been, " Has it
" ever been decided that the charters constitute a trust 1 " to which the
answer must be in the negative, the absence of any such decision affording
the strongest inference against the existence of any such trust. But
taking the question as Lord Coleridge put it, it is answered by the
present Lord Chancellor, Lord Selborne, who, in his before-mentioned
reply to Question 1684, states that they, the Companies, are, in his
opinion, absolutely entitled to their property, and under no trust what-
ever, and in his answer to Question 1699, speaking with regard to the
charters of the Mercers' Company, says that any general trust upon those
charters for charitable purposes he is quite satisfied does not exist, and
to Question 1700, with regard to the particular charter of the Mercers'
Company, 1 7 Richard II., the form of which has generally been supposed
to be most open to the construction of creating a trust, says that that was
not an incorporation for charitable purposes.

This Company desire to refer to these authoritative statements of the
Lord Chancellor, which are at least equally applicable to their charters,
not one of which contains any expression capable of creating such a trust.
Mr. Phillips, in answer to Question 1386, says that he does not
know that the question has been raised before the Courts whether
the corporate property of the Guilds is trust property or not. How-
ever, as regards the Clothworkers' Company, the question was recently
raised before Mr. Justice Fry by the Metropolitan Board of Works, who
opposed the application of the Company for payment out of Court to
them of money paid in respect of part of their corporate property at
Islington, taken by the Board under their compulsory powers, on the
ground that it was trust property. That opposition was overruled by his
Lordship, who ordered the money to be paid to the Company as being
absolutely entitled. But while claiming to be absolutely entitled at law
to their corporate property, and even to have the right, with the assent
of the existing members, to divide it, the Company admit the moral
responsibility resting on them in common with all other landowners in
respect of it, and are willing to recognize a special responsibility
similar to that rightly imputed to the great feudally descended land-
owners, especially those taking their root of title from Church lands.

296 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkers' As to tho administration of the corporate property of the Corn-
Company. pany ._

Yearly sums amounting to nearly two-thirds of the income of the
Company are expended —

In disbursements supplemental to Charity Trusts (eleemosynary,
educational, or otherwise).

Annuities and Aids to Decayed Liverymen, Widows, &c.

Donations and Subscriptions voted at Courts.

Schools.

Exhibitions and Scholarships.

Technical and General Education (on which up to 1880, the date to
which their returns are made up, the Company had expended 1)0,000?.,
and have since expended much more.

Higher Education of Women.

No charge is made against the trusts for administration, office, or
estate expenses, which are paid out of the corporate income. And as
part of their provision for technical education they have completely
finished, at a cost of 15,000?. and an annual subsidy of 1250?. and up-
wards, their own Textile and Dyeing Department of the Yorkshire Col-
lege, at Leeds (the only portion yet built), where the actual processes of
weaving, both by hand and by power loom, and dyeing and other pro-
cesses connected with the cloth manufactory are taught, not only
scientifically by lectures, but by practical manual instruction and work,
and they have lately given 500?. towards the establishment of a scholar-
ship in commemoration of the late President of the College, Lord
Frederick Cavendish, who was a member of the Company.

They have given 3000?. to the Building Fund, and 300?. per annum to
the Maintenance Fund, of the Technical School at Bradford, which was
opened by the Prince and Princess of Wales last year. They have made
large subscriptions for the establishment and maintenance of similar
schools at Huddersfield and Keighley. They have founded lectures in
connection with technical education at Bristol, Stroud, and the seats of
the cloth industry in the west, and also at Glasgow ; and they subscribe
a yearly sum for the working artisans in the cloth trade at Batley, in
Yorkshire, on condition of an adequate local subscription, and they are
now going to submit proposals to the Dewsbury Chamber of Commerce
for extending and improving the facilities for technical instruction in that
town.

They also, as is mentioned by Lord Selborne (answer to Question
1682), in the year 1873, took part in the initiation of the City and
Guilds' Technical Institute, to which they make large subscriptions ; they
also have encouraged excellence of workmanship in cloth manufacture
and dyeing, by giving medals in connection Avith the recent exhibitions
at the Crystal Palace and Bradford.

As regards general education, they have established a scheme for
making grants in aid of the education of poor members, whether freemen
or liverymen, mainly based on competitive examination, subject to the
attainment of a high standard, and have established exhibitions at the
North London Collegiate and Camden Schools for Girls, to which a
wing, called " Clothworkers' Hall," has been added, the Company paying
more than half the expense (3100?.) out of their corporate income, the
rest from funds applied under Sec. 30 of the Endowed Schools Act, 1869 ;
cf. also P. Christian's (Isle of Man) School.

They have also given large donations and yearly subscriptions to Girton
College, Newnham Hall, and Somerville Hall, Oxford, for the higher
education of women, where there are open exhibitions of considerable
value.

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 297

The Company wish specially to refer to the Thwaytes' Bequest, which ciothworkcra'
is frequently mentioned by the witnesses. Mr. Thwaytes, by his will, Company,
dated 24th of March, 1831, left 20,000f. to the Company to provide
pensions of 10/. for the blind, which sum (after deducting legacy duty)
is now invested in the sum of 19,59 11. 16s. 9<7. stock, standing in the
name of the Official Trustee of Charities, producing the income of
587/. 15s., Avhereas the Company maintain 100 pensioners at 10/. per
annum (in the whole 1000/.), charging the deficiency to their corporate
income.

Mr. ThAvaytes likewise " left other 20,OOOZ. to be laid out in the way
that " may tend to make the said Society comfortable."

The Company hold one of their Livery dinners in commemoration of
Mr. Thwaytes, and the balance of the fund is applied for the general
purposes of the Company, including the supplemental pensions to the
blind above-mentioned. The remains of this and the other dinners are
distributed to the poor alms-people.

(2) As to the Company's Trust Estate.

In many instances the Trust Charity property consisted of rent-charges
issuing out of the corporate estate of the Company. These the Com-
pany, in the case of Lute's Charity and a great many other charities
specified in the table of charities set out in the Company's returns, have
redeemed, with the sanction and under the orders of the Charity Com-
missioners, made in pursuance of sections 23 and 25 of the Charitable
Trusts Act, 1853, by which the Commissioners are empowered conclu-
sively to sanction compromises of claims on behalf of charity and redemp-
tion of rent-charges by the payment of sums of stock into the name of
the official trustee of charitable funds.

This explains the discrepancy between former returns and reports and
the present returns of the Company, the amount of the charitable trust
personal estate of the Company being increased, and that of the real
estate being diminished by such redemptions. It is suggested by Mr.
Beal that it was very well to redeem the rent-charges, but that it did not
follow that the surplus rents of the properties on which they were
charged do not belong to the charities. It is a sufficient answer to this
that "the Charity Commissioners, who necessarily had the titles to those
properties laid before them, would not have sanctioned the redemption if
they had considered that the whole of the property belonged to the
Charity, but would have applied to the Attorney-General to take pro-
ceedings to enforce the right of the Charity. The question as to whether
under devises or gifts a specific or definite portion only of the rents of
property is given to charity, and the surplus belongs to the Company, so
that the Company and not the Charity is entitled to the benefit of the
increase in value of the property, or whether the whole of the rents, or
of the surplus of them, after answering charges, are devoted to charity, is
one depending on the construction of the particular instrument, and has
given rise to much litigation. But out of 100 cases, about eighty (see
Question 919) have been decided in favour of the Companies, and only
about twenty in favour of the Attorney-General. Many of these cases
are not reported in the Law Reports, but it is believed that the Charity
Commissioners have a record of them.

The cases in which the Attorney-General succeeded include those re* '
fcrred to by Mr. Beal of the Attorney-General v. The Wax Chandlers'
Company, " Law Reports and Equity," 452, 5 Chancery, 503, 6 House
of Lords' Cases, 1 (which could not have been so clear a case as Mr. Beal
represents, since Lord Romilly and Lord Hatherley both decided in
favour of the Charity ; and Lord Hatherley again refers to it as present-
in" features of difficulty in Keudal's case), and the case of The Merchant

298 110YAL COMMISSION.

Clothworkers' Taylors' Company v. The Attorney-General, G Chancery, 512 (Kendal's
Company. c&se), and the Attorney-General v. The Drapers' Company, 4 Beavan,
17.

The cases in which the Attorney-General has failed include those of

The Attorney-General v. The Haberdashers' Company, 4 Brown,
Chancery Cases, pp. 101 — 103.

The Attorney-General v. The Mayor of Bristol, 2 Jacob and Walker,
295.

The Mayor South Molton v. The Attorney-General, 5 House of Lords'
Cases, 1.

The Attorney- General v. The Skinners' Company, 2 Russell, 417.

The Attorney-General v. Smithies, 2 Russell and Mylne, 717.

The Attorney-General v. The Cordwainers' Company, 3 Mylne and
Keen, 534.

The two cases of The Attorney-General v. The Fishmongers' Company
(Kneseworth's Will) and Preston's Will, 5 Mylne and Craig, 11 — 16.

The Attorney-General v. The Grocers' Company (Laxton's case), 6
Beavan, 526.

The Attorney- General v. Brazenose College, 2 Clark and Finneley,
295.

Many of the Clothworkers' Charitable Trusts are administered under
schemes of the Court of Chancery, the Endowed Schools Act, 1869, and
of the Charity Commissioners obtained at the instance of the Company,
for example (amongst others), Burnell's and other benefactions, Hitchin's
Charity, Hobby's Charity, Lute and Middlemore's Charity, and all the
funds constituting the Company's Trust Personal Estate (which is par-
ticularized in the Company's returns) are placed in the name of the
Official Trustee of Chanties. These facts show that the reluctance im-
puted by Mr. Hare and Mr. Longley to the Companies to resorting to the
Charity Commissioners does not exist on the part of the Clothworkers'
Company ; on the contrary, they have been anxious to avail themselves
as largely as possible of the assistance of the Commissioners. Lambe's
Islington Charity is administered under a private Act of Parliament
(Lambe's Chapel and Estate Act), passed with the co-operation of the
Charity Commissioners. As before mentioned, the Company defray out
of their corporate income the expenses of the administration of the
Charitable Trusts, and they do not even accept the five per cent, for rent
collection as receivers allowed by the Court of Chancery and the Charity
Commissioners, and they also largely supplement the charitable gifts
out of their corporate income.

The Company desire specially to mention the case of Middlemorc's
Charity, as that is referred to by Mr. Lucraft in his evidence. Samuel
Middlemore by his will, dated 24th October, 1628, bequeathed the sum
of 8001. to the Company upon trust to purchase lands to the yearly value
of 40?., which was to be applied in clothing for the poor. The Company
endeavoured to procure such a purchase, but did not succeed in doing so
in consequence of the difficulty of finding land to produce such an
income, and of the further difficulty interposed under the Statutes of
Mortmain, there being at that time mesne lords whose rights could not
be defeated by the Crown's licence to hold land in mortmain. They
therefore retained the money, paying out of their corporate income the
yearly sum of 40/., being the interest on it at five per cent., which they
gradually increased to 70/. and 80/. By the decree of the Court of
Chancery made in a suit commenced in 1833, it was ordered that this
Charity and that of John Middlemore (the son of Samuel), who be-
queathed 1001. for similar purposes, should constitute thereafter a charge
of 45 /. per annum upon the Company. Recently under order of the

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 299

Charity Commissioners, dated the 16th November, 1877, the Company Clothworkers'
transferred the sum of 1500/. Consols into the name of the Official Company.
Trustee of Charities in satisfaction of this charge of 45/. This stock has
recently been sold out and reinvested in the purchase of ground rents
at West Hackney amounting to 62/. per annum (with large increase in
reversion). These Charities, together with Lute's Charity, are adminis-
tered under a scheme, dated January, 1878, framed by the said Com-
missioners, in co-operation with the Company.

VII. Reform.

The Company reserve and claim the benefit of the protest contained in
Part V. of their returns. But, irrespective of that protest, they Avould
not consider it to be their duty to offer suggestions on this head. They
would refuse to enter into a discussion of the schemes (which, as sug-
gested by Lord Sherbrooke, are of doubtful public utility) for the appro-
priation of the property of the Companies propounded by Messrs. Hare,
Beal, and Phillips.

They would decline to anticipate that the Commissioners would re-
commend to the Legislature, or that the Legislature would sanction a
measure for depriving the Companies of their property, as proposed by
the two latter gentlemen. Such a measure would, in their view, be an
act of confiscation which would shake the rights of property of every
description, certainly the rights of the owners of property derived under
grants of Church property, or of the possessions of the dissolved monas-
tries, nor would they contemplate the possibility of any measure for taking
away from the Companies the control over their estates.

But any suggestions made by the Commissioners themselves would
meet with the respectful consideration of the Court of this Company.
They, however, point out that the purposes to which the Corporate
income is now applied, general education (lower and higher), technical
education, support of hospitals, dispensaries, and other charitable and
benevolent and scientific institutions, are the very objects the adoption
of which is advocated by the more moderate of the witnesses. The
Company would not think that it would be for the public benefit that
they should be subjected by the Legislature to any hard and fast rules
of administration.

To two suggestions which have been made they would readily assenib,
viz. : —

One, which regards their corporate property, that it, in common with
all other property held in mortmain in the kingdom, should be subjected
to succession duty at intervals of thirty years or thereabouts, correspond-
ing to a generation or an annual tax in substitution thereof.

The other, which regards their Charitable Trust Estate, that increased
power should be given over charities to the Charity Commissioners on
the lines laid down by Mr. Longley in the course of his evidence, subject
to minor differences.

CLOTHWORKERS' COMPANY.— FUETHEB OBSERVATIONS
AND SUGGESTIONS.

Trade.

The Clothworkers' Company have never spent other than a trifling
proportion of its revenues on any trade purposes, even in the time when
the trade organization was in a more or less vigorous activity. And little
or nothing was ever left or given for purposes connected with trade

300

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Cloth workers' otherwise than as express charitable trusts, i.e. loans and apprentice
Company. fees> Moreover, such expenses out of the corporate funds as may be
said to have been connected with the trade were mainly petty disburse-
ments on account of searches for bad workmanship, including often the
cost of a dinner at a tavern or the Hall after the day's inspection. The
decay of the Companies' connection with their trade is well explained
and illustrated by the well-known passage from Froude's " History of
England," vol. i. pp. 50 — 62, previously referred to.

Any scheme for resuming or constituting a direct connection with
trades is impracticable, as it would result in favouring some trades to the
exclusion of others, and especially must leave out of its scope the great coal
and iron and textile manufacturing industries of the country. Such a
scheme would also be quite irreconcilable with the present industrial
organization of the country ; but in expending a considerable and in-
creasing proportion of its income in technical instruction as connected
with " clothworking " and the textile industries, and also (through the
medium of the Gity and Guilds of London Institute for the Advance-
ment of Technical Education) with the commercial and manufacturing
interests of the metropolis and the country generally, the Clothworkers'
Company of the present day conceives that it is acting in a spirit of
cy-pres to that of its ancestors, who were more closely connected with
the trade from which the Company took its designation.
Entertainments.

The following feast days seem to have been observed at Cloth-
workers' Hall from ancient times : —
Feast of Our Lady, 25th March.
Feast of St. John the Baptist, 24th June.
" Election Day," St. Peter ad Vincula ") Venison
Confirmation Day (August) j feasts.

Feast of St. Michael, 29th September.
Lord Mayor's Day, 9th November.
St. Thomas's Eve

and

Christmas.

Among special entertainments may be mentioned that given in the
time of the Commonwealth to Lord General Monk, his friends and
field officers, on the 13th of March, 1659, which cost about 200/.

A great deal of plate has been given to the Company by members,
but in 1643 much was sold, as has been stated in the returns, and vide
Court, 7th September, 1643. — "This day also this Court takinge into
their sad and serious considerations the many greate pressinge and vgent
occasions Avch they have for money as well for the paym1 of their
debts as otherwise. And consideringe the danger this Citty is in by
reason of thet'greate distracons and civill,warrs of this Kingdome Have
thought fitt and so ordered that y" Stock of Plate wch this Company
hath shall be forth wth sold at the best rate that will be given for ye. same.
And to this end it is ordered and Tho' Austin Esquior and Mr. Ralph
Hough are hereby requested wth the p'sent Wardens or any two
of them whereof Mr. Warden Hutchins to be one to take the said
plate upon accompt by Indenture from Mr. Philpott the late Quarter
Warden in whose possession the said plate is and to expose the same
at the best rate (except only such pticular pcells thereof as in
their discretions shall seeme meete to be reserved for the necessary use
of this Company) and that before the same be sold they cause a
pticular to be made in wrytinge pticulerly of all the said pcells
of Plate so to be sold wth the fashion the weight and the severall
Donors names To the end that the same may le repai/red and made

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 301

" good in statu quo when God shall enable this Company so to doe Clothworkors'

" The wch this Court doth commend to posterity as an Act ivhicli. they Company.

earnestly desire may be don And whereas this Company vpon their

Cofnon Scale oweth to the said Mr. Hough ,£300 more wth interest

And it is further ordered and agreed that Mr. Eobert Hutchins

the pnte Quarter Warden shall receave the moneys for wch the

said Plate shall be sold and shall thereout pay vnto the said Mr.

Austen and Mr. Hough their said severall debts of Three hundred

Pounds a peece wth such interest money as shall appeare to be due to

" them for the same and thereupon to take up the sev'all obligacons

" given vnto them by this Company vnder their Com on Scale for

" ye payment thereof And the remaynder of the said money together

" with remaynder of the Plate which shall not be sold to keepe and

" deteyne in his hands for the use of this Company or otherwise to be

" accomptable for ye same.

"Court, 11th September, 1643. — This day also this Court was
" informed by Mr. Hough the prsent Mr. and by Thomas Austen Esquior
" that in pursuance of an Order of the 7th of this moneth They wth the
" assce of Wardens of this Company had made sale of 2068 oz. Plate
" pcell of the plate belonginge to this Company viz1 1159 oz. of guilt
" at 5*. 2d. p oz. wch came to £299 8. 2. and 242 oz. pcell guilt at
" 4s. Md. w* came to £59 9. 8. and 667 oz. of white @ 4s. Wd. wch
" came to £161 3. 10. In all £520 Ols. OScL And that they have
" reserved unsold for the vse of this Company 1239 oz. 5- of the said
" plate which sale so by them made was very well approved of allowed
" and confirmed."

The Court lately (1881) passed an order in pursuance whereof a list
of the plate presented to the Company in 1643 was compiled from
various sources, and it will become a question whether it should
be replaced in accordance with the recited orders of Court.

All the Company's ornamental plate is the gift of private members.
Charities.

A slight modification of the Charitable Trusts Bill of 1881, as accepted
by the House of Lords, would go far to give the powers reasonably
required for the strengthening of the Charity Commission, so as to bring
about the gradual adaptation (subject to necessary safeguards and rights
of appeal on the part of trustees) of obsolete and more or less worn-out and
useless charities to the requirements of modern life and civilization,
e.g. such educational charities as apprentice fees might often be con-
verted into scholarships or bursaries from public elementary schools for
girls and boys of exceptional promise, whereby their education might be
continued in higher schools of successive grades, ending in the Poly-
technic or Central Technical Institute. Moreover, such other charities
as are specified in Sect. 30 of the Endowed Schools Act of 1869 might
often be converted and made applicable to purposes other than educa-
tional, as provident dispensaries, provident societies, and other premiums
or incentives towards encouraging provident habits.

BARBERS' COMPANY.

4, Warnford Court, Throgmorton Street, E.G.
8th February, 1883.

SIR, — The attention of the Barbers' Company having been called to the
statements of Mr. Lucraft before the Livery Companies' Commission

302 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Barbers' respecting Bancks" and Ferbras' Charities (printed evidence, thirteenth

Company. day), I am instructed by the Court to make the following remarks, and

in so doing to express their surprise that Mr. Lucraft ventured upon

making statements respecting their Charities before satisfying himself as

to their correctness.

1st. — As to Bancks' Charity.

The Company beg to refer the Commissioners to the Returns of the
Mercers' Company, " Part 1, Return 2, Bancks' Charity." From these
Returns it will be seen that the statements made by Mr. Lucraft arc
totally incorrect.

It will further be seen that since the year 1855 the Barbers' Company
have received nothing in respect of this Charity. Notwithstanding this,
the Barbers' Company continued to distribute to their poor, beef, loaves
of bread, and money, until the year 1868, when the balance due to the
Company from the Charity amounted to the sum of 66Z. 19s. 9^., at
which sum it still remains. The Court anticipate receiving no income
from the Mercers' Company from the estate at Holloway until the year
1887 or 1888, when it is hoped that the debt to the Mercers' Company,
as specified in their Returns, will have been extinguished, and that the
Barbers' Company will then be in receipt of their one-seventh share of
the ground rents (after providing for the fixed payments) amounting to
the sum of 40Z. per annum or thereabouts.

Zncl. — As to Robert Ferbras' Will

It is not the fact that Robert Ferbras devised two freehold houses in
Dowgate Hill for the benefit of the poor members of the Company : he.
devised the houses to the Company upon trust, after doing repairs, to
divide one moiety of the surplus receipts among the poor.

It is not the fact that for nearly 400 years the Company applied the
income to their own corporate funds : on the contrary, for many years
prior to the year 1848 they applied more than the income of the moiety,
then about 201. per annum, in payments to quarterly pensioners subse-
quent to that date. The accounts have been rendered to the Charity
Commissioners, to which I beg to refer you.

I am, &c.,

H. GROSE SMITH.
H. D. Warr, Esq.,

City of London Livery Companies' Commission,
2, Victoria Street, S.W.

COACHMAKERS' COMPANY.

The Hall, Noble Street, E.G.,

26th January, 1883.

SIR, — In answer to the inquiry contained in your letter of the 23rd of
November ult., whether the Worshipful Company of Coachmakers and
Coachharness Makers wish to call any witnesses before her Majesty's
Commissioners before they make their Report, I beg to inform you that
I have submitted your letter to the Court of my Company, together with
copies of the printed evidence already received by her Majesty's Com-
missioners ; and as this Company has not, like some other Companies,

LONDON CITY LIVERY COMPANIES' VINDICATION. 303

been pointedly attacked by any of the witnesses, the Court has, subject to Coachmakers'
the few observations hereinafter contained, instructed me to inform you Company,
that, so far as they can at present sec, they have no intention to pro-
duce any witness, but at the same time they are willing to answer in
Avriting any further questions which her Majesty's Commissioners may
think fit to ask, but subject, of course, to the same protest as was annexed
to their original returns.

The observations which I am respectfully to submit to the considera-
tion of her Majesty's Commissioners divide themselves into two heads.
1st. It seems to have been assumed that the Companies hold their " cor-
" porate property," as distinguished from their specifically " trust property,"
upon some trust, expressed or implied, for the benefit of the craft with
which the name of the Company is associated, and that such corporate
property has been acquired either by will or deed of gift ; and, 2ndly,
that the members of the various City Companies are disconnected with
and have no interest in the craft supposed to be represented by the
Company. Now, as to the first point : — on carefully perusing the
Charter 29, Charles II., 31st May, 1677, there is no single trust, chari-
table or otherwise, contained therein; the Company only had certain
powers conferred on them for regulating the trade, and they never had
any property given, devised, or bequeathed to them from the date of their
Charter to the present time. In the year 1703 this Company bought of
the Scriveners' Company their hall ; and, to enable this Company to pay
for it, 109 members of the Company (this shows that this Company has
not much increased} as it has only about 120 at the present time, and it
can scarcely be supposed that all the members contributed) subscribed
various sums, amounting in the whole to 2030Z. 7s. 6d., and a list of the
donors is still preserved in the present hall ; and in 1843 a further sum
of 2571. 10s. was subscribed by the then members of the Court to refur-
nish such hall. In the year 1867 the hall and all the old buildings were
pulled down, and the present hall was built by the Company, and the
surplus land was let for building purposes ; but to enable the Company to
build the new hall they had to mortgage the whole of the property they
had so bought in 1703 for 3000/., and such mortgage debt is still due,
and may be called in at any time. From the above short statement it is
clear how the Company acquired their present property ; and if it be not
corporate property, then it must belong to the representatives of the
original donors rather than for public trusts.

As to the second point, namely, that the Companies are now disasso-
ciated from their trades. — On careful perusal of the books of this Company
I find that the master coachmakers of London have from the date of
the Charter to the present time always been a majority or been largely
represented on the Court of the Company ; and as such Court is recruited
from the Livery, it must, I think, be assumed that the majority of the
Livery have been connected with the coachmakers' trade, or, at any rate,
with kindred crafts ; and out of a present Livery of 120 members, seventy
are connected with the trade of which the Company bears the name, and
out of a Court of twenty-seven members, nineteen are master coachbuilders,
or otherwise connected with the trade, and it often happens that the
Master and Wardens are all master coachmakers. Indeed, this Company
is entirely identified with the trade ; and this is proved by the efforts •
they have made both by exhibitions of carriage and other drawings at
their hall, and the Mansion House, and at the Baker Street Bazaar, and
for the prizes they have continuously offered, and the support they have
continuously given in the case of technical education, and by admitting
master coachmakers not only from London, but throughout the whole of
the United Kingdom. Thus the Company exercises an influence over

304 ROYAL COMMISSION.

Cotohmakera' tho whole of the trade (see Question 620), and is considered in England
an(| ]£ur0p0 ^d jn the United States as representing the trade ; and in
all the International Exhibitions of Industry, whether in England or
elsewhere, more than one member of the Court has been appointed on the
juries to adjudge the merits of carriages exhibited. It is from the fact
of the Company being so intimately and closely connected with the trade
that they, unlike many other Companies, have not been compelled to call
in extraneous aid, but have been able not only to offer but to award
their prizes free of the expense of skilled examiners, and their
awards have met with general satisfaction in the trade. Further, as
knowing the wants of the trade, this Company has preferred to support
technical education in the midst of the workshops, rather than to support
the City and Guilds' Institution at a distance, where the workmen could
not or would not go, as by so doing they were able to teach the workmen
how to use their hands in the day, and how to acquire science and theory
in evening classes (thus coinciding with Mr. Lucraft's evidence, thirteenth
day).

Although this Company has no charity foundations, yet they do not
ignore charity, and support, so far as their means allow them, charities in
connection with the trade, and give donations and sometimes pensions to
the indigent connected with the trade. They have occasionally extended
their charity outside the trade.

In any Eeport which her Majesty's Commissioners may make on this
Company, my Court hope that the above observations may be carefully
considered with the original return sent in by this Company.

I have, &c.,

H. T. NICHOLSON, Clerk.
H. D. Warr, Esq.,

Secretary City of London Livery Companies' Commission,
2, Victoria Street, Westminster.

HORNERS' COMPANY.

STATEMENT.

THE POINTS TO WHICH THE DEPUTATION OF THE HORNERS' COMPANY
OP LONDON DESIRE TO REFER ON THEIR ATTENDANCE BEFORE THE
LONDON LIVERY COMPANIES' COMMISSION ON THE 2ND OF MAY,
1883.

REFERRING to Return F., sent in by the Homers' Company to your Com-
missioners, in which it was stated that the income of the Company had
been almost stationary during the last ten years, but, in consequence of
the sale of the Company's property, the regular income would be increased
by it to the amount of 33Z. or thereabouts ; and to Keturn M., which
states that the small income of the Company had prevented them from
doing anything to subsidize or encourage general or technical education,
but they were in hopes, as their income increased, that they would be
enabled to take steps for encouraging the manufacture of horns ; the
Company, acting on this desire, held, on the 18th, 19th, and 20th of
October, 1882, with the permission of the Lord Mayor, an exhibition of
articles, ancient and modern, British and foreign, made of horn, or of
which horn is a component part, at the Mansion House, London. Prizes
were offered to exhibitors, being members of the trade. Due notice was

LONDON CITY L1VEEY COMPANIES* VINDICATION. 305

given of the Exhibition through the medium of the public papers and Homers'
the circulation of a prospectus, the result of which was that considerable Company,
interest was evinced, not only by the trade, but by private owners of
articles both ancient and modern, and a collection of works of art of a
very interesting and instructive nature was obtained by great efforts, and
the Exhibition attracted so much public interest that, with the permission
of the Lord Mayor, it was allowed to continue open for an extra day
(Saturday), and during the four days about 7000 persons visited the
rooms.

A printed list of the prizes offered accompanies this Statement.

The whole of the prizes offered to members of the trade were
awarded, except the second prize in Class 4, the two prizes in Class 5,
and the prize for dark pressed horn in Class 6.

Among the trade exhibitors were Messrs. S. E. Stewart and Co., of
Aberdeen, whose comb works are the largest in Europe. They took a
very considerable personal interest in the Exhibition, and sent a very
large case of varied objects. Mr. David Stewart, a member of that firm,
has, in consequence of the Exhibition, joined the Homers' Company,
and has been admitted on the livery. He undertook the office of judge,
and his firm did not therefore compete for prizes.

Messrs. J. F. Kain and Son, of 1 and 2, Fleur-de-Lys Street,
Norton Folgate, London, workers in horn and ivory, took the first
prize in Class 1. One of their members has also joined the Company,
and has been admitted on the livery.

Among the exhibitors from private collectors were many articles of high
archaeological interest ; several members of the Society of Antiquaries
and other archaeological societies having sent articles from their private
collections. This portion of the Exhibition excited a great deal of interest,
particularly among antiquarians, and so valuable were the articles en-
trusted to the Company that it was considered advisable to revise the
catalogue after the Exhibition had closed, to make a permanent record of
the Exhibition. A revised copy of this catalogue accompanies this
Statement.

Among the exhibitors, her Majesty was graciously pleased to send
from her Windsor collection a very interesting collection, after the return
of which it was resolved by the Court of the Company to apply, through
the Secretary of her Majesty's Privy Purse, to be allowed to present her
with a copy of the catalogue and a history of the Company, which has
been written by one of the members of the Court, bound in horn, in
acknowledgment of her Majesty's gracious condescension in lending her
articles for exhibition ; and it was also considered a favourable opportu-
nity of illustrating the applicability of horn for the purpose of book-
binding. Her Majesty accepted this proposal, and the Company, in
furtherance of their desire to promote technical education, offered a prize
for the best design for the purpose to the National Art Training School,
South Kensington ; the result of which has been that a very beautiful
design has been chosen from a number of competitors, and is now in the
hands of Messrs. S. R. Stewart and Co., to be executed in horn work,
and, when completed, it will be presented to her Majesty.

Owing to the novelty of the Exhibition, and its being entirely of a
tentative character, the Company undertook the whole expense, which
has prevented them from taking further action this year in promoting
the interests of the trade, but the experience which they have had from
the result of the Exhibition has satisfied them that much good has been
done in stimulating and developing the trade, and that further efforts
in the same direction, which they hope to make, will, it is anticipated,
be of material and valuable assistance.

306

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Concluding
remarks of
the writer.

Counsel for
uniomassures
bulwark
against op-
pression and
wrong.

In bringing to an end his duties of exposing the conspiracy against
the City Livery Companies of. London, the writer desires to express the
pleasure felt in the execution- of his task,, even though fraught with
much anxiety consequent on inability to do adequate justice to a ca.se of
such great national importance.. At the outset he stated that never has
there been presented, to Parliament any Commission Report fraught
possibly, with greater consequences to property in general, seeing that
the Commission, was- mainly composed of. an element known as "very
advanced;" or, in plainer words, that a large majority held very liberal
views as to the construction of. the significant words meum and tuum.
The fact of the Lord Chief Justice of England, who is understood to be
one of the learned lawyers interested in. the division, of the Serjeants'
Inn properties, being of the Commission, so also that the chief pro-
secutor was appointed a judge in the case, has rendered it difficult to
write as freely on the matter as justice demands. The writer would not
breathe a word reproachfully of Lord Coleridge ; he feels, however, that
qualms of conscience could hardly fail of being awakened in England's
Chief. Justice when subscribing his name to an unwarranted, uncalled-
for,, and almost gratuitously insulting demand that the Companies should
be prevented realizing their properties. Coming, as this action appears
to have done, so closely on the realization of the Serjeants' Inn. pro-
pertieSj. it has seemed as though the conscience, in acting for self as
against others, sometimes presents an undesirable difference. Looking
also at the unhesitating and somewhat flippant manner of a noble duke,
a member of the Commission, the writer has felt how widely different
are our dealings for and against others,, to our own course where self and
and self only is concerned. Perhaps there is no property in London
known to contribute less to public charities than the vast estates
yielding such boundless income to his Grace, who smiles so benignly
on the marauders seeking charity plunder from the City Liveries.
It can only be accounted, for on the principle of a possible desire to
elbow out all- charity, so that its example through contrast may not
protrude itself. Who does not know that the highest title of the
house of Bedford is not remarkable for allowing freedom of motion in
neighbourhoods wherever it holds sway ? Let any one wander in. the
districts of Bloomsbury and St. Pancras,, he will soon find himself, a
prisoner "fast bound in misery and iron," Barriers stop the way
everywhere. It may be the exercise of liberty to indulge this legal
power, though savouring so; little of liberality towards mankind;

Happily in the case of this Royal Commission it is the Dissent Report
that consequent on its fairness and honesty, commends itself to English-
men. The Warr conspiracy has completely annulled, all effect of the
Majority Report prejudicial, to the Companies. From the first day to
the closing of the Commission it can. be truthfully said not an adverse
charge was, in the smallest degree, established. The Companies came
out of the ordeal as men of. their high, character and1 sustained honour
should do, and it is impossible to believe that any adverse legislation
can be proposed in the case.

Renewing heartfelt congratulations and repeating the assurance of his
sympathies with the least of the minor Companies uniformly with the
wealthiest, the writer counsels union in the one common cause as the
surest bulwark against oppression and wrong.

LONDON :

PRINTED BY GILBERT AND BIVINQTON, LIMITED,
ST. JOHN'S SCJUARE.

London. Livery Companies
64-62 Vindication

L6A52

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Vindication"

See other formats