Full text of "The Yorkshire woollen and worsted industries, from the earliest times up to the Industrial revolution"

See other formats

OXFORD HISTORICAL AND
LITERARY STUDIES

Volume I. ELIZABETHAN ROGUES AND VAGA-
BONDS AND THEIR REPRESENTATION IN
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. BY FRANK
AYDELOTTE.

Volume II. ANGLO-ROMAN RELATIONS, 1 558-1 565.
BY C. G. BAYNE, C.S.I.

Volume III. THE HOUSE OF LORDS IN THE REIGN
OF WILLIAM III. BY A. S. TURBERVILLE.

Volume IV. A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SAMUEL JOHNSON.
BY W. P. COURTNEY. REVISED AND SEEN
THROUGH THE PRESS BY D. NICHOL SMITH.

Volume V. HENRY TUBBE. SELECTIONS EDITED
FROM THE MSS. BY G. C. MOORE SMITH.

Volume VI. KEIGWIN'S REBELLION (1683-4). AN
EPISODE IN THE HISTORY OF BOMBAY.
BY RAY AND OLIVER STRACHEY.

Volume VII. LORD SELKIRK'S WORK IN CANADA.
BY CHESTER MARTIN

Volume VIII. WALPOLE BALLADS. EDITED BY
M. PERCIVAL.

Volume IX. WARREN HASTINGS IN BENGAL, 1771-
1774. BY M. E. MONCKTON JONES.

Volume X. THE YORKSHIRE WOOLLEN AND
WORSTED INDUSTRIES. BY HERBERT

H EATON.

Volume XI. THE EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION
OF JOHN EVELYN. BY H. MAYNARD SMITH.

September icj2u.

THE LIBRARY

THE UNIVERSITY

OF CALIFORNIA

RIVERSIDE

HISTORICAL AND

LITERARY STUDIES

VOLUME 10

Oxford University Press

London Edinburgh Glasgow New York

Toronto Melbourne Cafe Town Bombay

Humphrey Milford Publisher to the University

1526-12

OXFORD

Historical and Literary

STUDIES

Issued under the direction of C. H. FIRTH

and WALTER RALEIGH Professors of

Modern History and English Literature in

the University of Oxford

VOLUME 10

The Yorkshire Woollen and
Worsted Industries

By HERBERT HEATON, M.A., M.Com.

OXFORD

At the Clarendon 7Jress

1920

THE

YORKSHIRE

Woollen and Worsted
Industries

From the Earliest Times up to
the Industrial Revolution

»<Ak

O X H O R T>

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
MCM XX

PREFACE

The present volume had its origin in a thesis written in 191 1
for the Honours School of History in the University of Leeds.
In that work my attention was confined to the Yorkshire
textile industry in the eighteenth century, but the award of
the Rutson Research Scholarship (191 1) and of a Fellowship
(1912) by the University of Leeds made it possible to devote
much time to the earlier history of the industry. The substance
of the first three chapters was submitted for the M.A. degree
(Leeds), and that of the greater part of the book was presented
as a thesis for the degree of M.Com. (Birmingham) in 1914.
Since then the thesis has been largely rewritten and consider-
ably expanded.

In the following pages I have attempted to sketch the his-
tory of the Yorkshire woollen and worsted industries from the
earliest times of which there is documentary evidence down to
the eve of the Industrial Revolution of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. I have traced the expansion of the local
manufacture, and described its many vicissitudes, its organiza-
tion at various stages, its markets, its relation to the State.
But in all things the coming of the Industrial Revolution
has been my stopping-place. The building of the modern
mills, the final capture of the worsted trade from East Anglia,
the victory over the West of England clothiers, and other
results of the coming of la grandc Industrie are left untouched.
My reason for stopping at this point was that to carry the story
on to the present day would make the volume too long. Further,
on commencing my researches I found a number of scholars
at work on the period 1 760-1900. One was specializing on
the Bradford trade after 1760 ; another was studying the textile
trades, 1750-1850 ; the Hammonds were promising a volume
on the town labourer, and Mantoux had already published
La Revolution Industricllc (1906). Dr. Clapham had written

\r>

viii PREFACE

on the migration of the worsted industry from East Anglia
(Economic Journal, 1910), and his Woollen and Worsted In-
dustries (1907) provided a standard work on the present position
of those industries. The old books, such as James's History
of the Worsted Manufacture (1857), had given intimate pictures
of some aspects of the ' great change ', and special topics such
as the Factory Acts and trade unionism had been thoroughly
discussed by recent writers. Thus the modern period had
plenty of followers already at work, and it would have been
unwise to go over ground so well trodden already. Yet there
was a distinct gap in the history of the woollen manufacture
waiting to be filled. Writers on the Industrial Revolution have
generally begun with a sketch of industrial society about 1607,
but have made little effort to trace the rise of that society,
contenting themselves with a few quotations from Young and
Defoe. Further, in their references to the woollen industry
of the eighteenth century writers have conveyed the impression
that Yorkshire was, and had been for centuries, insignificant
as a producer of cloth. This idea, due possibly to Macaulay's
gloomy picture of the North of England in his famous third
chapter, is incorrect. My aim, therefore, has been to tell
a story which ends with a detailed picture of the eighteenth-
century industry, to link up the fourteenth century with the
eighteenth, to throw light on to the events of the Tudor and
Stuart periods, and finally to give the Yorkshire industry its
proper place in relation to that of East Anglia and the West of
England.

The work is based chiefly upon information gleaned from
printed materials of the last two centuries, and from manu-
scripts covering the whole period from the thirteenth century
to the eighteenth. Some of these documents are housed in
the British Museum and Public Record Office, but a large
amount of matter has been obtained from papers found in
various parts of the West Riding, chiefly in the hands of local
authorities and the cellars of solicitors' offices. The student
of Yorkshire history is fortunate in that many manuscripts of

PREFACE ix

local importance have been printed by the Yorkshire Archaeo-
logical, Surtees, Thoresby, and other antiquarian societies.
May I suggest that these organizations should unite in an effort
to obtain a Record Office for Yorkshire or the North of England,
in which the documents scattered throughout the county might
be collected and carefully preserved. Local bodies are, with
few exceptions, notoriously indifferent about the welfare of
old manuscripts in their charge, and the pressure of other
duties makes it very inconvenient for their officials to provide
all the desirable facilities to searchers. The magnificent
accumulation of York municipal records has been placed in
a state of good repair, but is virtually inaccessible to the
student ; the West Riding Sessions Books and the Leeds
Corporation MSS. might with advantage be handed over to
the care of a Yorkshire Record Office ; and investigation
would show that many interesting documents lie unvalued in
private hands, in perpetual danger of destruction, when they
should be gathered together and made available for purposes
of research.

The technologist who looks to these pages for new informa-
tion concerning the progress of textile skill and methods will
be disappointed. Excepting in Chapters VIII and X, I have
avoided making any detailed description of textile processes,
for such a task can be accomplished successfully only by one
versed thoroughly in the practices surrounding the making of
cloth. I have dealt rather with the weaver than with weaving :
with textile workers rather than with technology. Still, it was
impossible to neglect entirely the technical side of the story,
and the general reader who wishes to understand the difference
between woollens and worsteds, or to know the character of the
various textile processes, is recommended to glance first at
the treatment of these topics on pp. 259-63 and 332-44.

Eor assistance generously rendered, my thanks are clue to
many — to the University of Leeds for the financial support
which made it possible to spend a year examining documents
in London and elsewhere ; to Professor A. ). Grant and

x PREFACE

Professor D. H. Macgregor for their encouragement and advice
during the early stages of preparation ; to Dr. L. Knowles,
who guided me through the maze of the British Museum and
Record Office archives ; to Sir Robert Fox (Town Clerk of
Leeds), Mr. Peake (Clerk of the Peace, Leeds), Mr. Vibart
Dixon (Clerk of the Peace, West Riding), Mr. H. Greenwood-
Teale (Leeds), Messrs. Mumford and Johnson (Bradford), and
the Town Clerk of York, for permission to examine documents
in their keeping ; and to Mr. H. Ling Roth, of the Bankfield
Museum, Halifax, for reading parts of the manuscript, and for
many valuable suggestions. To Dr. Maud Sellers, Mr. John
Lister, and Professor Sir William Ashley it is difficult to
express adequate thanks. Dr. Sellers placed at my disposal
the whole of her voluminous transcripts from the York Corpora-
tion MSS., and was always ready to assist in every possible
way. Mr. Lister in similar fashion opened to me his collection
of copies of local documents, the fruits of over twenty years'
work. Sir William Ashley read through my manuscript, gave
help and advice at many points, and found me a publisher.
To my colleagues, Professor Naylor, Mr. R. Bronncr, and
Mr. W. Ham, of the University of Adelaide, I am indebted for
much assistance in reading the proofs. Finally, I am indebted
to my wife for unwearied assistance in preparing the work for
the press ; and to my parents, without whose generous aid
the work could never have been done.

H. H.

University of Adelaide,
March, 1920.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

PREFACE vii

I. THE INFANCY OF THE WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN

YORKSHIRE i

(a) The Rise of Cloth-making ..... 2

(b) The Flemish Immigration ..... 8

Fourteenth Century . . . . .21

(d) Gild Organization in the Urban Textile Industry . 27

II. DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE FIF-
TEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES . 45

(a) Decline of the Textile Industry in Beverley and York 47

(b) The Expansion of the Woollen Industry in the West

Riding 68

Appendix : The Distribution of the English Woollen
Industry in the Fifteenth Century ... 84

III. ORGANIZATION OF THE WEST RIDING INDUSTRY

IN THE FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH
CENTURIES

(a) The Clothier and the Domestic System .

(b) Apprenticeship . . . . . . .101

(d) The Wool Supply and the Middleman . . .118

IV. THE STATE REGULATION OF THE YORKSHIRE

CLOTH INDUSTRY UP TO THE SEVEN-
TEENTH CENTURY 124

V. MARKETS AND MERC] [ANTS : THE ORGANIZATION
OF HOME AND FOREIGN TRADE IN YORK-
SHIRE CLOTH, UP TO THE RESTORATION . 145

VI. SOME MILESTONES IN THE SEVENTEENTH CEN-
TURY 177

VII. STUART EXPERIMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL REGULA-
TION : GILDS AND COMPANIES . . .216

XI 1

CONTENTS

CHAP.
VIII.

IX.

XI.
XII.

FROM THE RESTORATION TO THE INDUSTRIAL

REVOLUTION : THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS

The Rise of the Worsted Industry in the West Riding

Progress of the Woollen Industry during the Eighteenth

Century ........

THE DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF THE
CLOTH INDUSTRY DURING THE EIGH-
TEENTH CENTURY

(a) The Distribution of the Industry

(b) The Homes of the Workers

(d) Apprenticeship in the Eighteenth Century

(e) The Journeyman in his Relation to the Clothier

THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE : FROM THE
SHEEP'S BACK TO THE CLOTH HALL
The Wool Supply .....
Manufacture ......

MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND CLOTH HALLS

THE STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN THE
EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

The Worsted Committee

PAGE

248
263

276

BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX

282
284
289

293
301
312

323
332

359

405
418

438

447

MAPS AND DIAGRAMS

Map of Yorkshire ........ facing p. 1

Map to indicate the Distribution of the English Industry in the

Fifteenth Century ........ 87

Diagrams to illustrate the Difference between Woollens and

Worsteds ......... 263

Map of West Riding Textile Area ...... 287

Plan of Leeds Coloured Cloth Hall ...... 373

CHAPTER I

THE INFANCY OF THE WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN
YORKSHIRE

The manufacture of woollen cloth has for centuries been an
important occupation of Yorkshire men and women. From the
twelfth century onwards there is abundant proof of the exis-
tence of the industry, and since that time generation after
generation has worked at the spinning-wheel, loom, and dye-
vat. The industry has been the architect of the social structure
in each epoch, and has been the motive power of the county's
progress. Finally, it has left its mark in the list of family
names ; Lister, Walker, Webster, and other names common in
the county, have survived from the days when a man took his
surname from his trade.1

Until about 1300, however, the outstanding feature of economic
life in the county (apart from agriculture) was the trade in wool.
The production of wool, especially for the foreign market, pro-
vides a topic which lies outside the scope of this volume, and we
can only notice it in passing. But it is necessary to remember
that a great part of the wool produced on the manors and abbey
lands 2 was exported to feed the looms of Germany, Italy, and
the Low Countries. Native 3 and foreign merchants flocked
to the wool fairs, or went direct to the producer, in their
search for supplies. Long-period contracts were made frequently
between these buyers and the Yorkshire abbots, and on one

1 Lister was the trade name for dyer, Walker lor fuller, and Webster for
weaver.

- The abbeys were large wool-producers. In 1270, the Abbot of Meaux
sold iju sacks to merchants of Lucca (Chronicles of Meaux Abbey, Rolls Series,
ii. 150). The list of about 200 monasteries supplying wool to Flanders, circa
1284, contains the names of thirty-nine Yorkshire abbeys (Cunningham,
Growth of English Industry and Commerce, 19 10 edition, vol. i, app. D,
pp. 628 et seq.).

3 Patent Rolls, i Ed. I, mm. 7, 8, and 14, give lists of licences to export
wool. The licences were chiefly to alien merchants, but Hull, Pontefract,
York, Lincoln, Newcastle, &c, are also represented. In 1230 merchants
of Beverley were sending ships laden with wool. &c, to Flanders, and another
ship was laden with the goods ' mercatorum de Lboraeo ' (Close Rolls, 14
Hen. Ill, m. 3) ; and in 1334, merchants of York, Beverley, Pontefract, and
'the parts of Craven' were residing in Flanders (Close Rolls, S Kd. Ill,
111. 0 d).

1526.12 B

2 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

occasion an Italian company agreed to purchase the whole of
the Kirkstall clip for ten years.1 The wool was exported from
York and Hull, and between the merchants of these towns
a keen rivalry existed for the monopoly of the trade.2

Meanwhile a certain amount of the raw material was being
made into cloth at home, and this amount increased as time
went by. We do not know what proportion was retained for
the Yorkshire industry, but it is improbable that the local
demand was a serious rival of the foreign until the fourteenth
century. To the rise of that local demand, and the early
growth of the Yorkshire textile industry, we must now turn our
attention.

(a) The Rise of Cloth-making

Of the origins of the textile industry in Yorkshire, or indeed
in England, very little is known. The discovery of rude textile
implements in the lake-village of Glastonbury and elsewhere
proves that the weaving of cloth is of prehistoric antiquity.3
In Anglo-Saxon times cloth was widely used for garments by
all classes, and the rough coarse fabrics worn by the poor were
doubtless woven in the huts of the period, just as hearth-rugs
are ' pricked ' and stockings knitted in the homes of the working-
classes of Yorkshire to-day. At the same time a higher grade
of cloth was being produced in some districts, and dyeing was
practised, the dye being obtained from cockles, or from madder
imported from France. By the end of the eighth century Mcrcia
was exporting woollen cloaks, presumably made from English
cloth, to the realms of Charlemagne, and owing to some apparently
fraudulent reduction in the length of the garments Charles found
it necessary in 796 to ask King Offa that the cloaks might be
' made of the same pattern as used to come to us in olden time '.4

1 Gaucher Book of Kirkstall Abbey (Thoresby Soc. Publications, vol. viii),
pp. xxiii-xxiv, and 22()—y, document cccxxiv, under date 1.292.

- For details of this rivalry, see Poulson, Deverlae (1829), p. 89 n. ; also
YVheatcr, 'Early Textile Industry in Yorkshire', in Old Yorkshire (1885),
p. J'>4 ; also Close Rolls, 6 Ed. Ill, in. 1, and Patent Rolls, 14 Ed. Ill, m. 14.
The two towns were occasionally made Staples for the control of the wool
export.

J For much interesting information concerning the early industry see
II. Salzmann, English Industries of the Middle Ages (1913), chap. viii.

4 Letter from Charles the Great to Offa, a.d. 796 (English History Source
Hooks, no. 1, ed. YVallis, pp. 59-61). See also A. F. Dodds, Early English
Social History (Bell, 191 3), pp. 138 and 140.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 3

Of evidence relating to the industry in Yorkshire in particular
there is none. We know that York l was an important port and
market long before a.d. 1000, trading in wool, and possibly in
cloth to a small extent. Of the great mass of the Yorkshire
rural population it is safe to surmise that they were dressed in
cloth produced by the distaff and primitive hand-loom in the
cottages scattered throughout the county.

With the twelfth and thirteenth centuries comes more docu-
mentary evidence relating to York, from which we can gather
that the textile industry was firmly rooted in town and country
alike long before 1300. The first traces are to be found in the
two great ecclesiastical centres, York and Beverley, where the
industry appeared early under gild organization. The weavers
of York are first mentioned in the Pipe Roll of I164,2 and in the
following year the payment is definitely stated to be ' pro gilda
sua '.3 The York gild was by no means the first in the field.
Lincoln 4 had its weavers' gild in 1131, and the Pipe Rolls of
the early years of Henry II record the subscriptions of weavers'
organizations at London, Winchester, Lincoln, Nottingham,
Oxford, and Huntingdon.5 But when York appeared, the
amount of its contribution leads one to believe that its weavers'
gild must have been of some magnitude. Thus in 1164 the
pavments to the Exchequer were as follows :

Weavers of London . . . . . .12

,, ,, York ....... 10

,, ,, Lincoln, Winchester, and Oxford . . 6

Fullers of Winchester ...... o

Weavers of Huntingdon and Nottingham . . .2°

York jumped at (Mice into the second place on the list, acknow-
ledging only London as superior in the amount of its contribution.
We may therefore assume that by the middle of the twelfth
century there was a comparatively large body of men in York

1 Alcuin remarked on the commercial importance of Vork in his day.
See Drake, Eboracum (1737 folio edition), pp. 227-8.

: Pipe Roll Soc. publications, Pipe Roll, 11 Hen. II, p. 46.

3 Ibid., 12 Hen. II, p. 30.

1 Pipe Roll, u Hen. 1 (Record Com.), p. ioq.

•'• See earlier volumes of Pipe Roll Soc. publications.

6 Pipe Roll, 11 Hen. II. See under names of town--. Oxford does not
appear in the Roll for 1 1^4, but see Pipe Roll, 1 2 I len. II. p. 117.

B -?

4 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

engaged in the trade of weaving, and able to pay a substantial
sum (at least £150 in modern money) for the monopolistic
privileges 1 conferred upon the gild by the Royal Charter.

Beverley did not lag far behind York. In the reign of Henry II
there was buying and selling of cloth there,2 and Spanish mer-
chants were exporting pieces ' de scarlato et . . . de Staunford,
de Beverlaco, de Ebor ' to the Continent.3 In 1209 the ' Law
of the Weavers and Fullers of Beverley ' was quoted alongside
laws of Winchester, Marlborough, and Oxford,4 and during the
thirteenth century the wares of Beverley achieved widespread
fame, the ' Beverley Bleu ' 5 and the ' Pann de Scarleta ' being
especially famous, both at home and abroad. In fact, the prices
paid for the Beverley fabrics indicate that these cloths were of
the highest quality. Witness the following data :

(a. d. 1319) 1 robe and 2 whole pieces of Pers 6 cloth of Beverley
were valued at £18 ; 4 whole cloths of Beverley were valued at
£28. As a whole cloth was about 24 yards in length, this price
was equivalent to about 6s. per yard, or quite £4 10s. in modern
money. 'Compared with the current prices of other cloths the
above statements indicate a high standard of workmanship,7
and the Beverley pieces seem to have stood alongside those of
Lincoln and Stamford, which were the best produced in England
at that time.

The activity of York and Beverley was reflected in a less
degree in the smaller towns of the county. In 1274 Whitby,
Hedon, and Selby were mentioned as places in which cloth was
made, and the inhabitants were accused of manufacturing it of
dimensions contrary to the assize laid down in Magna Carta.8
Whitby has been the home of many pursuits, and in the reign
of Edward I it was a cloth-making stronghold, with John the
Fuller, Roger the Dyer, Nicholas the Weaver,9 and others of the
same occupations amongst its inhabitants.

Meanwhile, what of the still smaller communities scattered

1 Sec section on the textile gilds for the nature of these privileges.

- Madox, The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer (171 1), p. 4OS.

3 Poulson, Beverlac (1X29), p. 58.

4 Selden Soc. publications, vol. xiv (Beverley Town Documents), p. 135,
quoting Add. MSS. 142^2. •"• Close Rolls, jo Hen. Ill, m. 6.

6 Probably a ' blue ' cloth. '■ Close Rolls, 13 Jul. II, 111. 14.

8 Hundred Rolls (Records Comm.), Kd. I, Com. Ebor., i. 131-2.

9 Lay Subsidy, 30 Ed. I (Vorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, vol. xxi, p. 108).

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 5

throughout the rural area of the county ? The evidence of
a widespread industry here is no less conclusive, and in every
Riding we find men whose attention had become concentrated
on some branch of cloth-making.

At Leeds x in 1201 a certain Simon the Dyer was fined 100s.
for selling wine contrary to the legal assize ; 2 the nature of the
entry and the amount of the payment indicate that Simon
engaged in other trades besides that of dyeing, and was a wealthy
man. Robertus Tynctor (dyer) de Ledes3 was a witness to
a Kirkstall Abbey charter not later than 1237, and an inquisi-
tion of 1258 records the names of William Webster (textor),
Richard and Andrew Taillur (tailors ?), and John Lister (tinctor),
in the list of Leeds cottars.4 A little later, in 1275, Alexander
Fuller of Leeds was fined for making cloth which was not of the
proper breadth,5 and thus in Leeds of the thirteenth century we
meet the weaver, the fuller, and the dyer.

The Calverley charters, which cover the thirteenth century,
show that Calverley was a centre for the fulling of cloth. Standing
on the river Aire, it was especially suited for this kind of work,
and no less than five fullers are mentioned about 1257. 6 Turn-
ing to the south and west, the Court Rolls of the Manor of
Wakefield provide abundant evidence of the existence of cloth-
makers in the surrounding villages. These Rolls refer to the
area between Wakefield and Halifax, and throughout this
expanse the distribution of textile workers is almost uniform.
In 1284 Thomas the Weaver of Hipperholme complained that
his two cows had disappeared from the common,7 and in the
same year weavers of Sowerby 8 and Sandal 9 came before the
Court. Ossett l0 was the home of Robert the Lister (i.e. dyer),
1274, and other dyers carried on their business at Alverthorpe11

1 Win. Paganel's charter to Drax (c. 1 1 10) indicates the presence of mills
in Leeds ; possibly one was a fulling-mill (J. S. Fletcher, Picturesque History
of Yorkshire (n.d.), i- 354).

1 Jackson, Guide to Leeds (1889), p. 21. This 'Guide' is a scholarly piece of
work, hut no authority is quoted for the above fact.

3 Couchcr Book of Kirkstall Abbey, charter cvii. Thoresby Soc. publications,
vol. viii, p. Si .

4 Inquisition, 1258 (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, xii. 56-7).

5 Jackson, Guide to Leeds, p. 21.

,; Calverley Charters, Thoresby Soc. publications, vol. vi, pp. S— 5 5 . No
weavers are mentioned till 1357, pp. 170-1.

7 Wakefield Court Rolls (Yorks. Arch. Soc., Record Series. 2 vols.), 1. 1S2.
" Ibid., ii. iS. » Ibid., ii. j<>;. "> Ibid., i. M. " Ibid., 1. ." .,.

6 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

and Halifax.1 Of fullers there were many. These men washed
the grease and other foreign matter out of the rough pieces
which had been woven in the cottages for home use ; but the
existence of so many fullers leads one to believe that a great
part of the cloths which came to them had been made for the
home or foreign market. Certainly, all down the Calder Valley
we find the fulling-mill — at Sowerby, Halifax, Rastrick, Mirfield,
Dewsbury, Ossett, and Alverthorpe.2 These mills were the
property of the lord of the manor, and the tenants were com-
pelled to use the manorial mill and no other.3 But though the
lord retained the monopoly for his mill, he did not manage the
work himself ; instead, he leased the mill to one or two of his
tenants for an annual rent. Thus, in 1277, William the Fuller of
Wakefield and Ralph de Wortley paid forty shillings as one
year's rental for the mill at Wakefield.4 It was no small mill
which could command a rental of £2, but William and his
partner would have plenty of business, washing the pieces before
they were cut up into garments by the cottagers or placed for
display and sale on the cloth-booths which stood in the market-
place. For Wakefield had its dealers also ; there was Philip
the Mercer5 (1274), William the Chapman,6 Philip the Tailor,
and one or two merchants, all in or near Wakefield.7

Sufficient has been said to show that the industry was already
present in the parts which were eventually to become its strong-
hold. But these districts had not the monopoly of the rural
manufacture, for entries such as have been detailed above
can be found concerning all parts of Yorkshire. Away in
the dales we meet Thomas Webster and Isabel W'ebster, both
weavers, at Skipton.8 In the Yale of York there were fullers
at Pocklington,9 tailors and fullers at Thorp Arch,10 walkers
(fullers) and ' litesters ' (dyers) at Aberford and Alwoodley.11

1 Wakefield Court Rolls (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, 2 vols.), i. 272.

2 Ibid., both vols., passim.

'■' See Wheater, op. cit., p. 262, for charter from Archbishop of York to
inhabitants of Sherburn (a.d. 1282), illustrating monopoly over fulling-mill.

J Wakefield Court Rolls, i. 176.

r' Ibid., i. 81. In 1308, cloth booths mentioned, ii. 170.

6 Ibid., i. 163. ; Ibid., i. 131.

8 Inquisition, 31 Ed. I (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, xxxvii. 101).

» Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, xii. 76 (a.d. 1260).

10 Inquisition, 130] (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, xxxi. 168).

11 This is a little later, 1327. Thoresby Soc publications, ii. <s.s e1 seq.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE

Aysgarth,1 Stokcsley, and Pickering 2 carried on the various
branches of the industry, and there was a dye-house at Richmond
worth £4 per annum.3 Northallerton, Yarm, and Ripon were
flourishing communities, containing a full and strong con-
tingent of cloth-makers, as well as tailors, glovers, mercers, &c.4
In the southern areas of the county, Pontcfract, Rothcrham,
and Sheffield were similarly provided with all the necessary men
for making and selling woollen goods.5

The above is a mere catalogue of names and places, but it will
serve to prove that by 1300 there was in town and country alike
a big element of textile labour, which was supplying domestic
needs and also a wider market. The cloths of Beverley and
York were of no mean quality, and took their places alongside
the high-class pieces produced at Lincoln, Stamford, and else-
where, goods for which there was a big demand abroad. On
the other hand, the rural fabrics were of inferior quality and
coarse texture,6 and did not take a prominent place even in the
home market. Native manufacture could now meet some of
the demands of the wealthy, and all the needs of the poor, and
a few types of cloth were exported to the Continent. Still, one
must not over-emphasize these facts, or convey the impression
that by 1300 England had cut herself free from dependence upon
foreign supplies. King and nobility, though they frequently
purchased English wares, often had recourse to the produce of
Flanders, and in the fostering ordinances 7 of the early fourteenth
century, when the use of foreign cloths was forbidden, a saving
clause was always inserted in favour of the finery of royalty
and nobility.8 Hence there was a steady importation of Con-
tinental cloths, and many merchants from Yorkshire loaded
ships at Sluys and other foreign ports ' with cloth and other
goods . . . for the purpose of bringing the same to Kyngeston-
uppon-Hulle to trade therewith ', taking back lead or wool in

1 Lay Subsidy, 30 Ed . I (Yorks. Arch. Sue, Record Series, xxi. 100, 103, iSrc).

2 Ibid., passim. s Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, xii. .230.

4 Ibid., xxi. 10, 27, 00. 5 Ibid., xv. 70, 81, 145, iVc.

,; Kendal cloth in the fifteenth century was worth only ^hl. per yard
(Lord Howard's Household Hook, li. 210).

7 e.g. Ordinance of 1327, Patent Rolls. 1 Kd. Ill, pt. ii, m. 24.

s In 1 242, for instance, Henry III ordered ' Rogerus le Tavlur retineat duas
navatas panni Randrensis . . . ad rob. is regis contra instantem hyernein '.
Close Rolls, jo Hen. Ill, pt. lii, m. 4.

8 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

return.1 The next three centuries were to witness a great
change, as the export trade in wool declined, and British and
foreign merchants carried more and more English pieces to
every part of the Continent, making the produce of Yorkshire
looms a commodity of international fame — or notoriety.2

(b) The Flemish Immigration
The definite emergence of the textile trade during the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries has given rise to much speculation, and
the question has been asked, Was this progress due to the
natural development of the domestic industry, or to the influx
of Flemish cloth-makers ? The question is of some importance,
but unfortunately there is not sufficient evidence to enable one
to give a definite answer. Hence on the one hand it can be
urged that manufacture for the market evolved naturally from
manufacture for home use ; whilst on the other hand many
have maintained that the greater part, if not the whole, of the
credit must be placed at the door of the Flemish immigrants.
The latter theory has for long held sway, and the old historians
made the alien weaver the hero of a story full of charm and
heroics. Fuller3 gave to him one of his most poetic paragraphs,
and although later writers have almost destroyed the halo, the
debt to the mediaeval immigrant is still admitted by many to
be very great. Approaching the subject as it concerns the
Yorkshire industry in particular, some popular writers have
asserted that cloth-making was unknown until about 1331.
Mr. A. C. Price, in his excellent little book on Leeds and its
Neighbourhood, refers to the Flemish weavers who settled at
York during the reign of Edward III, ' to whom probably the
great clothing trade of the West Riding owes its origin ' ; 4 and
when the statue of the Black Prince was erected in Leeds some
few years ago, many speakers and writers justified the choice
of subject on the grounds that the Black Prince's father was
responsible for the introduction of the woollen industry into
Leeds and district. Serious writers have, of course, long since
repudiated any such extreme view, but Dr. Maud Sellers, in her

1 Close Rolls, 13 Ed. II, m. 14.

2 For the complaints concerning bad workmanship see Chapter IV.
;i Fuller, Church History of Britain (1845 edition), iii, § 9.

4 Price, op. cit., p. 66.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 9

account of the woollen industry in the Victoria County History,
attributes great importance to migrations of Flemings, especially
during the eleventh, twelfth, and fourteenth centuries.1 The
present writer must confess his inability to accept her conclu-
sions, and feels that the part played by the Flemings in establish-
ing and developing the Yorkshire industry has been over-rated
by even such an eminent authority as Miss Sellers.

As to the influence of Flemings in Yorkshire during the
Norman regime, one cannot safely pass any judgement, as there
is so little evidence on either side. Miss Sellers bases her cases
largely on the Domesday Survey, with its reiterated ' waste ',
and urges that people must have come from somewhere to
repopulate these stricken valleys. No part of England was
sufficiently populous to be able to spare detachments for the
West Riding. The Low Countries were overcrowded ; access
to Yorkshire from Belgium was easy ; therefore Flemings came,
settled in the vacant places, and built up the textile industry in
these parts.

But was the West Riding really so entirely depopulated,
desolate, and in need of a thorough resettlement ? In the pages
of Domesday Book many Yorkshire villages are described by
the melancholy word ' Waste '. William I, in his march of
vengeance in 1069, had spread the destroying army over a large
section of the county, and his ravages embraced the eastern
parts of the West and North Ridings, almost the whole of the
East Riding, the city of York, and the upper valleys of the Aire
and Calder.2 Scarcely had William departed southwards when
Malcolm Canmore raided the northern counties, penetrating as
far as the North Riding. He also plundered right and left, and
those who fell into his hands were either killed or taken away
as slaves to Scotland. Hence those who made the great survey
in 1086 were impelled to write ' waste ' over almost the whole
area north and west of Leeds and Wakefield. :! But this term did
not necessarily imply an absence of all human lite, tor some
manors which were so described contained villeins or cottars in

1 For Mi>s Sellers' discussion of this topic, see Victoria Countv Ffisl,>ry,
Yorkshire, ii. 43(1—40.

- Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora (Rolls Series), ii. 3-4.

J See map and article by Dr. Heddoe, ' The Kthnolouv of the West Ki.lnu '
(\ ork<hii( Archaeological Journal, vol. \i\, pp. 57 et set].).

io THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

1086. Further, as William's army approached, many Yorkshire-
men doubtless fled into hiding in the forests or on the moors,
where it would be easy to find solitude and safety. With them
they might take cattle and sheep, and either settle there per-
manently as moorland shepherds, or return to their old homes
when the destroyer had departed. One need only know the
West Riding countryside to realize the impossibility of a total
destruction of population by William's troops.

Again, some of the important clothing centres of a later date
were flourishing communities at the time of Domesday. York x
had a population of over 5,000, and Beverley had been left
untouched by William. Ripon and Pontefract were important
settlements ; Leeds, spared by the Conqueror, had a population
of over 200 persons,2 and was worth more than before 1066,
and Wakefield, Batley, Dewsbury, and some other places
were little, if any, smaller than before the Conquest. Thus
the West Riding was far from being completely depopulated ;
in fact, it contained almost as many people as the other two
Ridings put together.3 If the Flemings had required a new home,
easy of access, near a wool supply, and sparsely populated, they
could have found such an area farther east than the West
Riding.

It is possible that population was brought to the uninhabited
manors of Yorkshire by the new Norman landlords, and this
population might be brought from other parts of England or from
abroad. The De Laci family, which had received almost the whole
expanse from the borders of Lincolnshire to Lancashire, owned
other parts of England as well,4 and might thus move tenants
from the south, or from the populous Pontefract area westward.
At the same time Flemish landlords obtained many parts of
the North Country, to which they may have brought Flemish
artisans. For instance, William I gave large estates in Holder-
ness to the valiant and restless Fleming, Drogo de la Bouercr,5

1 H. B. de Gibbins, Industrial History of England, 16th edition, ioio,
map, p. 38.

- Price, op. cit., p. 33.

3 Dr. Beddoe calculates the Domesday population as follows : West Riding,
3,143 ; East, 2,300 ; North, 1,311 : Yorks. Arch. Journal, pp. 56 et seq.

4 Price, op. cit., pp. t,}, and 118.

5 Chronicles of the Abbev nf Meanx (Rolls Series), i. 89-90. Drogo built the
castle at Skypse, but soon left the region, because of its infertility.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE n

and Gilbert of Ghent received lands on the other side of the
Humber.1 A certain Reiner the Fleming2 founded Kirklees
Nunnery, and even so far west as Hellifield we find in 1202
a family which hailed from the Low Countries.3 Further, during
the strife of the twelfth century the Flemish mercenary was
very much in evidence. William of Ypres, a leader of mercenary
troops, was one of Stephen's right-hand men,4 and Walter of
Ghent led a body of his fellow-countrymen at the Battle of the
Standard.5 But there is nothing to show that these men were
in any way connected with the textile trade. They were fighters
rather than artisans. Still, the land from which they came was
one in which the cloth industry had flourished for more than
a century, and so some of the rank and file might be acquainted
with the art, and a few might settle down to industrial pursuits.
Further, the wealthy Fleming would bring his ' entourage ',
which would almost certainly include a weaver and kindred
workmen, and hence it is probable that amongst the Flemish
immigrants were a number of men whose concern was the
manufacture of cloth. But all this is conjectural, and the
assertion that the Flemings were responsible for the establish-
ment of the industry or the formation of the early gilds hangs
on a very slender thread of possibilities.

When we reach the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,
documentary evidence is more abundant, and one can form
more definite opinions about the presence and influence of the
aliens. Perhaps the best plan would be to present all the avail-
able data, and then draw our conclusions.

During the thirteenth century Flemings were to be found
scattered throughout the county. The affairs of a family of
Flemings are frequently referred to in the Wakefield Court
Rolls,6 and the entries indicate that the family owned much
property. In 1284 a certain William the Fleming held the vill
of Wath-on-Dearne, near Barnsley, 'in capite ' from the King,

1 Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce , i. 047.

' Halifax Antiquarian Society Reports, 1902—3.

3 Pedes Finium, Com. Ebor. (1202-5), Surtces Soe. publications, vol. xciv,
p. 7S.

* Roger de Hoveden, Chronica (Rolls Series), i. 203-4.

5 Yorks. Arch. Journal, x. 370.

s Wakefield Manor Court Rolls (Vorks. Arch. Soe., Record Series, 2 vols.),
passim. See Index, under ' Fleming '■

12 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

and this district was occupied by a number of his fellow country-
men.1 Similar families dwelt in other parts of the county ; 2
they were apparently landowners, but as to their interest in
industry we know nothing that might help to prove that they
were fostering the woollen manufacture in Yorkshire.

Turning to York, where trade was developing quickly during
the early part of the fourteenth century, we find many Flemings
in the ranks of the freemen of that city. All who desired to
take up any trade or business there were obliged to qualify
themselves, and be enrolled on the list of freemen ; hence the
names given in that register are those of men engaged chiefly
in industrial and commercial pursuits. In 1291, Walter the
Fleming and Giles the Fleming were admitted to the freedom.3
In 1296 Giles of Brabant made his entry,4 and others followed
during the subsequent years. Some of these men occupied
important positions. Giles of Brabant rose to the dignity of
bailiff in 1308-9 ; 5 in 1298 Jacobus le Fleming was mayor,6
whilst the doughty Nicholas the Fleming occupied the mayoral
chair from 1310 to 1315,7 and met his death when leading
a York contingent against the Scots at the disastrous Battle of
Myton (1319).8 These men were evidently much esteemed by
their fellow citizens ; but the Roll tells us nothing about their
occupations. They may have been ordinary merchants engaged
in the exportation of wool and perhaps concerned with its
manufacture into cloth. But whilst silent concerning the
business practised by these aliens, the Roll shows the presence
of a number of native workers in wool, drawn from many
parts of Yorkshire and other counties. There are thirteen
names of textile workers entered during the reigns of the first
two Edwards,9 and not one of them gives any suggestion of

1 Kirkby's Inquest (Surtees Soc. publications, vol. xlviii, p. 1). See also
Lay Subsidy, 2$ Ed. I (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, vol. xv, p. 46).

2 At West Lilting {Kirkby's Inquest, pp. 378-9) Nicholaus Flemyng, who
became Mayor of York. Others at Fryton and Whitby (Lay Subsidy,
30 Ed. I, Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series, vol. xxi, pp. 53, ~2, 108). Matthew
de Lnveyne living at Norton, mentioned in Assize Rolls, 36 Hen. Ill (Yorks.
Arch. Soc, Record Series, xliv. 58).

3 Register of the Freemen of York (Surtees Soc, vol. xevi), 20 Ed. I, p. 5.

4 Ibid., 25 Ed. I. 5 Kirkby's Inquest, p. 380 n.
■ Freemen's Roll, 26-7 Ed. I. " Ibid., 4-Q Ed. II.

8 Ibid., p. 18 n.

9 Victoria County History, Yorkshire, iii. 438.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 13

Flemish origin. There were William of Malton l and John of
Wales,2 fullers ; John of Newcastle 3 and Robert of Marsk,4
weavers ; Williams of Easingwold 5 and Richard of Leicester,6
chaloners (i.e. coverlet weavers) ; Wilfred of Leicester, dyer ; 7
John of Craven 8 and John of Manchester,9 tailors ; to say
nothing of chapmen from Bristol, Lincoln, Wakefield, and Craven,
' Mercatores de Beverle ', and mercers from Skipton, Ripon,
Coventry, and Upsala.10 Thus, to sum up, two things are clear
from a study of the early list of freemen : — (1) That in 1327 the
making of cloth and wool was in the hands of Englishmen ;
(2) that increased numbers of enrolments were being made,
showing a general expansion of trade in the city, and in this
progress the cloth-makers stepped forward with the rest. All
this was before the traditional migration began.

The granting of favours to foreign merchants had been a
general feature of the economic policy of the thirteenth century.
Now in the fourteenth the fostering of cloth-making took the /
place of importance, and in the Ordinance of May 1, 1326,11 we
have the declaration of a policy which was, in spite of many
vicissitudes, to guide the development of the industry for some
time to come. The most important points were : — (1) No person
should wear foreign cloth, except royalty, nobility, and those
paying an annual rental of £30 or over. (2) ' That in order to
encourage people to work upon cloths, the King would have all
men know that he will grant suitable franchises to the fullers,
weavers, dyers, and other cloth workers who live mainly by
this mistery, whenever such franchises are asked for.' (3) All
alien merchants were taken under the King's protection.
Erlward III confirmed this declaration in the first year of his
reign, and quickly added to it his offers of protection to foreign
weavers. In July 1331 he issued letters of protection to John
Kemp, ' Textor pannorum laneorum ', and his employees, and
the proclamation concluded with a general otter of similar favours
to all foreign weavers, fullers, and dyers.1- Six months later 1:!

I Freemen's Roll, 2; Ed. I. - Ibid., 13 Ed. II. 3 Ibid., 12 Ed. II.
• Ibid., 20 Ed. II. •> Ibid., 17 Ed. II. * Ibid., r Ed. II.

' Ibid.. 17 Ed. II. » Ibid., 11 Ed. II. » Ibid., iS Ed. II.

>•> Ibid., 20 Ed. I.

II Patent Rolls, u> Jul. II, pt. ii. in. S. Also 1 Ed. Ill, pt. ii, m. 24.
13 Ryiner, Focdcru, iv. 41)0.

" January 1333 : Records edition ol Rymer, vol. 11, pt. ii, p. S40.

14 THE INFANCY OF THE , chap.

the King again dispatched a general mandate to the sheriffs :
' Be it known unto you that we have taken into our protection
all and singular weavers and other cloth-workers, from what-
soever part they come, along with their goods and implements.'
The sheriffs were commanded to see that the ordinance was
strictly obeyed.

Some years elapsed before the next declaration was made,
and on this occasion it concerned two aliens who wished to
settle in York.

' 12th December 1336. The king to his sheriffs . . . greeting.
Know ye that since William of Brabant and Hanekin of Brabant,
weavers of the parts of Brabant, have come into our realm of
England, and dwell in our city of York, there carrying on their
occupation ; we, being aware that if they engage in their industry
within our realm manifold advantage and benefits will accrue
to us and ours ; . . . and for this reason, wishing that William
and Hanekin should be free to attend to their business in peace
and quietness ; . . . we therefore take them . . . under our pro-
tection and defence, whilst they engage in the aforesaid occupa-
tion within our realm, along with their goods and all possessions
whatsoever ; ... in which they shall be for the space of one
year.' x

This policy was firmly established in 1337, when an act was
passed, providing a wide statutory basis of protection, promising
security, and offering all necessary ' franchises ' to alien cloth-
makers.2 Such offers came at an opportune time for the Low
Country men. All was not well in Brabant and Flanders. The
towns were full of faction strife, the gilds were drifting towards
oligarchy, and the poorer artisans found themselves virtually
disfranchised by the wealthier citizens. The gild monopoly was
so strictly enforced that rural industry was almost impossible.3
Hence, to the members of the defeated factions, and to the
poorer citizens, Edward's offers of protection would be very
welcome, and some packed up their effects and came to partake
of Edward's bounty.

Now arises the question, What was the extent of the migra-

1 Rymer, op. cit., iv. 723 ; also Patent Rolls, 10 Ed. Ill, pt. ii, m. 11.

2 11 Ed. Ill, c. 5 {Statutes of the Realm, vol. i, pp. 280-1). See also Rymer,
op. cit., iv. 751, and Patent Rolls, 11 Ed. Ill, pt. i, m. 6.

3 Ashley, Economic History, 1. ii. 197-8. Also Cunningham, op. cit., i.
305-6.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 15

tion to Yorkshire, unci what was its influence upon the cloth
industry there ? In York itself the influx was considerable, and
we meet several Flemings and men of Brabant amongst the
freemen.1 For instance, note the following entries in the Free-
men's Roll :

1344. Nicholas de Admare, de Braban, webster.2

1352. Thomas Braban de Malyns, tixtor (weaver).3

,, Laurentius Conyng de Flandre, webster.

,, Georgius Fote de Flandre, walker (fuller).

1357. Gerwinus Giffard de Gaunt, tixtor.4

,, Levekyn Giffard, f rater ejus, tixtor.

1359. Petrus de durdraght (Dordrecht), walker.5

1360. Arnaldus de Lovayne, teinturer (dyer).6

This list of names, which is by no means exhaustive, shows
that by 1360 there was a complete set of textile workers from
Belgium settled in York ; weavers, dyers, fullers, in addition
to tailors and merchants, had come from Ypres, Brabant,
Malines, Ghent, Louvain, Bruges, &c. Some of these men were
doubtless wealthy, had brought with them their households and
workpeople, and had made homes in York.

The Fleming was in York. Further, there was a great expan-
sion in the cloth trade, marked, as Miss Sellers has pointed out,
by the enrolment of some 170 weavers, 100 dyers, 50 fullers,
30 chaloners, and a swarm of shearmen, wool-packers, &c,
during the reign of Edward III.7 But we cannot lay the honour
for this expansion at the feet of the immigrant. From the early
years of the century there had been a steady development in
the trade of the city. The cloth-makers shared in it, and their
progress was accelerated by the government's policy of favour-
ing the English manufactures. Judging from the Freemen's
Roll, the Flemings did not appear in any numbers until about
1346—50, and before this time the expansion had become very
marked. Textile workers from all parts of the county, and of

1 We do not find the names of the two men who received the special letters
from Edward III. This was probably because they were under the King's
direct protection and favour, but as the protection was only for one year, one
would have expected to find them taking up the freedom eventually.

- Freemen's Roll, iS Ed. III. :' Ibid., 26 Ed. III.

4 Ibid., 31 Ed. III. ■- Ibid., 33 Ed. III. " Ibid., 34 Ed. III.

' Victoria ( 'ountv II ist<>rv, Yorkshire, iii. 430. the importance of these figure-;
i> discounted somewhat bv the fact that manv came in to till the places of the
victims of the Black Death.

16 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

the country, had taken the freedom of York before the Flemish
invasion, as the following list will show :

1332. Willelmus de Hedon, tixtor.1

1333- Willelmus de Selby, walker.2

T334- Johannes de Bristow (Bristol), webster.3

1336. Willelmus de Ripelay (Ripley), taynturer (dyer).4

1342. Thomas de Huntingdon, litester (dyer).5

,, Walterus de Beverle, tixtor.

,, Willelmus de Cravene, litester.
1344. Johannes de Hertilpole, webster. H

,, Johannes de Novo Castro, litester.
J345- Johannes de Appleby, litester.7
1346. Willelmus de Lyncoln, sheregrynder.8

There were more cloth-makers from Lincoln than from the
whole of the Low Countries, and Lincoln had a reputation for
superior cloths even in the twelfth century.9 It was therefore
no decadent or infantile industrial community to which the men
of Flanders and Brabant found their way. There was a boom
already gathering force, and they simply helped to swell it.
Their chief influence would be in the innovation of new varieties
of cloth, and possibly of new methods of manufacture. The
dyer of Louvain would introduce new hues, just as would his
fellow-craftsmen from Lincoln, Stamford, and Grantham. The
weaver of Ghent would have his favourite kinds of cloth, and
his own ways of making them, just the same as the weaver of
Huntingdon, Gloucester, Yarmouth, or Chester. Thus the aliens
joined in the life of the city, but were by no means its dominating
force. They shared in, and influenced to some extent, the
progress of the fourteenth century, but they did not initiate it.
Amid the developments of the following years, they occupied
no positions of municipal importance, but took their places
along with men from other parts of England in obedience to the
decrees of city and gild.

Turning to the country districts, as seen in the Manor Court
Rolls of Bradford10 and the Poll Tax Returns, we find evidence

1 Freemen's Roll, 6 Ed. III. 2 Ibid., 7 Ed. III.

3 Ibid., 8 Ed. III. * Ibid., 10 Ed. III. ■' Ibid., 16 Ed. III.

<■• Ibid., 18 Ed. III. ' Ibid., 19 Ed. III. s Ibid., 20 Ed. III.

9 Salzmann, op. (it., p. 136.

" A manuscript translation of these Rolls is in the Bradford Public Reference
Library. It is in four volumes, and covers the period Edward Ill-Henry V.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE i7

of a flourishing cloth industry in almost every part of the West
Riding, But very few immigrants from the Low Countries.
The Bradford Court Rolls cover the first forty-five years of the
reign of Edward III, the period when the immigration was at
its height. There are many entries concerning the textile
industry, but never once is there mention of a Fleming or
' Brabaner '. From a most careful examination of the Rolls
one does not obtain the faintest trace of evidence indicating
any Flemish settlement in Bradford. Mr. John Lister, who has
examined the Wakefield Court Rolls, has informed the present
writer that the name ' Fleming ' occasionally occurs in these
documents, but that there is no evidence to show that the
people mentioned had any connexion with cloth-making. From
the Poll Tax Returns of 1379 one gets a similar impression. Of
course some of the aliens might have forsworn their foreign
names, thus escaping our identification, and this possibility
must be borne in mind. In the whole of the returns for the
West Riding only seven textile workers from the Low Countries
are recorded :

1 Bawtry. Iohannes de Braban et Agnes uxor eius,

webstcr .... vjd (i.e. 6d

2 Spofforth. Iohannes Brabaner, Textor, et uxor eius

3 Skipton. Petrus Brabaner, Webster, et uxor eius

,, Petrus Brabayner, Webstrc, et uxor eius

4 Wetherby. Iohannes Brabayner, Textor

0 Ripon. Lamkynus de Braban, Textor . . . vy

6 Ripley Iohannes Brabaner, Webstcr, et uxor eius . vjd

In addition to these names, there are about twenty-four other
entries of a similar character, but with no occupation attached ;
as for instance :

7 Ledes. I lenricus Brabaner et uxor eius,

8 Laughton. Walterus Lovayne, et Alicia uxor eius,

9 Acton. Iohannes de Flaundres et uxor eius.

In these instances the poll tax payment was usually fourpence
or sixpence ; this denotes comparative poverty, and hence these

1 Poll Tax Returns, 2 Richard II (published by Yorks. Arch. Soc, cd. by
Lister), p. 14.

2 Ibid., p. jj?. 3 Ibid., p. 267. • Ibid., p. 222.

3 Ibid., p. 250. ,; Ibid., p. 235. 7 Ibid., p. 215.

" Ibid., p. ?y. '■' Ibid., p. 165.

VJd.

xijd

vjd.

vj*

i8 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

people would be compelled to engage in some work, which might
be weaving.1

The number of aliens who entered the rural districts was I
small, and the new-comers were generally poor.2 Could such an *
element exert any powerful industrial influence ? There are at
least two tests we can apply, though neither can be regarded
as final. In the first place, does the distribution of the aliens
mentioned above coincide with the active industrial areas, and
was industry booming in the places wherein the ' Brabaners '
had taken up their abode ? Secondly, admitting that their
influence might be slow in bearing fruit, do we find that the
industry developed during the fifteenth century in those places
favoured by the Flemings in the fourteenth ? Do we meet any
aliens in the area which witnessed such a great expansion in
cloth-making during the fifteenth century, namely the Halifax
parish ?

Let us take one or two places conspicuous in the Poll Tax
Returns for the number of persons engaged in the textile in-
dustry. Rotherham,3 for instance, was a populous centre, in
which the tax was paid for some 350 persons. Here were five
weavers, a coverlet weaver, three fullers, two shearmen, three-
dyers, in addition to tailors, drapers, and merchants. In all,
fourteen men were engaged in the manufacture of cloth ; but the
most careful scrutiny fails to reveal the presence of any Flemings
in the busy community. At Wakefield,4 payment was made by
a ' wulchapman ' (i. e. a dealer in wool), eight weavers, five
fullers, two coverlet weavers, one dyer, four drapers, and several
mercers and tailors. Here again there is no trace of exiles from
the Low Countries. Ripon 5 had its solitary ' Brabaner ', who
had gone to live in a town which had long been a small textile
centre. He was only one out of the sixteen ' websters ' who
paid poll tax in that town. Pontefract, which paid the largest
amount of taxation, had an abundance of cloth-makers, but no
Flemings. Where the alien weaver is found, he is often almost

1 In the returns for the East Riding, I can find only three Belgian names,
and these not specifically clothiers (Yorks. Arch. Journal, xx. 329 et sec].).

2 It will be noticed that most of the rural immigrants came from Brabant,
while those in York came from various parts. Further, all the former are poor,
only one person paying more than sixpence. Again, all are weavers.

;| Poll Tax Returns, p. 25. 4 Ibid., pp. 160-2.

'" Ibid., p. 249.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 19

alone in his craft : Skipton,1 with its two Flemings, had only
two other weavers, whilst the Wetherby alien 2 had the company
of only two native weavers. And so one might continue, showing
that in other places, large and small, where the industry flourished,
the alien was absent, and that when he did appear, it was
generally in some centre where cloth had been made for some
considerable period, or in an isolated quarter where he was
almost the only one of his craft, and he himself far too poor to
employ others in the trade. His influence in the latter places
does not seem to have been great, for Bawtry, Spofforth,
Wetherby, Ripley, Acton, and Laughton never appear at
a subsequent date as important clothing centres.

Further, if we turn to the valleys of the Colne and Calder, to
Halifax and the whole district west and south of Leeds, where
the ulnagers' accounts of the fifteenth century indicate a great
growth, we do not find the Fleming sowing the seed. In 1379
Halifax3 had its ' lyster ', Liversedge its fullers,4 Elland its
three weavers, coverlet weaver, three dyers and a fuller.5 But
in the whole of the Halifax area the only name with a Flemish
appearance is that of Roger Flemmyng of Sowerby Bridge,
whose occupation is not stated. Indeed, with the exception of
the two solitary ' Brabaners ', father and son, at Skipton, one
does not find any weavers from the Low Countries in any parts
west of Leeds and Wakefield. And yet this region was the
stronghold of the textile industry from the fifteenth century
onwards.

One other matter is worthy of a moment's consideration.
The influence of the Flemings would probably have been towards
improving the standard of workmanship, and raising the quality
of the wares produced. Now York and Beverley made cloths
of considerable value, but the West Riding fabrics were always
of an inferior grade until the nineteenth century. Even in the
seventeenth century 6 it was pointed out that Yorkshire clothiers
used the same quality of wool as many West of England manu-
facturers, but the finished cloths from Yorkshire were much
inferior to the pieces made from the same kind of wool in Wessex.

1 Ibid., p. 267. - Ibid., p. zzz.

3 Ibid., p. 188. ' Ibid., p. iSo. ■'• Ibid., p. 183.

* See evidence given during the big law-suit between the Yorkshire i lothiers
and the ulnager, 1038 (Chapter VI).

C 2

20 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

The difference was said to be due to less skilful sorting of the
wools, and lower efficiency in carrying out the various pro-
cesses. The West Yorkshire clothier, like his fellows in Lan-
cashire, Wales, and the corners of Devon and Cornwall, was
deficient in industrial skill. This may be due to the fact that
few, if any, skilled workers, either alien or native, came to these
parts, but concentrated in the towns and eastern districts.

Thus we come to the conclusion that the Flemish element in
this county was small, and exerted little influence. In York
the aliens came to swell a rising tide, but in the wide rural
area over which cloth was being made their influence was
negligible.1

From all this discussion we return to the question with which
we set out : Was the establishment of the industry due to the
growth of the native domestic industry, or to the immigration
of alien craftsmen ? There is no proof of any large immigration
of Flemish cloth-workers at any time before the middle of the
fourteenth century, and then the influx was mainly confined to
York. We are therefore driven to the other possibility, and to
suggest that the establishment of manufacture for sale grew
from manufacture for home use. Before the Conquest the
domestic industry was in existence, the family demands for
clothing being met by the family's work at the distaff and loom.
This industry was not destroyed by the ravages of William I,
and continued to be part and parcel of Yorkshire domestic life
for centuries. Meanwhile, with the growth of population and
the development of society generally during the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries, it became possible for some men to earn
a livelihood by devoting the whole, or the greater part, of their
time to the manufacture of cloth. They then sold, or bartered,
the produce of their labour to meet the local demand, and
eventually supplied a wider market. This advance was first
made in the towns of Beverley and York, but gradually
specialized workers in wool appeared in the country districts.
Such developments brought in their train the division of labour,
one man becoming a weaver, the second a dyer, the third a fuller,
and so forth. All this was a natural consequence of the growth

1 Mr. J. Lister, who has spent twenty years on antiquarian research on the
West Riding, agrees entirely with the conclusions arrived at above ; though
my own opinion was definitely formed before I had met Mr. Lister.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 21

of population, the increase in home and foreign trade, the
presence in the county of plentiful supplies of wool and water,
and the difficulty of making a livelihood out of agriculture alone.
In its growth the industry possibly received some assistance
and practical guidance from alien workmen, but there is nothing
to show that these men were responsible either for the intro-
duction of the industry, or for its subsequent development.

Century

From the Poll Tax Returns and other MSS. one gathers
some impressions of the general character of the industry as
practised in the country districts and small towns during the
reigns of Edward III and Richard II. The largest centres of
population1 lay east of Leeds, at Pontefract, Doncaster, and in
the Vale of York. In these parts cloth-makers were plentiful, and
tailors, drapers, and merchants equally so.2 West of Leeds the
industry claimed a smaller number of professional adherents,
and was in a more primitive stage as yet. Leeds, standing
midway between the two areas, was well supplied, having two
' lysters ', two ' chalunhers ', one walker or fuller, two ' talours ',
and one merchant.3 Where population was gathered round
a castle or abbey, the industry was well established ; Skipton,
for instance, had four weavers, a fuller, draper, glover, merchant,
and four ' cissores ' or tailors.4

Wool was to be obtained almost everywhere, and weaving
might be either a person's staple occupation, or merely an
auxiliary industry, carried on by the man in his spare time, or
by the members of his household. Even the parish clergy
occasionally devoted their leisure to cloth-making, and the
Bradford Manor Court Rolls for 1354 speak of the ' chaplain '
of Bradford taking his cloths to the tenter-ground to be stretched
and dried.5

1 The Poll Tax Returns show that Pontefract had the largest population
in the West Riding. Next came Doncaster ; then in order of size followed
Sheffield, Selby, Tickhill, Rotherham, Wakefield, Snaith, Ripon. \.wiU,
Tadcaster, Knaresborough, Bawtry, Bradford, Hudderstield, Halifax. See
Price, op. cit., p. 52 n.

1 Poll Tax Returns ; see for Doncaster, Selby, Pontefract, Arc.

5 Ibid., p. 215. ' Ibid., p. 207 •

<• Iiradfonl Manor Rolls, 28 I'd. Ill, pp. 234-4.?.

22 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

The fulling industry was also widely scattered, and fulling- /
mills were to be found on the banks of every stream, even in the
most remote places. Fulling had received an impetus from the
act of 1376-7, which forbade the export of cloth until it had
been properly fulled ; 1 this, coupled with the growing demand
for English cloth, made the fulling-mill a good source of revenue.
Every manor which stood on a water-course possessed its mill,
which was leased to one or two of the tenants for an annual
rental. The Bradford mill, for instance, was let in the early
'forties to William and James Walker, at a rental of ten shillings
per annum.2 In 1346 James resigned his share of the mill to
William, being ' unable to hold the said mill on account of
poverty '.3 William retained his tenancy, aided by his son
Thomas, and in 1353 managed to secure the monopoly of the
fulling on the manor.4 In that year father and son 5 went to the
manor court, and gave to the landlord forty pence by the year
of ' new rent ' for the term of the father's life, being promised
in return ' that there shall no strange fuller enter within the
town and liberty of the Court of the Lord of Bradford, . . .
neither shall anything be taken or carried out of the said town
to be worked upon, nor shall any one use that craft in the said
town, except (the Walkers) and their servants '.6

The dyer was in a similar position to the fuller, in that he
could not carry on his occupation without the licence of the lord
of the manor. The landlord might allow many dyers to practise
in the same locality, or he might hand over the monopoly of
the trade to one man. Instances of both practices are found in
the Bradford Rolls. In the 'forties there was no monopoly,
but a licence was essential before practising in the industry. In
1342 William Nutbrown was fined threepence for using the
office of dyer without licence,7 and ten years later Walter Lister
of Leeds was caught practising the same trade in Bradford

1 Statutes of the Realm, 50 Ed. Ill, c. 7.

2 Survey of the Manor of Bradford, 15 Ed. III. Transcript in the Bradford
Reference Library.

3 Manor Rolls, 20 Ed. Ill, p. 80. * Ibid., 27 Ed. III.

6 Thomas prospered greatly in his day. In 1360 he took a plot of the
landlord's waste, 40 ft. by 30 ft., for a house to be situated there, and for the
enlargement of his tenter-ground (Rolls, 34 Ed. Ill, p. 408). The Leeds
fulling-mill let at 20s. per annum in 1342 (Survey, 15 Ed. Ill, printed in
Bradford Antiquarian, ii. 137-8).

6 Manor Rolls, 27 Ed. III. ' Ibid., 16 Ed. Ill, p. 18.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 23

without having paid the four shillings which was charged for
the privilege of dyeing within the manor of Bradford. Lister
was brought before the court, and ordered to pay the necessary
sum.1 Two years later Lister assumed the offensive, and ' took
the office of dyer in Bradeforddale, so that no other shall
be received to perform that office there this year, rendering
therefore to the lord by the year four shillings V2 This grant
apparently amounted to a monopoly.

The cloth industry was in the hands of men and women alike, y
Women were the brewers of the day ; they might also be the
weavers and dyers. Witness the following Poll Tax entries :

3 Thorpe iuxta Rypon. Alicia Garc, Webster . . . vj1'

4 Rypon. Alicia de Bowland, Webestcr .... xij'1

,, Christiana Lyttester, Lyster .... x i j d •

0 Eland. Alicia and Isabella de Crosse, Websters . . xijd

The ulnager's accounts for 1395-6-7 record payments for
cloths made for sale by ' filia vicarii de Crayk ',6 and Emma
Earle of Wakefield ; 7 the latter was responsible for the manu-
facture of 48 cloths in 54 weeks, out of a total of 173-2- cloths
produced for sale in the Wakefield area. These industrious
women remind one of the Wife of Bath.

' Of cloth making schc haddc such an haunt,
Sche passeth hem of Ypres and of Gaunt.'

In York women were admitted to the freedom.8 No woman
could carry on a trade unless her name had been entered on the
Freemen's Roll, and consequently many such names appear in
that list. But the women's special field was that of spinning 1
the wool. The distaff, the primitive apparatus for this process,
was part of the equipment of every household, and spinning
belonged to the common round of the day's toil. Wife and
daughters were responsible for this work, and it seems that even

1 Ibid., 34 Ed. Ill, p. 385.

2 Ibid., 36 Ed. III. p. 44;. Similarly, Robert Lyster of Halifax in 13S2
was granted the monopoly of dyeing in the manor of Halifax (Lister and
Ogden, Poll Tax Returns for the Parish of Halifax).

:1 Poll Tax Returns, p. J54. 4 Ibid., p. 250. 5 Ibid., p. 183.

8 ' Particulars of Account of Wm. Skipwith, collector of ulnage and subsidy
of saleable cloths ... in the County of York ', 1395-^ (Exch. K.R. Account.-.,
bundle 345, no. 15).

: Similar account 1 390-7 (Exch. K.R. Accounts, bundle 348, no. 17).

* See preface to I:ree»ieu's Register.

24 THE INFANCY OF THE chap

at this date spinsters were employed, working for wages underfed
a master. Thus, at the Halifax Tourn, April 6, 1372, Ibbot
de Holgate and Matilda Winlove of Warley, spinsters, were
accused of having taken wages contrary to the Statute of
Labourers.1

The status of the cloth-makers varied. In the smaller settle-
ments they usually contributed only fourpence or sixpence to
the Poll Tax, but in many places a shilling was paid. The
coverlet weaver, the dyers, the drapers, and some of the ordinary
weavers of Rotherham were in the shilling class ; 2 one of the
weavers of Wakefield kept two servants, who probably gave
assistance in the workshop, and his fellow wool-chapman
paid 35. 4^.3 From earlier sources we learn that many of these
men had their toft of land, like the two cottar weavers at Skipton
(1307) .4 They generally had a little farm stock, with cows,
horses, swine, and poultry, in addition to a little acreage under
crops, thus being farmer and manufacturer in a small way.5 As
such they bear a marked resemblance to the small clothiers who
were so numerous in subsequent centuries.

Mention of the Skipton cottars draws our attention to the fact >
that many of the weavers mentioned during the thirteenth and j
fourteenth century wTere cottars. These men would have a small
tenancy of land, probably six to twelve acres of arable, the
cultivation of which would take up part of their time. They
would look after their live stock, and perform the requisite
number of days' service on the demesne lands, unless those
services had been commuted. When all this had been done,
they would still have at their disposal each week a number of
days which would be occupied with cloth-making. As to the
origin of these cottar weavers, one hesitates to generalize. Were

1 ' Ibbot de Holgate et Matilda Winlove de Warlonley sunt filiatnces ad
rotam et capiunt stipendium contra Statutem de Artificiis.' Halifax Tourn,
6th April, 46 Ed, III (Lister and Ogden, op. cit., p. 43).

2 Poll Tax Returns, pp. 25 et seq. 3 Ibid., pp. 160-1.

1 Inquisition Post Mortem, 31 Ed. I (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record Series,
xxx vii. 101).

5 Types drawn from Lay Subsidy, 25 Ed. I (Yorks. Arch. Soc, Record
Series, xxv. 114): Wakefield, 'Thomas Tinctor, j vaccam, precium iiijs ;
ij quart, siliginis (wheat) vs ; jv quart, avene (oats).' p. 2. Burton-in-
Lonsdale, ' Kicardus Tinctor ', 2 oxen 5s. each ; 2 cows 3s. 5^. each, also
various crops, p. 91. Almanbir (Almondbnry), ' Iohannes Tinctor', 1 ox,
1 cow, 1 horse, also crops.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 25

they small tenants because they were primarily weavers, or
were they weavers because, being only small tenants, they had
time to spare for weaving ? The latter is the more likely, and
probably explains the origin of the weaver class, one or two
members of which appeared as cottars in so many villages
during the thirteenth century. The cottar in his spare time
might hire himself out as an agricultural labourer ; or he might
take up some industry, and in Yorkshire, as in the West of
England, he turned to the manufacture of cloth.

There was some mobility of population throughout the county.
In the ranks of the York freemen we find William the Cordwaner,
Richard the Webster, William the Mercer, and John the Car-
penter, all of Leeds ; John of Holbeck, weaver, and John and
Ralph of Pudsey, tailors. There were men of Leeds trading
and brewing in Ripon, and merchants from W7akefield and
Kendal were familiar figures throughout the West Riding.

The progress of the industry was frequently checked during
the fourteenth century by great calamities. The Scottish Wars
and the frequent raids l had disastrous effects on various parts
of Yorkshire during the early decades, the most severe suffering
being inflicted after the disastrous Battle of Myton-on-Swale in
13 19. After a time the Scottish terror passed away, but the
unseen scourge of plague now had to be faced. The loss of life
caused by the Black Death was terrible, and Mr. Seebohm 2
estimated that quite one-half of the population of Yorkshire
was carried away by pestilence during the reign of Edward III.
The great outbreak of 1349 denuded abbeys,3 towns, and villages
of their population, and subsequent outbreaks of pestilence
claimed heavy toll from the cloth-makers. The population of
York, for instance, in 1340 was between 30,000 and 40,000.
From the Poll Tax returns for the city, one gathers that by 1379
the population had been reduced to between 11,000 and 13,000.''
There were many gaps in the ranks of the freemen, and each

1 After Bannockburn the Scots raided as far as Skipton and the suburbs
of York. After Myton they swept down the western parts of the counts' as
far as Airedale (Price, Leeds and its Sei^hbourhood, p. 41 ; also Chronicles of
Meaux Abbey, Rolls Series, ii. 337).

2 'The Black Death ', in Fortnightly Review, 1865, p. 150.

s At Meaux only ten men survived out of titty, and it was necessary to
appoint the sub-cellarer as abbot (Chronicles of Meaux Abbey, iii. .^7 and y~).
' Victoria County History, Yorkshire, iii. 441.

26 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

outbreak of plague was followed by a rush of new craftsmen to
occupy the vacant places.1

The country districts suffered almost as severely during these
years of war, pestilence, and famine, and in small communities
the recovery was much more slow. There was more than one
serious famine, which, coupled with the Scots' raids, reduced the
manors to a miserable plight. At Bradford, for instance, in 1342
the Hall was in ruins ; the corn mill, which had been valued at
£10 a year in 1311, now stood at £6 65. 8d., and the fulling-
mill, ' the building whereof is entirely unroofed ', had decreased
in its annual value from £1 to 8s. in the space of thirty years.2
Then came the Black Death, especially acute in 1349, but
rapacious enough in 1362. The Bradford Court Rolls give vivid
pictures of the effects of these visitations. In 1349 twenty-two
tenants ' closed their extreme days ', to quote the euphemism
•employed in the Rolls, and under the stress of such events the
whole social order collapsed for a«timc. Similar stories could be
told of other villages, the sum total of which is that Yorkshire
Avas depleted for many years of its population and wealth, and
its progress seriously retarded. Hence the early career of the
textile industry was very chequered. But the manufacture was
never abandoned by the dwellers in the West Riding villages.
Soil and climate prevented that, for these factors would not
allow any population in the western parts of the country to
subsist on a purely agricultural basis. Fourteenth-century farm-
ing was so primitive that tillage could only be successful under
very favourable conditions of soil and weather. The Yorkshire
valleys would produce indifferent crops only, and the growth of
grain at this time occupied a small part of the tenants' atten-
tion. The land was most profitably employed in pastoral work.
But even this, allied to a small production of crops, did not
guarantee a livelihood to the population, and some supple-
mentary occupation must therefore be followed. The district
was naturally fitted for the manufacture of cloth, thanks to the
supplies of wool and water, and the woollen industry therefore

1 The number of new freemen admitted just prior to 1349 was about
sixty per annum, but in 1 340 no less than 208 enrolments were made. See
Victoria County History, Yorkshire, iii. 441, for detailed figures.

- Survey of Manor of Bradford, 1342. See also M. C. 1). Law, The Story of
Bradford (Pitman, 1013), p. 52.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 27

maintained itself amidst all the vicissitudes of plague and
warfare, of high birth-rates and often higher death-rates.

(d) Gild Organization in the Urban Textile Industry

The manufacture of cloth in the chief towns of Yorkshire
passed at an early stage under gild control, and remained so
until the decline of the urban industry in the sixteenth century.
The gilds of York, Beverley, and Hull were very similar in
character to those which existed in the big industrial and com-
mercial centres throughout England ; for this reason, therefore,
a brief description of their economic functions will suffice. But
whilst dwelling solely on the industrial work of the textile gilds,
one must remember that their scope was much wider. The
gilds embraced many of the most prominent features of social
life. They concerned themselves with the tending of the sick,
the burial of the dead, the support of religious observances, and
the institution of regular feastings ; lastly, they developed the
rudiments of popular dramatic art by their pageants and amateur
theatrical displays.

As to the origin, as well as much of the early history of the
textile craft gilds, we are left in a wilderness of doubt. They
may have come into existence as a normal consequence of
industrial evolution, being formed when the industry had become
sufficiently specialized and differentiated from other occupa-
tions. On the other hand, they may have been formed as
associations of aliens settling in certain towns under royal pro-
tection.1 But there is no evidence which will enable us to come
to any conclusion of a satisfactory character, and the whole
matter must remain problematic until some evidence comes in
from a source as yet unknown.

The first notices of textile gilds are found in the early twelfth
century, but it is not until n6j2 that we find any mention of
the weavers' gild in York.3 The city had evidently received its

1 This is the general theory adopted by Dr. Cunningham. See Cunningham,
op. cit., i. 3^7.

- Pipe Roll, 11 Hen. II, and subsequent years.

3 The weavers' gild was soon followed In' similar organizations amongst
the glovers and curriers, saddlers, and hosiers, all of whom had gilds under
royal warrant by 1170 (Pipe Roll, 20 Hen. 11, printed in Hland, Rrown, and
Tawney, English Economic History, Select Documents, ioi \. p. 114).

28 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

weavers' charter in that year or the previous one, and in return
now began to make an annual contribution to the Exchequer.
The charter was quite short, and its chief provision was the
granting of a monopoly : ' No one except them (i. e. the York
weavers) shall make any cloths, dyed or striped, in the whole of
Yorkshire, except the men of York, unless it be others of the
same occupation in Beverley, Kirkby, Thirsk, Malton, Scar-
borough, and other my royal boroughs (aliis dominicis meis
burgis). And in return for this licence they shall give £10
annually to my Exchequer.' x The weavers of York were thus
granted a monopoly for certain kinds of cloth, but for those
kinds only Further, the exemptions were numerous and
important, for in addition to the five towns mentioned there
were other royal boroughs, to all of which the saving clause
would apply. The charter did, however, give York the control
over the rural areas, though the value of that power would
depend on the success with which it was enforced upon those
outside the walls of the city.2 Hence the charter in actual
practice probably only meant that the weavers of dyed and
striped cloth who dwelt in the neighbourhood of York had to
contribute something towards the annual payment. Even
when we have made this necessary modification, the privilege
granted by the charter must have been important, and the gild
of considerable size, for the ' firma ' of £10 was a larger sum
than that of any other weavers' gild in the country, London
alone excepted. Moreover, £10 in the twelfth century would be
equivalent to £150 to-day. Thus the privilege granted must have
been of some value, or the gildsmen would not have agreed to
pay so heavily for it.

The weavers' tribute was paid with great regularity through-
nut the reign of Henry II, and should one year have been missed,
as in 1 173, £20 was forwarded in the subsequent year.3 During
the turbulent times of the following century the payment fell
into arrears, even though Henry III renewed the charter in

1 Quoted in Patent Rolls, 20 Ed. Ill, pt. iii, m. 19.

2 Similarly the weavers of Lincoln were given a monopoly over the country
within a radius of twelve miles around that city (Patent Rolls, 22 Ed. Ill,
pt. ii, m. 22).

3 Pipe Rolls, 20 lien. II, weavers' contribution omitted; 21 Hen. II,
payment made for two years.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 29

1220.1 In 1238 the debt amounted to £165, in 1246 it was £210,
and at last, in 1268, matters reached a crisis, when the Sheriff
received orders to enter the city and distrain the weavers for
the whole of the arrears.2 Whatever the result of the Sheriff's
visit, matters were soon back in their former plight, and in 1275
the weavers once more appealed for exemption from payment,
on the ground of their poverty.3 This poverty was probably
due in part to the Sheriff's distraint, which, even if only partially
carried out, would exhaust the weavers financially. Under
these circumstances, there would be a keen desire on the part
of many to escape from this over-taxed city to some place where
manufacture could proceed under less costly conditions. Also,
as we have seen in the preceding sections, a considerable amount
of cloth-making was being carried on throughout the county,
and this rivalry between town and country was possibly diminish-
ing the demand for York cloths. At such a pass had the com-
petition arrived that in 1304 the city weavers petitioned the
King, showing ' that divers men in divers places in the county,
elsewhere than in the city or in the other towns and demesne
boroughs . . . make dyed and rayed (striped) cloths, so that the
weavers in the said city are unable to render their £10 yearly to
the Exchequer '.4 Edward replied by instructing the Exchequer
to cause inquiries to be made, and to compel all such as
were found plying the craft in illegal places to refrain from
such work henceforth. Unfortunately we do not know the
result of this order, but the evidence of the fourteenth century
proves that the city weavers never succeeded in perfecting their
monopoly, and that the rural manufacture continued to flourish.
Turning to Beverley, we find the weavers of the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries in a strange position. A manuscript dated
about 1209 5 contains the ' Law of the Fullers and Weavers of

1 Close Rolls Calendar, 1220, i. 421, quoted by Gross, Gild Merchant (1890),
i. 108 n.

2 Victoria County History, Yorkshire, ii. 437.

• Close Rolls, 3 Ed. I, m. 17.

4 Close Rolls, 32 Ed. I, m. 12. At Lincoln in 1348 we find the same com-
plaints of a declining industry. The weavers declared that there ' were no
weavers working in the city and the suburbs and circuit thereof before the
fifth year of the reign of the present king '. Apparently there had been an
exodus from Lincoln also. Latent Rolls, 22 Ed. Ill, pt. ii. m. --■

• Add. MSS. (Hrit. Mus.) 14252, quoted by Leach, Selden Soc. publications,

30 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

Beverley '. This law declares that the weavers and fullers of
the town ' can dry no cloth nor go out of the town to do any
trade ; nor can any free man be attainted by them, nor can
they bear any witness. And if (a weaver or fuller) wishes to
forswear his craft, he must do to him who is called Mayor and
the Bailiffs of the town that which will make him to be received
into the freedom of the town, and turn the tools out of his
house.' No ostracism could be more complete. Here, evidently,
the weaver was outside the pale of the burgess roll and merchant
gild. So long as he remained a cloth-maker he had no caste in
the town ; he could not trade outside its walls, but must sell
his pieces to the merchants, who had probably made this rule
for his imprisonment. The municipal courts of justice were
closed to him, and he could neither bring accusations nor bear
witness against a free citizen of the town. If we try to explain
these harsh restrictions by suggesting that the outcasts were
foreigners, we are met at once by the fact that the prohibitions
were imposed not on the nationality but on the craft, and would
apply equally to native and alien. Leach suggests that the
cause of the disqualifications lay in the fact that the weavers
were the first important class of landless industrial workers,
who were therefore tyrannized over by the more powerful
sections of the community.1 Salzmann holds that the cloth
trade was in the hands of big capitalistic merchants, who
utilized their power in the municipality to keep the cloth-
makers in subservience.2 This may have been possible, for the
export trade in Beverley cloths would give the merchants
a grip on the makers. But the most satisfactory theory
is that which was put forward bv Miss Bateson, who maintained
that the weavers and fullers already had their powerful gild
organizations before the town received its charter, and therefore
did not take up the new franchises, deeming themselves strong
enough behind the walls of their own society. Then, as the
town government grew stronger, it began to impose disabilities

xiv. 135. Another copv of the ' Law ' is found in the Liber Custumarum of
London (Rolls Series), i. 130— 1.

1 Beverley Town Documents, ed. Leach, Selden Soc. publications, vol. xiv,
p. xlix. Miss Bateson rejected this theory, and replaced it by the one outlined
above. See Knglish Historical Review, xvi. 566.

- Salzmann, op. cit., p. 135.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 31

on the weavers and fullers, because of their obstinate main-
tenance of their own separate organizations. Such a state of
affairs would be similar to that existing in the fishmongers' and
weavers' fraternities of London.1 These two trades had obtained
special immunities before the city had any really strong self-
government. When the London municipal authority became
more powerful, it resented the existence of these separate juris-
dictions, and a long struggle ensued before the mayor and his
colleagues were able to bring the gildsmen under the common
rule. Meanwhile the weavers were denied the rights of freemen.
If the same struggle took place in Beverley, the Law quoted
above was the municipality's answer to the weavers' claim to
independence. The conflict ended with the defeat of the weavers
and fullers, for their next documentary appearance shows them
to be entirely subservient to the town and its rulers.

During the fourteenth century, and probably during the
thirteenth, there was a general movement towards organization
amongst the urban crafts, and by 1400 the number of gilds in
every large town almost equalled the number of occupations. ^
At Beverley in 1390, thirty-eight crafts took part in the plays
on Corpus Christi Day, amongst them being the weavers, dyers,
coverlet weavers, fullers, and shearmen.2 The number of crafts
in York was naturally larger. A list of York plays, dated 1415,3
contains the names of 57 crafts, and a later list brings the
number up to about 80. 4 Of these the weavers, tapiters (or
coverlet weavers), fullers, dyers, shearmen, wool-packers, and
card-makers were connected with the cloth industry. The
strength of these textile gilds in York can be estimated roughly
from the ordinances edited by Miss M. Sellers in the York
Memorandum Hook.'' These ordinances, which are nearly all
dated about 1400, are prefaced occasionally by a list of the
masters of the fraternity. Probably the list of names is incom-
plete in some cases, and the actual membership was greater
than the list of names suggests. Taking the four cloth-making

1 I'nwin, The Gilds and Companies of London (1908), chap. iii.
- Si'ldcn Soc. publications, xiv. 33.

:l Davit's, Municipal Records of York in tin l-'ifteenth Century (1S4;)
pp. 2$} '1 ; also Drake, liboracum (1737), app. xxix.
' Victoria County History, Yorkshire, iii. 44''.
'' Surh'i's Soc, vol. exx (igi 1).

32 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

crafts * of which a list of members is given, the numbers are as
follows :

Fullers
Tapiters
Dyers .
Weavers

Total

30 names given

57 >) j)

59 >,

50 ,, ,, and others referred to.

196

In addition to these crafts, there were the card-makers,
shearmen,2 wool-packers, and other small occupations, the total
membership of which might amount to about 50. Thus there
were some 250 masters in the city of York engaged in the manu-
facture of cloth and allied industries. York at that time con-
tained a population of between 11,000 and 13,000 souls,3 which
is equivalent to about 2,500 families. Therefore out of 2,500
heads of families, 250, or about one-tenth, were masters of some
gild which regulated the making of cloth. Such an estimate
does not take into account the merchants who traded in cloth,
the retailers of cloth within the city, or the journeymen employed
by the 250 masters : were it possible to ascertain the number
of these men, it would be found that the manufacture and sale
of woollen goods employed a very large part of the population
of York.

In Hull the number of gilds was not so large, and the weavers
of that town favoured linen rather than woollen fabrics.4 Ponte-
fract had its craft gilds in the later years of the fifteenth century,
if not before, for it is very probable that the largest town in the
West Riding would have its gilds even before 1400. 5 Concerning
such towns as Doncaster, Ripon, and Selby, there is no evidence
to show the existence of any textile gilds, although the industry
flourished in these centres. Of Wakefield we know little more,
but the fact that Mystery Plays were performed there would

1 See Ordinances of these crafts, Memorandum Book, vol. i.
- The Ordinances of this craft are prefaced by seven names, and others are
referred to (Memorandum Book, vol. i, pp. 78-81).

3 Estimate based on Poll Tax Returns ; see Mem. Book, vol. i, p. xxxiv.
Also Archaeologia, xx. 525, where ThomasElyot, on the basis of a subsidy roll
of 51 Ed. Ill, estimates the population of York at 10,800.

4 Lambert, Two Thousand Years of Gild Life (1891), prints ordinances of
Hull craft gilds.

5 The Booke of Entries of the Pontefract Corporation (1653-1726) refers to
gilds of the fifteenth century, p. 36/ .

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 33

suggest that there were gilds to perform these plays.1 Thus our
actual knowledge of Yorkshire textile gilds is confined to those
of York, Hull, and Beverley ; concerning the smaller towns in
which the industry was carried on, we can only surmise that
where industrial life flourished in any populous community
some form of gild organization would be found.

The nature of the functions discharged by the textile gilds
can be gathered to some extent from the ordinances which have
been discovered. In no case do these ordinances go back beyond
1386, and are generally dated about 1400 ; 2 hence the picture
presented is that of gild activity at the beginning of the fifteenth
century. We know nothing of the work of the gilds during the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Further, the picture is incom-
plete, for one cannot gain a comprehensive view of the gild
through its ordinances any more than one can completely
understand a nation by studying its statute book alone. Still
we see enough to enable us to appreciate the extent to which
the industry was subjected to regulation and restraint.

The purpose of the craft gild was to promote the welfare of
its own particular industry. The policy always turned to that
end, and in all decrees the gild sought to destroy evil practices,
foster good work, and thus extend the demand for the wares of
its members. Such results could only be achieved if it had
complete control over all the workers at that craft within its
area, and hence the first essential was that the gild should
possess a monopoly of the local trade. In York the weavers
obtained a limited monopoly over the county, but we have
already seen the actual value of that privilege. Still York
clung tenaciously to the letter of its rights, and at almost regular
intervals petitioned the King, informing him ' that contrary to
the charter of Henry II, many foreign weavers of the County of
York have made and woven cloths dyed and rayed, and daily
continue so to do, to the grave loss of the weavers of the city,
and delay of the payment of the yearly ferm '.3 The petition

1 The Townclcy Mystery Plavs. Sec Victoria County History, Yorkshire,
iii. 445.

- Dales of ordinances : York. Fullers, 1390?; weavers, 1400; dyers,
[300; shearmen, 1405. Beverley. Weavers, 140'). Hull. Weavers, 1400.

■' Patent Rolls, 22 Rich. II, pt. ii, m. 20 d, and 1 Hen. IV, pt. vii, in. 5.
See Ancient Petitions, no. ""'73, asking for commission. 1300.
1526.12 n

34 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

usually resulted in a commission of inquiry, followed by a renewal
of the old charter. Such renewals were effected in 1220,1 1346,2
1377,3 1400,4 1414,5 1468, 6 and at other times, nearly always, it
will be noticed, at the beginning of a new reign. Similar mono-
polies were enjoyed by the weavers' gilds of Beverley and Hull,
no person being permitted to establish himself as a weaver in
these towns unless he was a member of the local gild. By this
monopoly the gild hoped to control industry, check competition,
encourage trade, and increase the membership of the gild, the
new members helping to bear the burden of the craft's social
expenditure and its contributions to the municipal or national
exchequer.

The term ' foreign ' in the York petition quoted above might
refer to Flemings or to Englishmen, for both were foreigners or
strangers unless they belonged to the weavers' fraternity. All
crafts made special provision for the stranger within the gate,
and almost every set of ordinances contained some clause
indicating the reception which was to be given to the man who
came to the town, seeking permission to set up in a trade, or to
serve as a journeyman. The weavers of York declared, in 1400,
that no stranger should be received henceforth to work in that
city, unless he first produced authentic and satisfactory certifi-
cates from the place of his former habitation as to his faithfulness
and right conversation.7 The dyers demanded evidence that
the stranger had been fully apprenticed and was properly
skilled,8 and the shearmen and coverlet weavers 9 ordered that
the new-comer should be examined by the searchers of the craft
touching his moral and industrial character.10 The stranger from
beyond the seas received less kindly consideration, and the
tendency was towards excluding the alien proper from participa-
tion in the industrial life of the city. Thus the coverlet weavers
of York in 1419 issued very stringent anti-alien regulations. No

1 Close Rolls Calendar, i. 421, quoted by Gross, Gild Merchant (1890), i. 10S n.

- Patent Rolls, 20 Ed. Ill, pt. iii, m. 19.

3 Ibid., 1 Rich. II, pt. ii, m. 35. 4 Ibid., 1 Hen. IV, pt. vii, in. 5.

■■ Ibid., 2 Hen. V, pt. ii, m. 39. * Ibid., 8 Ed. IV, pt. ii, in. 13.

7 Weavers' Ordinances, Mem. Book, i. 242.

H Dyers' Ordinances, ibid., i. 113. 9 Ibid., i. 85, 100, 107.

1,1 The card-makers demanded that the stranger should produce 'suificeant
recorde . . . be (by) letters under scle auctentyke of hys conversacion and of
hvs gude fame ', or be able to find satisfactory pledges for himself and his
deeds {Mem. Book, i. 80).

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 35

master was allowed to take an apprentice unless that apprentice
was English-born and a freeman (' nisi ille apprentices sit natus
Anglicus et liber homo '), under pain of a £2 fine.1 Further, it
was decreed that if any alien wished to set up as a coverlet-master
within York, he should pay to the city council £2 135. 4^., and
to the craft £1 6s. Sd., a total sum equivalent to £48 in modern
money.2

Though membership of the gild was insisted upon, the con-
ditions of entry were far from easy. One aim of the gild was to
guarantee good workmanship, and this could only be effected
by properly trained and experienced craftsmen : therefore
apprenticeship was one of the corner-stones of the gild system.
The would-be master must begin at the very bottom of the
ladder, and become formally apprenticed to some fully recognized
master of the trade which he wished to learn. The whole system
of apprenticeship was hedged round with detailed regulations.
The number of apprentices which a master might have at the
same time was often fixed, and the Hull weaver was not per-
mitted to take more than two youths into his charge at the
same time.3 On indenturing the apprentice, the master was to
report his transaction to the executive of the craft, enter the
name of his protege in the register, and pay for him an entrance
fee which varied from sixpence to half-a-crown, or even more.4
The apprentice then entered upon a period of training which
was fixed in almost every gild at not less than seven years. The
card-makers 5 of York declared that ' Na maistre . . . take any
apprentice or any servant in manor or fourme of apprentice . . .
for lesse terme than . . . seven yerys togyder, and that be (by)
indenture, (under) payne of xiij" . . . iiijd' ' ; and the Hull weavers
insisted that ' No mann sett up a loome wythyn hys howsse bot
if he have bene prentyse vij yere at that occupacion, under
payne of xlK (£10) ', a heavy fine if inflicted in full.6

During the seven years for which he was bound to his master,

the apprentice learned the theory and practice of his trade.

Having then reached years of discretion, and attained a fair

degree of proficiency, he could now step at once to the rank of

1 Mem. Hook, i. ioo. 2 Ibid., i. 109. 3 Lambert, op. cit., p. 20(1.

1 See York Ordinances, Mem. Book, i. 100, 113, \c. The apprenticeship
fee in the dyers' gild was /i.

' Mem. Book, i. So. '■ Lambert, op. cit., p. J05.

D 2

36 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

a master, or enter an intermediary stage as a journeyman. In
either case he was obliged to make his entry into the gild, and
pay the required fee. Should he wish to become a fully fledged
master, setting up a stock of weaving apparatus, the craft
authorities came to his premises, to ascertain if ' his werkhowse
be goode and able '} At York the searchers were generally
accompanied by a number of masters, who came down to the
candidate's workroom and examined him to see that he was
proficient, and sufficiently skilled to carry on the work of a master
craftsman. The coverlet weavers were to be satisfied, through
the investigations of their searchers, that any applicant for
admission was ' habilis et sciens ... ad operandum et occu-
pandum ut magister in artifkio '.2 The fullers of York made
a strange stipulation, based on the nature of the fullers' work.
The master fuller, in his operations, would receive large numbers
of pieces from weavers, to be fulled in his mill. He might tear
or spoil a piece in the fulling stocks, or he might even lose it.
It was necessary therefore that some security should be provided
to those who placed their wares in the fuller's hands. The craft
ordinances made provision to meet this possibility, and declared
that the would-be master should not merely be proficient in his
art, but should also prove that he possessed property to the
value of four marks, so that if he lost a cloth entrusted to him
he would have the wherewithal to make good his loss to the
owner of the piece.3

Having passed his examination, the candidate now paid his
entrance fee, two shillings at Beverley,4 but much more at York.
At the latter place the weaver, on setting up his loom, or the
dyer, on acquiring his vat, was obliged to pay £i for his ' up-
sett ' ; 5 the shearman paid only 6s. Sd.,6 and the fuller half that
sum (in addition to guaranteeing the reserve of four marks).7
When we multiply these sums by twelve, so as to convert them
into terms of modern money, it becomes evident that at the
beginning of the fifteenth century entry into the York textile
gilds was hedged about with many conditions, and barred by
heavy entrance fees, which must have presented great obstacles /

1 Lambert, op. cit., p. 205. - Mem. Hook, i. 109.

3 Ibid., i. 71.

1 Beverley Weavers' Ordinances (Ili^t. MSS. Comm.), p. 94.

5 Mem. Book, i. 243. b Ibid., i. 108. '• Ibid., i. jz.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 37

to the poorer members of the community who sought admis-
sion.

There were in the field of industry three classes of workers,
the master, the journeyman, and the apprentice. Of these only
the master enjoyed the full privileges of complete membership,
and the craft gilds were thus associations of masters rather
than associations of men. The master alone was eligible for the
offices of the gild, and he alone voted in the elections.1 But the
gild did not confine its attention to the master alone; and
affairs of the journeymen and apprentices were also regulated
in every detail. The journeyman was an inferior grade of
member, who did not pay so large an annual contribution to the
gild coffers as his employer. The master could not employ him
without the consent of the gild, and, should the journeyman
have any cause for complaint against his master, he could com-
plain to the searchers of the craft, who would take up his case
and give a decision. Thus, if a master refused to pay the proper
rate of wages, or fell into arrears with his wage payments, the
journeyman could appeal to the alderman of the gild, who
would insist upon due and complete recompense, and should
the master fail in his obligation the municipal authorities could
be called upon to make a distraint on the master's goods.2 On
the other hand, any misdemeanours on the part of the employee
were punished with marked severity, and the regulations for
journeymen were numerous. No man was to be employed
simultaneously by two masters,3 and any workman guilty of
fraudulent or faulty work was heavily punished. The dyers of
York declared that a man who did faulty work to the extent
of twelve pence was to be fined forty pence for the first offence
and half a mark for the second ; if convicted a third time, he
was to be expelled from the occupation, and forbidden to engage
in the dyeing industry henceforth.4 The journeyman's tongue
was also placed under control ; a heavy fine was inflicted upon
the Hull workmen who ' of malice make any talys contrarey to
treuth to th'entent to make discorde and debate among any of
the sayd occupacon '/' and the Beverley weavers announced

1 Lambert, op. cit., p. 205.

" Beverley Weavers' Ordinances (Hist. MSS. Comm.), p. 04.

' Mem. Book, i. 97. « Ibid., i. 114; half a mark equals '»'. SJ.

5 Lambert, op. cit., p. 206.

38 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

' that if any of the servants of the craft called a journeyman is
accused of fraud before the Keepers of Beverley or officers of
the craft, he shall serve no master of the craft unless he be
able to prove a lawful excuse '-1

The craft gilds also regulated the employment of women. We
have already noted the presence of women workers in both
urban and rural textile industries. They were in the ranks of
the freemen of York, and they appear to have formed a large
element in the weaving craft of that city, ranking both as masters
and as employees. So strong were they that in the Ulnager's
Account for the city in 1395 about one-quarter of the cloths
entered for that year as subject to the payment of ulnage and
subsidy were entered in the names of women,2 which meant
that these cloths were made either by women or by men who
were in the employment of female masters of the craft. Their
work about this time was evidently failing to give satisfaction,
or it may be that their strength in the industry was beginning
to arouse the envy of their male colleagues. Which of these
alternatives was the correct one it is impossible to state, but
we know that in 1400, when the gild underwent a thorough
spring cleaning, it was decreed that in future only those women
who had been well taught and approved by the craft officials
should be allowed to weave, lest by their poor work the women
should prejudice the craft and make it difficult to raise the
annual £10 for the Exchequer.3 In the dyeing trade4 a woman
was permitted to carry on the work for one year after the death
of her husband, after which she must either pay 20s. , the entrance
fee for herself, or allow her chief servant to take up the business
in his name as master of the craft. Hence in the list of members
we find the names of two women, one the widow, the other the
daughter, of former members. The women weavers of Beverley
were under similar control,5 and the earliest by-laws we possess
of the Hull weavers (1490) declared that ' ther shall no woman

1 Hist. MSS. Comm,, p. 94.

2 Exch. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 16. For the calculation see Mem. Book,
intro., p. xxvii.

3 Mem. Book, p. 243. This clause may have aimed at the prevention of
cheap female labour. The same trouble arose in Bristol during the fifteenth
century. See Little Red Book of Bristol, ii. 127.

4 Mem. Book, i. 1 14.

5 Hist. MSS. COmm., p. 04.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 39

worke in any warke concernyng this occupacon within the
towne of Hull, upon payn of xT '*

In the actual workaday life of the members, the power of
the gild was constantly asserted. Work on Sundays and feast
days was forbidden.2 Many crafts regulated the hours of labour,
and forbade night work, as in the case of the York coverlet
weavers, who were permitted to weave only so long as the light
of day was reasonably strong enough to allow them to ply the
shuttle with ease.3 The gild stated the fees which masters were
to demand for fulling cloths, and other similar charges.4 At the
same time wage-rates were often fixed. In 1405 the shearmen
of York established a maximum daily wage for their employees,5
with fines to be levied on such as paid more than this sum ;
and in 1400 the weavers drew up a piece-rate list for journeymen
weavers.6

The gild aimed at inducing honest relations between the
various members of the craft, and for this purpose made numerous
decrees to prevent any member from enriching himself unfairly
at the expense of his fellows. Masters were forbidden to attempt
to entice any apprentice or journeyman to leave his master before
his full term of service had been accomplished, and offences of
this character met with strong condemnation.7 Similarly, any
attempt to entice customers, or to forestall a rival in obtaining
orders, was forbidden, as being contrary to the principles of fair
trade.8 The same idea lay at the bottom of the prohibition of
' hawking ' or ' peddling '. Gildsmen were forbidden to go from
house to house seeking customers ; they were to confine them-
selves to the proper market accommodation provided for them,
and were not to attempt to push the sale of their wares by

1 Lambert, op. cit., p. 207.

• Mem. Book, Shearmen, i. 107 ; Fullers, i. 71.

3 Ibid., i. 85.

4 Ibid., i. 71. One penny per cloth for fulling, twopence for fulling and
burling. ■"■ Ibid., i. 107.

" Ibid., i. 244. The list was as follows : For weaving 8 ells or less, 141/. ;
0-10 ells, \(ul. ; 11 ells, iM. ; 12 ells, 2od. ; 15 ells, 2s. 4</. ; 14 ells, zs. S</.
7 See Ordinances, passim.

* Ibid., i. 113— 14. The dyers forbade any master to send his servants
out of the city to bring in wool or cloth, or to meet strangers coming to York
with wool or cloth to be dyed. Further, no master was by gilts or presents
to entice the customer of another dyer to transfer his custom to himself.
Such practices were regarded as violations of equality of opportunity and fair
trade.

40 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

going ' thurgh the citee ' or in streets and lanes ' fra house to
house in maner of hauking '.*

From fair trade to honest workmanship was but a short step,
and the gild laid a heavy hand upon those whose work did not
fulfil the required standard of quality. The weaver who put
bad or insufficient material into his piece, or who wove it faultily,
the fuller who lost or damaged the cloth in fulling, the shearman
who was careless in finishing the fabric, the dyer who used
improper materials for dyeing, all were liable to a heavy fine,
and occasionally to the confiscation of the offending material.
With the coverlet weavers of York the punishment for bad
workmanship was especially severe. For the first offence the
coverlets were confiscated, and if a master repeatedly trans-
gressed he came under the special supervision of the searchers
as an inefficient weaver. By them he was warned and admo-
nished to improve the quality of his work, but if it was eventually
found that he was quite incapable of improvement, his loom
was confiscated, and he was forbidden to continue in that occu-
pation.2

For the effectual administration of these and other branches
of gild activity, certain officials, forming an executive, were
necessary. The government of the weavers' gild at York and
Beverley was in the hands of an alderman, who presided over
the craft, stewards or bailiffs, who assisted him, and a beadle or
summoner.3 These men were elected annually by the whole
body of master craftsmen, gathered together in the Prime Gild
or annual general meeting. The alderman acted as judge on
all matters relating to gild ordinances and their infringement,
and was far more than a figurehead. He had the power to
summon special meetings when any matter of importance called
for immediate decision, and those who disregarded his summons
to attend were fined the customary amount in wax or money.
All masters were eligible for election to the office, and any one
refusing to take office when elected incurred the displeasure of
the craft, and was subject to a heavy fine. At the same time it
was necessary that any person elected to office should know all
the details of the trade, and be a fully qualified craftsman, and
the weavers of York in 1400 declared therefore that no man

1 Card-makers' Ordinances, Mem. Book, i. Si.

- Ibid., i. H(,. ■' Hist. MSS. Comm., p. 04.

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 41

should be elected, unless he was known to be just and faithful,
and also expert and perfect in his craft.1 The weavers' gild
of York was unique amongst the textile craft organizations of
that city, in that it was founded by royal charter. The other
gilds were based only on municipal sanction, and were much
more directly subservient than the weavers to the municipality.
In these gilds, therefore, there was no alderman at the head of
affairs. The mayor of the city seems to have taken his place,
and to have discharged most of the functions which fell to the
lot of the alderman of the weavers. In the ordinances and lists
of members of the shearmen, coverlet weavers, dyers, &c, of
York there is no mention of the alderman and no provision
for his election. In his place stands the mayor, the head of the
city and also of the craft gild.

The most energetic members of the gild executive were the
searchers, two or four in number, who were appointed to make
periodical inspection of all workrooms, and by their vigilance
enforce the ordinances of the fraternity. The searchers, when
elected, took an oath of faithful service before the city magis-
trates, and their names were entered in the municipal records.2
They then went forth on their task as industrial policemen,
supervising the ' upsett ' of new masters, the employment and
payment of journeymen, the taking of strangers and apprentices,
the quality of the work done, and the method of disposing of
the finished article. They were also financial agents of the
society, and collected all levies and fines ; one of the chief
functions of the searchers in the weavers' craft of York was the
gathering of the annual farm of £10, and this was probably the
most difficult part of their work.3 In nearly all the York gilds
the searchers were accompanied in their visitation by an equal
number of masters, who were elected to assist and supervise
them in the discharge of their duties. Once a week these men
made a systematic tour of all the workrooms and shops under
their control. When any fault or bad work was discovered,

1 Mem. Hook, i. 242.

- Minute Book of Beverley Corporation (Hist. MSS. Comm.), p. 113 : ' Supcr-
visores : Iohanncs Baylcdon ft Willclmus Belasys clecti sunt scrutatores ft
supervisorcs artis textorum pro anno futuro ft iurati sunt ' (1432).

:1 Mem. Book, i. 242-3. In the collection of this money the searchers could
briny pressure to bear on the weaver, and as a last resort could distrain cm
his loom and weaving utensils.

42 THE INFANCY OF THE chap.

the goods were at once confiscated (provided they belonged to
the culprit) and the offender taken before the mayor, to receive
correction and to be mulcted of the fine fixed in the craft ordi-
nances. Part of the fine was taken by the city and part passed
into the hands of the searcher, either to pay his wages or to
meet the various expenses incurred by the gild.1

In his visitations the searcher was protected from insult and
assault at the hands of the craftsman, and every gild imposed
severe penalties upon those who refused admission to the searcher
or behaved obstinately towards any members of the gild execu-
tive. On the other hand, the officials of the gild were by no
means immune from control, or absolute in their power over the
brotherhood. Any laxity or oppression in the discharge of their
duties was severely punished, and those in charge of the gild's
finances were held responsible at the end of their term of office
for any arrears of payments or financial mismanagement.

In the preceding paragraphs we have observed that the
municipal authority played a large part in the affairs of the gild.
This was natural, for the gilds required sanction and recognition
for their organization, such as would enable them to enforce
their decrees. It would be useless for the weavers to draw up
elaborate orders for the regulation of their trade, unless they
had behind them the power to enforce their wishes upon every
weaver in the community. From two sources could this power
be drawn. The first was the King, who had granted the charters
to some gilds during the twelfth century, and was frequently
approached to grant new charters or renew the existing ones.
Secondly, the craft might solicit the aid of the governing body
of the town in wmich it was situated, and seek municipal assis-
tance in discharging the duties for which it had been established.
This course was necessary, even in the case of gilds which had
been established under royal charter, and the York weavers,
armed though they were with the sanction of kings, were also

1 See Ordinances, passim (Mem. Book). Cases of searchers' work are to
be found in the Beverley Corporation Books (Hist. MSS. Comm.). Bad Work,
1 6 Hen. VI. ' Ioh. Briggehous, webster, pro defectu artiticii sui invento
in medietate alterius panni lanei Aliciae Marshall. . . . Et fullones noluerunt
operare dictum pannum quia non erat habilis : ideo ipse Ioh. Burgeys posuit
dictum pannum ad unum fullonem patriae in deceptionem et defraudationem
communis populi ' (p. 119). Insolence, 10 Hen. VI. Same man, Brighouse,
' pro rebellione et iniusta gubernatione sua versus aldermannum ', lined
3s. 4</. to city, and 3s. j\d . to craft (p. 11.?).

i WOOLLEN INDUSTRY IN YORKSHIRE 43

dependent upon the authorities of their eity. Further, a study
of the ordinances of many of the York gilds leads one to the
strong conviction that many gilds were the actual creation of
the town authorities.1 Under these circumstances, the munici-
pality exercised powerful control, legislative, judicial, and
financial, over the gild. No gild decrees possessed any force
until they had received the sanction of the mayor and his
colleagues.2 Should a revision of the craft ordinances be required
it might be effected by the gild, but the new rules must then be
submitted for the approval and endorsement of the municipal
authorities. At the same time the town council, if it felt the
need for such revision, might take the initiative and draw up
amendments, which were then submitted to the gild for its
assent and consent. Nor was this all, for the civic authority
had power of itself to issue regulations for the general control
of the whole industrial population or for the guidance of any
one section. This was part of its economic function, and stood
alongside the issue of by-laws concerning sanitation, the fixing
of prices in the assize of bread, &c. Hence the city frequently
made ordinances which applied to craftsmen as a whole, or to
some particular craft, and which might supersede the gild by-
laws, thus removing friction between divergent interests and
shaping a unified municipal economic policy.

In the enforcement of its decrees and the infliction of punish-
ment upon offenders the gild was dependent upon the municipal
courts. The alderman of the weavers' gild had a certain judicial
power, but it was frequently necessary to appeal to the judicial

1 The town council was responsible for the general, social, and economic
welfare of the community. In the city were many industries, some of which
had voluntarily formed themselves into gilds, presumably with beneficial
results. For those occupations which still remained unorganized the city
must act as guide. The city authorities therefore took the initiative, called
the craftsmen together, and led them to the drafting of ordinances, the
appointment of searchers, anil other steps necessarv for the establishment of
a gild. There is little direct evidence to support this view, but the whole
tone of many gild ordinances convinces one that these gilds were brought into
existence in this manner.

1 The weavers' ordinances at Beverley were issued ' with the assent of
the community of the town ' [Hist. MSS. Comm., p. Qj). Weavers' ordinances
at Hull (1400) were 'made amongst themselves, ratified ami confirmed by
the mayor, with the consent and agreement of all his brother aldermen
(Lambert, op. cit., p. 204). Weavers' ordinances at York were put into opera-
tion ' with the approval and consent of all the weavers, by the licence, strength,
and virtue of the royal charters, and by the licence and assistance of the
mayor and sheritt ' (Mem. Honk, i. 242).

44 INFANCY OF THE WOOLLEN INDUSTRY

head of the city for moral support. In return for this and
other favours, the municipality claimed a large measure of
financial control over the craft gild. From industry, individual
and organized, the city coffers received a considerable income.
In Beverley the weaver paid a farthing for every four cloths he
wove, and the fuller paid a similar amount for every two cloths
fulled ; twopence was charged on the sale of each sack of wool,
and a penny on each whole cloth sold.1 Further, the city claimed
a portion of all fees and fines paid by the gildsmen. In Beverley
one-half of almost every fine inflicted by the gild went into the
municipal purse, and the weaver of deceitful cloth, to quote one
instance only, forfeited 3s. 4^. to the gild and the same sum to
the town.2 At York the proportion varied. The weavers' fines
were allocated to the fund for paying the annual farm to the
Exchequer, but in all the other gilds the municipal treasury
claimed its share of the spoils. In some instances one-half the
fine went to the ' communitas civitatis Ebor.', or, as it was
expressed in some of the ordinances, to the ' chaumbre de
counseil sur le pount de Use en Everwyk'.3 In the coverlet
weavers' and a few other crafts the city's claim was stronger,
and in these cases no less than two-thirds of the various fines
and payments passed into the hands of the municipality.4

Such was the gild life under which the manufacture of cloth
was carried on in the urban centres about 1400. In each large
town were these craft organizations, more or less highly developed,
concerning themselves with the manifold activities of town life,
social and religious as well as economic, and yet in all things
subject to the general supervision of the municipal authorities.
Whether the above is a fair picture of the gilds in their prime
one cannot say, because of the lack of evidence of an earlier
date. Before many decades had passed, the industry had begun
to decline in the towns. Overtaxed and over-regulated, the
weavers of York and Beverley were unable to withstand the
competition which came from the rural areas, and the centre of
gravity in the industry passed westward. In that day the fate
of the gilds was sealed, and by 1600 their importance was a thing
of the past. But the story of that decline from power must be
left to the next chapter.

' Beverley Town Documents (Selden Soc), xiv. 2. 2 Ibid., p. 33.

a Mem. Hook, i. 97. * Ibid., 1. 85".

CHAPTER II

DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE FIFTEENTH
AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES

The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries constitute an epoch of
fundamental changes in the history of mankind. The discovery
of new continents and the readjustments in social life, politics,
religion, &c, were accompanied by the decay of much which
had been all-important in the life of preceding centuries. Men
were finding new worlds for themselves, and abandoning many
of their old forms and systems.

In the sphere of English industry and commerce the same
movements can be traced, and economic society underwent
radical transformations. It is generally agreed that the fifteenth
century was one of great expansion in the cloth industry.1 The
developments of the previous century were no whit abated, and
as the manufacture spread over wider areas the ' makeng of
cloth ' became, in the words of the House of Commons, ' the
grettcst occupacon and lyving of the poore people of the land \2
The policy of the government, from 1450 onward, was strongly
protectionist, and efforts were made to foster native industries.
In 1463 the importation of woollen caps, woollen cloth, and
other manufactures was forbidden,3 and scales of export duties
were so framed as to encourage the shipping of cloth rather than
of wool.4 These efforts to keep the raw material in the country
were partly successful, for in spite of the increasing output of
wool an actually smaller quantity passed over to the looms of
the Continent. The subsidy on wool exported to Calais amounted
in 1348 to £(>8,ooo ; in 1448 it had sunk to £i2,ooo,5 and the
average for the years 1428-61 was only about £31, 000. 6 The

1 See Abram, Social England in the Fifteenth Century (1909), chap. i. Cun-
ningham says that the cloth industry and the rise of the native merchant
1 lass were the only two bright spots in an otherwise gloomy century ("p. cit.,

- l\'ot. Pari., v. 274, quoted by Abram, op. cit., p. 2.

1 ; Ed. IV, c. 4. Renewed and made permanent bv 4 Ed. IV, c. 1.

4 Ashley, op. cit., ii. 226. ■"• Cunningham, op. cit., i. 4^4 n.

" J. II. Ramsay, Lancaster and York, ii. 26- .

46 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

day of the great wool exporters was nearly at an end, and the
30,000 sacks exported annually in the fourteenth century
dwindled to less than 9,000 before 1500, and to under 5,000 by
the death of Henry VIII.1

Meanwhile the export of English cloth grew rapidly. In the
fourteenth century English pieces had gone to Germany,
Gascony, Spain, Portugal, and the Low Countries,2 but the
total export, about 1350, was not more than 5,000 pieces per
annum.3 This number had risen by 1509 to more than 84,000,*
and during the sixteenth century the amount increased still
more, as Hansards, Merchant Adventurers, and Eastland Mer-
chants carried English cloths into the very heart of Europe, to
places which had formerly been the home of the industry. For
this expansion of the English manufacture had helped to bring
distress and decay on the foreign cloth-makers. Bruges, which
in the thirteenth century had boasted its 40,000 looms, stood,
at the end of the fifteenth, desolate and deserted. The 4.000
textile workers of Ypres (1408) had shrunk by i486 to a mere
handful, and the whole industry of the Low Countries had
suffered the ' misery of a century of slow death-— a misery on
which the English weaver throve and fattened '.°

With the growth of manufacture and the coming of ' high
commerce ', the mediaeval economic system was strained till it
eventually broke. The expansion in the cloth trade called for
a great increase in production, but the gild-ridden urban industry
was incapable of meeting the growing demand. Foreign trade
required an elasticity and enterprise such as were not to be
found under the gilds. The gildsman who wished to increase
his output found his path bestrewn with all manner of gild
regulations, restrictions, and financial burdens, which increased
the cost of production as well as the cost of living. Hence the
urban industry was ill-equipped to face the competition of the
manufacturies already well established in the rural areas and

1 Mrs. J. R. Green, Town Life in the Fifteenth Century, i. 51.

- Close Rolls, 22 Ed. Ill, pt. i, m. 8. 3 Ashley, op. cit., 1. ii. 225.

4 Mrs. Green, op. cit., i. 51. The Hansards exported 4,464 pieces in 1422, and
21,389 in 1500 (Schanz, Englischc llundclspolitik, ii. 28, quoted by Ashley,
op. cit., 1. ii. 225-6).

5 Mrs. Green, op. cit., i. 65-6. The English competition was only a small
cause of the Belgian decline ; but England reaped a great amount of benefit
therefrom.

n FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 47

smaller towns. In these places there were few industrial laws
to fetter the weaver's activities ; the ' rates were low ', and the
cost of living below that of the town. Here also was a supply
of unemployed labour, turned adrift by the economic upheavals
of the sixteenth century. All these conditions were favourable
for the production of cloth in increasing quantities at a com-
paratively cheap rate.

Such were the forces at work during the two centuries under
consideration. We see the results, firstly in the decline of York
and Beverley as industrial centres, and secondly in the outburst
of industrial life in the West Riding.

(a) Decline of the Textile Industry in Beverley and York

One of the most tragic features in the history of these centuries
is the decay in the economic life of the two towns within whose
walls the industry of the Middle Ages had been fostered. It is
impossible to fix a date at which the decadence began. The
Black Death shook their prosperity for a time, but the rest of
the county suffered equally. The Wars of the Roses brought
misfortune on the towns, and by 1470 the competition from the
West Riding had become severe. Hence, before the accession
of Henry VII the decline was far advanced, and the complaints
of the townsmen were frequent and serious. A similar develop-
ment was taking place in many other towns which had built
up a gild-controlled textile industry, and the history of York
and Beverley excellently illustrates the interplay of economic,
religious, and municipal influences on the textile trade.

York suffered heavily during the Wars of the Roses, when ' for
their trcuth unto ther Souverain Lord (Henry VI), such as
abode in York was robbid, spolid, . . . and soo extremely cm-
pouverishered that few of them was ever after of power to
diffend themselves'.1 The weavers of York at this time were in a
sorry plight, for the drift away from the city seems to have been
great. The yearly fee of £10 weighed heavily on those who
remained, and in 1478 they were ' granted pardon ', on account
of their poverty, of half the annual contribution.- When

1 Petition from the York City Council to Henry VII, [485 (Davies, Records
of the City of York in the Fifteenth Centurv, p. jqi).
' Patent Rolls, 18 Ed. IV, pt. li, m. 12.

48 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

Henry VII came to the throne the poverty of the gild was
again taken into consideration ; the greater part of the fee-
farm was remitted, and the mayor made chief Serjeant-at-
Arms to the King, with a salary to enable him to bear the
expenses of his office.1 At the same time the weavers were
released for the time being from their annual payment, and
allowed to have their ' gild, customs, and liberties without
accompt in the same way as citizens in other cities do '. Their
charter was renewed once more, with the proviso that all weavers
without the city should be exempted from contributing anything
to the gild coffers.2 The reason for this extensive grant was
specifically stated to be 'on account of the poverty and distress
of the said weavers, which is so great that if they were compelled
to pay the . . . farm, they would be obliged to remove from the
city, and dwell elsewhere '.

These concessions appear to have had little effect in checking
the decline which had already set in. Wolsey strove hard to
bring back the vigour and energy of former days by obtaining
Letters Patent which granted the city certain privileges in
the exportation of northern wool and wool-fells. This favour
allowed the cheaper wools of the northern parts of Yorkshire
to be exported from York instead of Newcastle, as formerly.3
' By reason therof the seid cityzens dyd dayly encresse in
gettyng of goods, as long as they contynued suche Shyppynge,
the whych graunte so opteyned . . . was the hyghest and most
especyall comodytye and Jewell that ever came to the foreseid
Citye for the p'farrement and enrychyng of the Cytizcns therof,
and also great refresshyng to all the Cuntrey abowte the same.' 4
The great ' Jewell ' did not, however, spread its radiance upon
the clothiers of the county, who soon complained that they
could get no wool, because of the vigour with which the city
merchants were exporting the raw material. The protests of
York were disregarded, and an Act, passed in the same year as

1 Materials for a Histnrv of Henrv VII (Rolls Series), i. 462.

2 Ibid.

3 By the Act 3 Ed. IV, c. 1, the export of wool was forbidden except to Calais.
But the fleeces of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmoreland, Richmond-
shire, and Northallertonshire might be exported from Newcastle to any part.
By the Letters Patent given to York that city was given equal freedom to
export.

1 Cottonian MSS. (Brit. Mus.), Titus B. i, f. 279, June 24, 1526.

ii FIFrEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 49

Wolsey's downfall (1529), annulled the privilege, and deprived
the river port of its licence to export.1 Indeed, if we may
believe the letter to Wolsey, the last state was infinitely worse
than the first, for prior to the grant a considerable trade in lead
had been carried on by the men of York. When the wool
licence was issued, declared the mayor, ' We were so gladde
thereof that we did lytell regarde our old commodytye, in bying
of leadc. And at that tyme, the rich marchaunts of London gatt
the treat of lead as we hadde before . . . and hath inhaunced yt
to so hygh a pryce That we canne gett but lytell of yt ' ; 2 and
indeed the trade in lead was partly lost to the city.

York had fallen upon evil days, but it was not the only
sufferer. The greatness of Beverley had already vanished, and
much of its economic glory departed. The cloths for which it
had been famed in the thirteenth century were now unknown,
and Leland, writing in the reign of Henry VIII, remarked that
' there was much goode clothe makyng at Beverle, but that is
now much decayed '. An Act of 1535 3 declared that there
were many houses in ' greate ruine and decaye, and specially
in the pryncipalle and chief stretes there, in which . . . stretes,
in tymes passid, have bene beautifull dwellyng howses . . . well
inhabyted, whyche at thys daye moche parte therof ys desolate
and void groundys, with pittys, sellers, and vaultes lying open
and uncoveryd, very perilous for people who go by in the night '.
A later document4 (1599) spoke of the town as being 'very
poore and greatlic depopulated, insomuche as there are in the
same fower hundred tenements and dwelling houses utterly
decay'd and uninhabited, besides so great a nomber of poore
and ncedie people altogether unhablc so to be ymployed anie
waie to gett their own lyvinge (that) the towne is constrayned
for the reliefc of them yearly to disburse one hundreth and fyve
pound, besides the chardge of brynging upp and keepinge of
fowcr-score orphans at knytting, spynning, and other workes '.
Similar complaints were made during the sixteenth century con-
cerning Malton, Scarborough, Pontefract, Hull, and most of the
older towns throughout the county.5

1 21 Hen. VIII, c. 17. 2 Cottonian MSS., Titus B. i, f. 270.

' j'i Hen. VIII, c. 1 ; Act concerning many towns, including Beverley.

1 Exemption from payment of all tenths and fifteenths ; quoted in Poulson,
•'/'. cit., p. 338. •• See statutes 1- Hen. VIII, c. 1 ; 52 Hen. VIII, c. 18.

1526.12 K

50 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

It would be futile to attempt to explain this decay of town
life in the textile centres as being due to any one cause. Many
forces were at work, and we must confine ourselves to the most
powerful of these varied and far-reaching influences.1

First came the burden of gild demands. Industry had arrived V
at that stage where greater freedom was essential to further
growth, but the gilds, instead of realizing this necessity, clung
more closely to their old privileges, and attempted to make
themselves even more exclusive than before. Their ordinances
were marked by greater insistence on conditions of membership
and citizenship. The privileges of the craft must not be watered
down by being distributed amongst too great a number, and at
the same time the growth of a class of interlopers must be
prevented. Hence town or gild restated with growing emphasis
the conditions of labour and the gild monopoly over industrial
life. The necessity for being a burgess was especially reiterated.
In the past the craftsman who did not wish to become a burgess
had paid various penalties, and these fines were now raised all
round. The non-burgess weaver of Beverley had his payments
increased in 1445, and again ten years later,2 whilst in 1460
the municipal authorities declared, 'Every person of every craft
of the town (Beverley) being a brother of the same crafts must
be a burgess from this day forth \3 The position of aliens was
becoming more difficult and unpleasant. In some gilds only
English-born youths could be taken into apprenticeship, and
the charges for the admission of adult aliens into the fraternities
were forced higher and higher.

Details of internal organization were also receiving the closest
attention.4 The large number of closely allied occupations made
demarcation disputes frequent and bitter. As the merchandizing
organizations grew more powerful, the functions of the crafts-
men were rigorously confined to manufacture. Between the
making of cloth, clothes, and other articles composed of cloth,
and the selling of these goods, there were at least six classes of

1 For documents illustrating this matter, see Bland, Brown, and Tawncy,
op. cit., pp. 270 et seq. ■ Selden Soc, xiv, intro., p. li.

3 Beverley Town Documents (Hist. MSS. Comm.), p. 46.

1 In 1493 the Beverley authorities declared that no man should take up
any occupation, except that of which ' he is brother withall, and in clothing ',
i.e. in livery (Selden Soc, xiv. 60).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 51

men — textile workers, tailors, glovers, drapers, mercers, and
merchants — and the growing jealousy with which each class
guarded its sphere of control can be seen throughout the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries. In 1561, for instance, it was decreed
that ' No tailor, walker, or dyer within this towne of Beverley
. . . shall bye no maner of wullen clothe or clothes to th'intent
to selle againe by holesaile or retaile, by yards or otherwyse,
under payne for every peace ... to forfett xx8' to the drapers
of the town ,.1 Specialization was pushed to extreme lengths,
a development which was sure to fetter the growth of the industry
as a whole.

The textile gilds began to suffer from over-legislation, either
from the multiplication of their ordinances or from decrees
and statutes issued by the municipality or the State. Both the
manufacture and sale of cloth were subjected to increasingly
minute regulation, and the liberty of the producer was more
than ever curtailed. The weights and dimensions of cloths were
fixed, and all pieces had to be scaled before exposure for sale.2
In 1561 the coverlet weavers of York were forbidden to use
more than one loom,3 and were warned against using certain
kinds of yarn. The number of prohibitions grew apace, and so
numerous did the by-laws of the weavers' fraternity become
that an early seventeenth-century set of ordinances contained
over 70 clauses.4 In the marketing of wares all manner of
stipulations were laid down, special attention being given to the
stranger and the alien. Here, as elsewhere, the gildsmen were
unable to abandon their parochial outlook for one which would
be national in its scope. The men of Kendal and other parts
of England were still regarded as being little better than the
alien.

The urban industry was over-regulated ; it was also over-
burdened with financial demands. The gild levies 5 and exac-
tions alone were heavy ; at York the fee-farm was a perpetual
nightmare to the weavers, who, as the York municipal records
declare (1561), ' beyng overchardged with the said yearly pay-

1 Ibid., p. 9Q. 2 York Minute Hooks, ix, f. u a (21 Hen. VII).

* Ibid., xx. f. 53 b.

' Ordinances of Weavers' Company (1007 and 1O20) in Gildhall, York.

• In 141S the entrance fee for the weavers' L;ild of Heverlcy was in< reased
from 2.S-. to $s. 4<t. (Selden Soc., vol. xiv. p. Ii).

I'. _'

52 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

ment, have fled the most part forth of the said citie, inhabytyng
in the country to the same nighe adjoynynge '-1 Added to this
was the load of municipal and national taxation. The former
tended to increase, and the frequent calls for tenths and
fifteenths were a severe strain on the resources of the towns-
men.

The chief burdens of the gilds were therefore extreme exclusive-
ness, excessive regulation, and heavy taxation. These might
have been borne with equanimity had town life guaranteed in
return peace and security. But from 1381 onwards, for at least
two centuries, the Yorkshire towns were torn with civic faction '"'
and strife. There were quarrels in the council, there was enmity
between those within the government and those without.
Disaffection often gave birth to disturbances, in which the gilds-
men played a prominent part, and occasionally the control of
the city passed for a time into the hands of the craftsmen. In
1493 the Governors of Beverley, formerly the Keepers, were
compelled to be liverymen of the crafts, just as their predecessors
had been elected from men nominated by the crafts.2 In York
the gilds enjoyed a short spell of power in municipal affairs,
before they finally sank into insignificance in the sixteenth
century. Here, after the Wars of the Roses, the members of the
various trades were ordered by Edward IV to name two alder-
men from whom the council would elect a mayor ; and later
they were commanded to gather together to choose a mayor
from among the aldermen.3 These elections gave rise to great
tumults, in which economics and local politics were inter-
mingled, and the voteless journeymen expressed their opinion
of their own conditions and of the general management of the
city. Constant disturbances led to the charter of 1517, in
which the control of York was placed in the hands of a mayor,
sheriffs, aldermen, and a Common Council. This last body was
composed of two members chosen from each of the thirteen
principal crafts, and one from each of the fifteen smaller frater-
nities. These men, along with one searcher from each gild,

1 York Minute Books, xxiii, f. 14 b, April iq, 1561.

« Scldcn Soc, vol. xiv, p. xxxv. Sec also Beverley Corp. MSS. {Hist. MSS.
Contm.), p. 54.

' M. Sellers, ' York in the Sixteenth Century ', English Historical Review,
xvi. _-7t>.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 53

formed a council of nomination which chose annually three
aldermen, one of whom was then elected mayor by the sheriffs
and other aldermen. This constitution, with some later re-
adjustments, continued throughout the century, but failed to
remove the causes of decay and discontent. Mayor and council
fulfilled the ceremonial part of their functions with great eclat.
Receptions, lavish displays of hospitality, the festivities of the
Council of the North, venison feasts, and fish dinners made
York proverbial for its good cheer. And all the time the com-
monalty watched its industry taking wings westward beyond
Micklegate Bar. Anger smouldered long, burst into flames,
and died away, having achieved very little.1 Remonstrances
were of no avail, and it was useless to appeal to the heads of
the town, who were, as one vexed soul complained, 4 more mete
to drive pigges to the feylde than to be Justices of the Peace \2
There was evidently no hope of regeneration from the local
authorities, who were themselves interested in the feast, the
pageant, and the ancien regime.

Other causes contributed to the decay of town life in York-
shire. Owing to some negligence the condition of the Ouse
had become unsatisfactory and the stream was practically un-
navigable. Steps were taken, however, in the early 'thirties of
the sixteenth century for the removal of the weirs, shallows, &c,
and the water-course was greatly improved.3 Beverley seems
to have been injured by the migration of its merchants to Hull,
this port being a much more convenient mercantile centre.4
The Reformation was not without its economic consequences. .
It affected town and country alike, and York and Beverley
suffered considerably, since they were ecclesiastical as well as
industrial centres. The dissolution of the ' Mynster of Beverley,
whyche before the dissolution thereof was invested with great
lands and possessions, whereby many religious persons, in-
habitants and poore people of the saide towne have bene mayn-
tayned and relieved ' was given by contemporaries as one of the
chief causes of the decay of that town."' At York the dissolution

1 English Historical Review, xvi. 296. 2 Ibid., p. 283.

3 State Papers, Henry VIII, vol. x, p. 24? ; and statute, 23 Hen. VIII.
c. 18.

* See Poulson, Beverlac, p. 338, in which Beverley mourns loss of staple.
•'• Ibid., pp. 3.iS-<>.

54 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

of the monasteries and religious gilds, and the confiscation of
such craft gild property as was held for religious purposes,
meant a great overthrow of charitable and religious life. The
monasteries had a firm hold upon the rural life of Yorkshire,
and the gilds played an equally important part in urban life ;
hence the actions of Henry VIII and Protector Somerset tore
up by the roots two very important growths. Part of the gild
money was to be spent in keeping up three hospitals,1 as places
' where the poore could be set on worke ', but in spite of this
provision there were large gaps in the charitable institutions
of the city, as well as in its round of religious observance.

Faced with these handicaps, York and Beverley attempted
to retain their places as cloth-making centres. Had there been
no rival, free from such defects, ready to snatch away the
industrial prosperity from the cities, the faults indicated above
might not have had any serious effect on the welfare of the
craftsmen. But the rival was there in the field at the beginning
of the fifteenth century, and in the struggle which ensued during
the next 150 years the circumstances were favourable in almost
every respect to the West Riding clothiers. On the one hand
was an industry burdened with financial levies, with all skilled
enterprise and progress checked by the craft ordinances, indus-
trial legislation, and the detailed system of inspection, with
prices and costs of production comparatively high, and with
local government in a state of almost constant chaos. On the
other hand was an industry free as yet from strict regulation or
heavy financial burdens, and with the cost of living and work-
ing expenses low. In such circumstances it was inevitable that
the rural districts and small towns of the West Riding should
triumph, and when the struggle really set in the old urban
industries could offer no successful resistance. The whole
situation is admirably described by a York writer, who was
reporting on the state of trade in that city in 1561 :

' The cause of the decay of the . . . weavers and loomes for
woollen (cloth) within the sayd cite as I doe understand and

1 Sellers. English Historical Review, xvi. 287. The Chantry Commissioners
in their report on York stated that they found only twenty in place of thirty-six
in the College of Vicars Choral, ' th' occasion whereof is by reason of decaye
of landes and revenues of the Cytie of York, beyng sore in ruyne and decaye '.
Surtecs Soc, vol. xci, pp. 25—6.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 55

learnc is the lak of cloth makyng in the sayd cite as was in old
tyme accustomed, whiche is nowe encreased and used in the
townes of Halyfax, Leedes, and Wakefield, for that not only the
comodytie of the water-mylnes is ther nigh at hande, but also
the poore folke as speynners, carders, and other necessary work-
folkes for the sayd webbyng, may ther bcsydc ther hand labor,
have rye, fyre, and other releif good cheape, which is in this
citic very deare and wantyng.' l

This vast economic change was not carried out without much
strenuous opposition from those who were being injured thereby.
The most famous instance of such resistance was the apparently
successful attempt of the coverlet weavers of York to retain
for themselves the monopoly of that branch of the textile manu-
facture. The weaving of coverlets for beds had long been an
important branch of the York industry, but, although the
weavers of the city claimed a monopoly of the trade, coverlet
weavers were to be found in many places throughout the West
Riding at the time of the Poll Tax Returns.2 By the middle
of the sixteenth century the competition of the outsider had
grown so strong that it became necessary for the men of York
to take steps in self-preservation. The most effective plan was
to get the protection of Parliament, which would establish the
citizens in the sole enjoyment of the manufacture. After con-
siderable agitation the desired statute was obtained in the
session of 1542-3.3 The Act so fully describes the whole situation
that it is worthy of quotation at some length :

' Whereas the City of York, being one of the most ancient
and greatest cities within the Realm of England, afore this time
hath been maintained and upholden by divers and sundry
handicrafts . . . and most principally by making and weaving
of coverlets and coverings for beds, and thereby a great number
of the inhabitants and poor people of the said city, suburbs
thereof, and other places within the County of York have been
daily set on work in spinning, carding, dyeing, weaving, and
otherwise, to the great comodity of the inhabitants and poor
people, . . . having thereby honest livings, and not made else-
where in any part of the county. For the true, substantial and

1 York Corporation Minute Books, xxiii, f. 20 a, June 8, 1561.

- Coverlet weavers are also referred to as chaloners and tapiters. From
the figures given below it will be seen that they made small pieces about the
size of the present-day quilt or sheet.

3 Statute 34-5 Hen'. Y 1 1 1 , c. 10.

56 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

perfect making thereof, many good and beneficial ordinances
and orders were devised and made, as well for the good quality
... as concerning the length and breadth of them.1 . . . And
forasmuch as the same coverlets and coverings were well and
substantially made and wrought, the King's subjects of divers
parts of the realm and also strangers from foreign realms, know-
ing the goodness of them, were very desirous to have and buy
them. . . . But^ now of late, divers and sundry evil-disposed
persons, apprentices not expert in the same occupation, with-
drawing themselves out of the said city of York into the county
. . . and other places thereabouts, and also divers other persons
inhabiting in villages and towns within the said county and
nigh to the same, intermeddling with the craft and occupation,
having little experience therein, not being bound to the said
rules and ordinances, do daily make coverlets and coverings,
neither of good stuffs nor of good assize, length or breadth, and
for the utterance of the same use daily the craft and subtilty
of hawking abroad in the country to villages and to men's
houses, putting the same naughty ware to sale secretly, not only
to the great impoverishing of the inhabitants of the said city
and to the great deceit of the King's true and faithful subjects
buying the . . . coverlets, to the great defaming and slandering
of the said handicraft, but also to the utter decay of the same,
if remedy the sooner herein be not provided.'

This statement of the grievance constituted the preamble of
the Act. Stripped of its legal verbiage, it meant that the trade
of the city weavers was being sapped by men who had always
lived, or had recently gone to live, outside the walls and
immediate neighbourhood of York. The mention of the ex-
apprentice renegades indicates the occurrence of what is men-
tioned in other similar statutes, namely that ' weavers and
workmen of clothiers, when they have been trained up in the
trade of cloth-making and weaving three or four years, do
forsake their masters, and do become clothiers and occupiers for
themselves, without skill, stock, or knowledge, to the great
slander of true cloth-making '.2 In the hands of these upstarts,
whose dignity did not scorn an occasional hawking of their
produce, the fame of the Yorkshire coverlets was being dragged
in the mire — at least, so said the men of York.

1 Best coverlets were 3 yds. by 2 J yds. ; second grade, 3 yds. by 2 yds.
third quality, 2$ yds. by 1 ; yds.

2 Statute 4-5 Philip and Mary, c. 11.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 57

For remedy against this outrage on law, order, and industrial
honesty it was decreed by the statute that

' No manner of persons dwelling . . . within the said county ot
York or nigh unto the same, shall . . . make any coverlets or
coverings, to be put to sale, unless such persons be inhabiting . . .
within the city of York or within the suburbs of the same, upon
pain of forfeiture of every coverlet wrought and put to sale.
And it is further enacted that no manner of persons of the
occupation of handicraftsmen of coverlets shall use the said
craft of hawking or go as hawkers out of the city . . . but only in
markets and open fairs.' *

The enforcement of these clauses was placed in the hands of
the officials of the craft of coverlet weavers, just as if it was an
ordinary by-law issued by the fraternity.

The wardens and searchers were given full power to search all
fairs and markets from the Trent northwards, and to confiscate
all coverlets which contravened the conditions laid down in the
Act. When they went into any ' liberties and franchises ' other
than their own, they might call upon the officials of those parts
to assist in the search. A proviso declared that ' It shall be
lawful for anyone to make coverlets as he shall please, for the
use of his own household or for the lord to whom he is tenant,
so always that the same coverlets shall not be put to sale '.

The coverlet weavers expected great results from this statute.
The total cost of obtaining it amounted to about £1,000 in
modern money, and of this sum the municipality paid one-half,
as it considered that ' the same Acte is as muche for the comon
wele of the city as of the coverlet weavers of the same \2 It
seems probable that the weavers' expectations were partly
fulfilled, for a survey of the Yorkshire industry made in 1595
reported that no coverlets were made in any part of the county
except York, and that this city produced ' two packs of cov'letts
and carpetts each moneth, and ev'y packe contaynes 14 or 15
stone weight '.3 Evidently by this time York had become free
from competition in the industry, a result probably due to the
enforcement of the Act. But even if that were so the output
was small and the industry quite insignificant.

1 34-5 Men. VIII, c. 10.

2 \~>>rk Memorandum Book, vol. i, intro., p. xxxi.

Peck's 'Certificate of New Draperies in the Conntv of Vork ' (i;o;),
D. S. /'., Elis.. eclii. j.

58 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

As we arc dealing with the woes of the coverlet makers, it is
amusing to note that the black sheep complained of in the
statute were to be found within the fold as well as without.
Six years after the passing of the above law one of the searchers
of the fraternity was found selling coverlets unsealed ; other
weavers were summoned for keeping apprentices contrary to
the ordinances, and about the same time one of the wardens,
a man chosen to govern the craft and administer its decrees
with honour and efficiency, was detected mixing ' hare and wolle
together, and werkyng the same into coverlettes ', for which
offence he was fined forty shillings and deposed from his office.1
Again, in 1555, the mayor wras petitioned to add two new
ordinances to the regulations of the trade, one making it un-
lawful to use certain devices in the making of coverlets, the
other giving greater powers to the searchers.2 The good name
of York coverlets w7as evidently in jeopardy from the practices
of those who fulfilled the conditions laid down in the Coverlet
Act rather than from the outsiders against whom the statute
was enacted.

Whilst men and industry sought the country districts and the
smaller towns, Beverley and York continued their steady decline
from former glories. Houses stood empty, streets were dirty
and unkempt, and churches which once ' were good and honest
livings for learned incumbents, by reason of the privy tithes of
the rich merchants, and offerings of a great multitude ', became
so impoverished as to be ' not a competent and honest living
for a good curate ; yea, and no person will take the cure, but
that of necessity there is some chantry priest, or some which
for the most part are unlearned and very ignorant persons, not
able to do any part of their duties, whereby the city is replenished
with blind guides and pastors '.3 Statutory permission was
granted to unite two or more churches into one parish, and
a number of disused edifices were sold into private hands.4

The gilds continued on their downward track, halting at
intervals to issue new ordinances which were as vigorous in

1 York Corp. Minute Books, xviii. jt,, 130 ct seq.

2 Ibid., xxi. 1 12 b-i 1 3.

3 Act 1 Ed. VI, c. 9, for closing various churches in York, and joining the
endowments together.

4 York Corp. Minute Hooks, xix, ft. in and 40 (1550).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 59

language as they were ineffective in action. In the distribution
of ' voices ' amongst the gild representatives for the York
Common Council in 1517, the finishing and distributing frater-
nities took the most important places, the dyers being the only
textile occupation in the list of greater crafts. Weavers and
fullers came amongst the fifteen less important industries, and
shearmen and the remaining textile branches were not repre-
sented at all. Some of these crafts were almost defunct by the
middle of the sixteenth century, for in 1552 the people of York,
petitioning for a reform in the craft representation on the
Common Council, declared x that certain of the crafts which
in 1517 were so important as to be able to claim one or two
members on the Council were now ' decayd so that there is
none of them to have voyces '.

For a number of the York crafts, however, death came more
slowly. They lost that industrial supremacy which they had
formerly possessed, but they contrived to maintain some kind
of existence for two centuries longer. In some instances they
gained strength by the union of two or three kindred crafts, as
in the case of the haberdashers, feltmakers, and cappers, who
were amalgamated in 1591 into ' one Companye and ffellowship ',
or of the tailors and drapers, who joined forces about 1560, with one
set of ordinances and one team of searchers.2 Then, being trans-
formed, and sometimes supported by a royal charter, a number
of these ' companies ' survived beyond the seventeenth century.

The decline of the weavers from the commanding position
which they held at the end of the fourteenth century can
be clearly traced, and we possess some reliable information
relating to the days of their decadence. The progress of the
industry in the West Riding began to be specially marked in
the first three-quarters of the fifteenth century, and that period
synchronized with a serious decline in the output from the York
looms. This we know from the Ulnage Accounts,3 which supply

1 Sellers, English Historical Review, vol. xvi, p. 280 ; also Victoria County
History, Yorkshire, vol. ii, p. 440.

- York Corp. Minute iiooks, ix, f. 25 a. In 1505 it was stated that there
were only three persons in the whole drapers' craft. See also ibid., xx, It. ;<>
and 60. Also 14 Charles II, Add. MSS. (Brit. Mus.), vol. 8935 ; and Entry
lk>ok, Charles II, vol. v, p. 98.

a For more detailed explanation of the nature of these ulnage documents,
see the next section of this chapter.

60 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

us with figures of the number of saleable cloths made in York
during the reigns of Richard II and Edward IV. Each account
states the number of cloths made for sale, and the amount paid
for subsidy and ulnage, fourpence being the subsidy paid on
a whole cloth of assize. The first record is for 1394-5, and
from September 23, 1394 to September 22, 1395 subsidy was
paid in York on 3,200 cloths of assize and one scarlet cloth, the
latter being charged sixpence, the former fourpence each. This
meant a total subsidy of £53 ys. 2d.1 Seventy years elapse
before we again have the necessary figures, and in the mean-
time misfortune had overtaken the weavers of the county town.
The account is for 1468-9,2 and the period covered is only ten
and a half months ; but if we calculate it out to a twelve-months'
basis, we find that the number of cloths for the whole year
amounted to 1,809, ar*d that the subsidy realized £30 3s. Thus,
during those seventy years, the amount of cloth made in York
had decreased by nearly one-half. The records of subsequent
years make the decline even greater, as will be seen from the
following statement :

Year.

Cloths.

Subsidy.

1394-5

3,200 cloths of assize and

[ scarlet cloth

£ s. c
53 7

1468-9

1,809 cloths of assize

• 3° 3

j annual J

J ( average )

H75-8 •

i,i73i ..

922j „

19 1 1
• 15 7

If one takes the annual average for the years 1473-8, it then
appears that the output of cloth from the city of York had
decreased by two-thirds during the preceding 80 years.

This diminution of output reacted on the fortunes of the
weavers' gild, the membership of which declined throughout
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. At the commencement of
each new reign the weavers petitioned the Crown for relief
from the burden of their £10 fee-farm, and were either excused

1 Account, 18-19 Rich. II ; Exch. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 16.

2 Account, 8-9 Ed. IV, Exch. Accounts, bundle 346, no. 22.

3 Account, 13-15 Ed. IV (two whole years), Exch. Accounts, bundle 345,
no. 24. This roll is for two whole years, so I have calculated the annual
average.

4 Account, 15—18 Ed. IV, Exch. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 24. This
account is for two and a half years and eighty-three days ; the annual average
has therefore been calculated for alxjvc.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 61

from one-half, or exonerated entirely from payment by each of
the Tudor monarchs.1 So far gone was the craft that in 1517 it
did not appear in the list of the thirteen most important trades,
and the decline continued during the next half-century. In
1561 the City Council appealed on behalf of the weavers for
relief from the fee-farm, and in the petition surveyed the rise
and fall of the trade.

' Whereas in olde tymes past, the said citie hathe moche
prospered in clothe makyng, and thereby th'occupacion of
weavers of the same citie, beyng then bothe many and of goode
substance, obteyned by charter of Your Highnes most noble
pregenytours to be incorporat, yeldyng for a fee fyrme or gylde
a certayne yerely somme . . . which yerely fee fyrme was payed
accordyngly so long as webbyng in the said citie was used. But
like as in processe of tyme the said occupieng decreased and at
last utterly decayed in the citie, even so the weavers of the
same, both wantyng their accustomed occupieing and also beyng
ovcrchardged with the same yerely payment, have fled the most
part forth of the said citie, inhabtyng in the contry to the same
nighe adjoynyng, sauf onely a few very poore men now remayn-
yng, whoe no doubte if they shalbe compelled to paye still the
said yerely fee fyrme, shall in short tyme be fayne alsoe clerely
to forsake your Grace's citie.'

Elizabeth declined to cancel the payment, except for a sum
of money to be paid at once, and the weavers, thanks to the
loan made them by the municipality, were able to relieve them-
selves of the yearly burden.2

Thirteen years before this happened the weavers of woollen

cloth had taken a step such as most crafts were taking about

this time. Their fraternity now numbered probably about

fifteen members, and for purposes of economy had long been

working in co-operation with the linen weavers, who were a craft

of about the same size.3 This co-operation rapidly grew stronger.

In 1548 the two crafts were jointly bearing financial burdens,

and almost immediately afterwards it was decreed that ' from

hensforth for dyvers concyderacons th'occupacon of wollen

wevers and lynon wevcrs shall be all one occupacon and to bere

equal charges in ;ill thynges, and to have scrche togydder as all

1 See, for instance. Calendar "f Stair Papers, Hen. \'III (1511), vol. i.

no. 1020.

- York Corp. Minute Books, xxiii, tt. 20 and 40.

' As, for instance, in u lien. \ II, York Corp. Minute Books, vii, t. 107,1.

62 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

one, and the said lyn wevers to be yerely at the eleccon of the
master of the wevers, and to be ordered like unto them in every
condicon '-1

This alliance resulted in the Weavers' Company of York,
a company in which the linen weavers generally predominated
throughout the next two centuries ; for this body existed until
at least 1796, and possibly for a year or two longer. In the
Muniments Room at York can be seen some seventeenth-century
ordinances of the company, as well as the Account Books for
the years 1564 to 1796. The ordinances of 1607 and 1629 are
most elaborate, and show to what lengths of detailed super-
vision the craft regulations had gone. There are over 70 clauses
dealing, inter alia, with the elections of the executive, foreigners,
hawking, apprenticeship, the behaviour of journeymen, the
employment of women, the frequenting of taverns during divine
service, and the practice of smoking tobacco in the meetings of
the company.

The Account Books indicate the number of members in the
society, and provide us with the data for a rough comparison of
the numbers in the industry at different periods. The weavers'
ordinances of 1400 are prefaced by the names of 50 members
of the crafts, and others are referred to ; therefore the member-
ship of the fraternity of woollen weavers in 1400 was at least
fifty. In 1590 the company of linen and woollen weavers con-
tained only about 20 members ; of these nearly half were
linen weavers, and so the number of master woollen weavers
could not have been more than a dozen — a strange contrast to
the 50 masters of two centuries before.

Up to the time of the Civil War the company made some
small progress, and increased its membership. This increase,
however, was almost entirely due to the linen- weaving section,
which did succeed in making a little headway. The member-
ship of 20 in 1590 had risen to 27 by 1626, and to 36 in 1632.2
In 1628 the weavers petitioned for a renewal of their charter,
with certain additions of a strongly monopolistic character.
The renewal was granted, but without the desired additions/5

1 Vork ("or]). Minute Books, xix, ff. 50 and 53.

- These figures are obtained by adding together the names of those who paid
their annual subscription with those who are recorded as being in arrears.
:| D. S. /'., ('/his. I, cix. 58 (July 0, U>2X).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 63

and the company prospered until the outbreak of the Civil
War. Then, in the chaos of the next 20 years, it fell to pieces.
In 1663 there were only 7 brethren ; at times during the follow-
ing years the number rose to about 10, and this small handful
of men kept the company alive in name until the end of the
eighteenth century. The annual meetings, however, were very
formal. There were no accounts to audit, for the annual sub-
scriptions had disappeared, and the only business consisted of
the approval of a new apprentice or journeyman. The meetings
were monotonous in their similarity and formality, and it seemed
possible that the company might continue indefinitely. Suddenly
the Account Book presents a blank page after the entries of
1796. The last meeting had been held, the last officers appointed,
the last apprentice approved. Then came the end ; how, when,
or why we do not know.

This story of the York weavers is typical of the manner in
which the survivals clung to their shadowy privileges and
organization. The economic forms of the Middle Ages were
slow in passing away, and the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries are littered with the remains of mediaeval institutions.
In York the insistence upon the freedom of the city as a sine
qua non for trading was retained up to the end of the eighteenth
century, and a certain Rev. W. MacRitchie, passing through
York in 1795, remarked that the city ' has but little trade,
because no man can set up in business here without purchasing
the Freedom of the City, which is an expensive matter, and to
beginners almost, if not altogether, unattainable '.1 At Hull
most elaborate weavers' ordinances were issued in 1673, and, as
Lambert says, the members of the gild ' met yearly, elected
their Warden and their Searchers, ordered their dinner, and
displayed their plate, until at length the dinner was deserted,
the silver tobacco pipe unlit, and the punch bowl cold V2 Then,
either in silent discontinuance, or in a last act of formal suicide,
the few remaining adherents dissolved the brotherhood which
had run through so many centuries.

For some years this industrial decline brought York into
a condition of depression. Eventually the city regained part of

' Antiquary, November iSqo, p. ;;_\ quoted by editor of York Freemen's
l\'ll (Surtees Soc., vol. xevi), p. xv.

J Lambert, Tivo Thousand Years ofCild Life, pp. 20S et scq.

64 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

its former activity, when the export trade of the Merchant
Adventurers had developed to considerable proportions, and
the cloths of the West Riding passed through York on their
way to Europe. In this day the loss of industry was counter-
acted by the increased commercial activity. But in the meantime
there was a period of dire poverty and distress. Unemployment
was rife, and the poorer classes of the city were in great straits.
The destruction of the monasteries and religious gilds had wiped
out the chief philanthropic agencies, and the various private
charities were inadequate for supplying relief to the poor. The
problem of poverty became very pressing about the middle
of the sixteenth century, and at last, following the example of
other towns, the authorities of York began to grapple with the
question of unemployment. They apparently admitted the prin-
ciple of the ' right to work ', and attempted to remove the
poverty in their midst by providing work for those who were
able to do it. Hence, from 1569 onwards for over a century,
York was engaged spasmodically in municipal manufacture.

The first scheme was inaugurated in 1569, with Roger Lighe,
a clothier by trade, in charge of the venture. The city purchased
stocks of wool and textile apparatus, which were established in
St. George's House. The constables of the various wards were
ordered to gather together the poor in their constituencies, and
bring them to the House, where they might be given work.
Those who were acquainted with the methods of cloth manu-
facture were to pursue that occupation, being paid wages
according to a piece-rate, and as to the inexperienced, Lighe
was ' to do his digligcns to instruct such of the sayd poore as he
shall perceyve not perfect, to th'intent that lyttle by lyttle
there may be of the sayd poore sufficient to serve the turne '.*
The scheme was floated with a fair measure of success. Shears
and other implements were purchased, men were sent into
Lincolnshire to procure supplies of wool, and the weavers were
soon so busy that the spinners could not keep pace with the
demand for yarn. The municipal fabrics were exposed for sale
in the City Hall on Ouse Bridge, and were generally purchased
by the merchants of the city.2

' York Corp. Minute Books, xxiv, f. 138 1> (May 18, i;6g).
- Ibid., II. 138-92 (1569-70).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 65

The establishment of this textile scheme did not, however,
solve the problem of poverty in York. The cloths were often
of inferior quality and of higher price than those which the
merchants could obtain from private makers, and thus the new
venture finally collapsed, leaving the morass of unemployment
undrained. Other new or similar schemes were therefore being
constantly hatched to provide for the poor by the introduction
of neiv industries. In 1590 a knitting school was instituted,1
and so many children attended it that the services of three
teachers were required. Seven years later the corporation made
a contract with Thomas Lewkener, a Hartlepool gentleman,
who undertook to begin the ' practice of the art, misterye, or
occupation of making of fustians',2 and thus provide regular
employment for at least 50 persons of the poorer sort. Lewkener
was given the freedom of the city, granted the monopoly of
fustian-making within the city for the space of ten years, pro-
vided with a house free of rent, and a loan of money. Armed
with such powers and privileges he made onslaught upon the
destitution in York, but only succeeded in denting the surface
of that problem.

Throughout the seventeenth century the city authorities
persisted in their efforts. Still more new industries were intro-
duced, the chief being the manufacture of worsted cloth. As
yet Yorkshire made scarcely any worsted goods, confining its
attention to the old-fashioned woollens. But Norwich and
various other places in East Anglia had built up a great trade
in worsteds, or ' Norwich stuffs '. The success of these towns
suggested to the aldermen of York the possibility of restoring
the industrial prosperity of York by introducing the trade
which had made Norwich so prosperous ; in this manufacture
at least they would be free from the competition of the West
Riding. In 1619, therefore, they induced Edward Whalley,
a citizen of Norwich, to take up his abode in York, and there
make worsteds, employing as many poor people as he possibly
could, lie was granted all the customary privileges, a house in
which to work, a loan of money, and his freedom gratis. The

1 Victoria County History, Yorkshire, iii. 468 ct scq.

- York Corp. Minute Books, xxxi, f. 301 (1507). For much of this informa-
tion I am indebted to Miss Sellers, either directly or through her article in the
Victoria County History.

66 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

scheme was a failure, and in 1620, £280 having been expended
with little apparent result, the council decided that ' to erect
a new manual occupation in the city of makinge Norwiche
stuffes would be too burdensome to this citty '} The worsted
project was therefore abandoned for the time being, but was
revived in the 'thirties, with a certain amount of temporary
success. A building known as the ' House of Workes ' was fitted
up with worsted-making utensils,2 and many poor householders
were set to work under the charge of a master, who was paid
£20 per annum for his supervision and tuition. Alongside this
work the council had introduced the making of Kendal cloths,
and had provided cards and spinning-wheels for all the hospitals,
in order that the supply of yarn might be sufficient.3

After the Civil War similar efforts were made to coax indus-
tries to York. In 1655 the corporation signed an agreement with
two brothers, Chapman by name, who lived at Thornover, some
distance from York. By the contract4 it was agreed that the
two men, clothiers by trade,

' shall . . . leave their habitations where they now dwell and
become Inhabitants and dwellers within the said City or Suburbs
thereof, to witt the House called comonly the Jersey House, and
accept their freedoms, and shall bring with them their familyes
and workefolkes and all their Loomes and materialls belonging
to their trade, to the house or place . . . which is intended for
their entertainment. They shall imploy their owne stocks and
such other moneys as are by these presents intended to be
given or lent to them . . . wholely for setting the poore people
of the Citty on worke, in spinning, carding and other Labours
concerning the said trade, and shall ducly pay unto them for
carding and spinning of fine wool for every six pounds averdupois
weight sixteen pence, and of course wool twelve pence for every
six pounds, . . . and they are to sett up and continue four Loomes
bctweenc them at the least, and to make two clothes weekely at
the least, it there be vent and carding and spinning to be gott
in the Citty.'

The clothiers were to continue in the trade for at least seven
years, and during that time they were 'to bring or procure

1 York Corp. Minute Books, xxxiv, ff. 177-8.

- Victoria Cmtnty History, Yorkshire, iii. 471.

:l York Corp. Minute Hooks, xxxv, f. 248.

1 Sec Articles of Agreement between Mayor and Comonalty and Thomas and
Michael Chapman, both of Thornover, in the County of York, Clothiers,
April 30, 1O55 ; in Muniments Room, York Guildhall.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 67

Instructors to teach the poorc to spin and card and doe other
Labours belonging to the said Trade ... at their own Charge,
and the Citty not to be att any charge ' for instruction.

In return for these services the corporation undertook to
give the men their freedom, presented them with a sum of £50,
and lent them £100 each, free of interest, for seven years.
Further, they were provided with Jersey House and some
adjoining land at a nominal rent, and the corporation promised
to ' find soe many spinning wheels and wool-cards as shall be
thought necessary for the first yeare '.

The Chapman brothers took up their abode in York, and set

to work, in accordance with the terms of the contract. But

they also failed to effect a revival in the industrial fortunes of

the city. Failure attended the efforts of their successors, of

whom there were many. Again and again, throughout the rest

of the century, clothiers, either of woollen or worsted fabrics,

were engaged by the city authorities to take up the task of

employing the poor.1 Their work was small, and entirely

insignificant in comparison with that which was being done in

the Leeds, Wakefield, and Halifax districts and in comparison

with the amount of cloth produced on the looms of York three

centuries before. These municipal efforts were little more than

expedients for the employment of the numerous poor who were

1 The last effort of the York Corporation which has come to my notice
is dated 1698. Richard Snowe of Masham, scrgemaker, was invited on the
usual conditions to come and supervise the textile work of the poor. The
preamble to the indenture is very interesting, and worthy of a little quotation :
' Whereas it is very observable that the number of the poore within this
Cittye dothe increase daily more and more, for want of employment and of
some publick manufacture whereupon to sett them to worke, and therefore
the I'oore are not onely become very burdensome and chargeable to the . . .
parishes where they live, but many of them for want of Employment under
the motion of their Poverty do turn Vagabonds and idle wandring Beggars,
and take and pursue evil courses of Life and Conv'sacon, to the utter Ruin and
destruction of themselves, the great Scandall of the Citty and the evill Example
of others, and whereas for the prevention of such mischiefes and Inconveni-
ences as may in all probability happen . . . by such Encrcase of the poore,
it hath been considered that some publick Manufacture should be sett upp
and carried on within the . . . Citty of Yorke, whereby the said poore or such
of them as are able to worke may be kept in a constant employment and there-
by rendered in a great measure capable to maintain themselves.' Snowe
was to employ no more than four non-pauper persons, and was to pay wages
' according to the best and greatest Kates that are or mav be for the time being
given, allowed, or paid, in any other places within this Kingdom '. This
indenture is in the Muniments Room at York; it is impossible to give tin-
reference number for it until the detailed catalogue of York MSS. is accessible.

F 2

68 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

on the hands of the authorities, and no industry could achieve
a great success when it was practically limited to a pauper
labour force. Hence these efforts to reinvigorate an almost
extinct manufacture were puny, fitful, and entirely ineffective.
The merchants of York did not look to Lighe, Whalley, and the
Chapman brothers for their supplies of cloth for the export
trade ; instead they went westward to the new home of the
industry, to the area which is still to-day devoted to the same
occupation. How and when the manufacture of cloth assumed
large proportions in this district we must now consider.

(b) The Expansion of the Woollen Industry in the West Riding

The Poll Tax Returns revealed the existence of the textile
industry in almost every part of Yorkshire, though more vigor-
ous in some areas than others. In the central plain of the county
there were more names attached to the industry than were to be
found further westward, and in the Halifax and Bradford areas
cloth-making did not appear as an important means of livelihood.
The cloths produced in these parts were made largely for home
consumption, and it is doubtful whether any considerable
number of fabrics found their way into the English or foreign
markets. It now remains for us to trace the progress of the
industry in that district which we regard to-day as its home,
i. e. the part of Yorkshire which lies south and west of Leeds.
Over this area there was in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries
a very rapid expansion, which brought the industry into a position
of rivalry with East Anglia and the West of England long before
the eighteenth century.

For this part of our story we have statistical evidence of an
accurate character. The Ulnager's Accounts,1 though dis-
tributed irregularly over the period 1394 to 1478, give valuable
ligures of comparison as to the progress in various places. It

1 I'hesc Accounts arc in the Public Record Office amongst the Exchequer
MSS. They were first examined by Mr. J. Lister, of Shibden Hall, Halifax,
who very kindly lent the present writer the transcripts which lie had made
of some of the Accounts. Mr. Lister's examination was not, however, exhaus-
tive ; further, lie confined his attention almost entirely to Yorkshire.
Miss M. Sellers went over the same ground in preparing her article on ' The
Textile Industries' for the Victoria County History, but owing to inaccurate
cataloguing omitted to notice at least one important document. The present
writer has collected the figures from the Accounts for the whole country.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 69

must be remembered, however, that only cloths made for sale /
passed through the hands of the ulnager. The pieces woven for
home use would not be subjected to his scrutiny, and hence the
ulnage figures apply solely to the cloths which were intended for
the market.

The earliest returns for Yorkshire are for the years 1395-6.
Mr. Lister points out the reason for this. By the Ulnage Statute
°f J353 (»nly those cloths which were equal to at least half
a cloth of assize were liable to be called upon to pay subsidy.
The cloth of assize measured 26 yards by 6\ quarters (i. c.
1 yard, 1 foot, ioi inches).1 The great majority of cloths made
in the country districts of Yorkshire were narrow cloths, ' streit '
cloths, kerseys, &c, which rarely exceeded 12 yards, and there-
fore escaped the payment of subsidy and the supervision of
the ulnager. In 1393-4, however, a change in the policy of
cloth regulation broke down this evasion. A law passed during
that session 2 declared that any weaver might ' make and put
to sale cloths, as well kerseys as others, of such length and breadtli
as him shall please, paying the subsidy, ulnage, and other duties,
of every piece of cloth after the rate of the assize of cloth men-
tioned in the statute of Edward III ', i. e. in proportion to the
size of the piece. This Act made the smaller pieces liable to
payment of subsidy, and the Yorkshireman now had to eon-
tribute his quota for the kerseys and ' panni stricti '. As the
subsidy on a cloth of assize was fourpenee, and as a kersey
equalled about one quarter of a standard cloth, the levy on
these shorter and narrower pieces was settled at one penny, and
remained at that figure as long as the ulnage svstem existed.

The first computus or account for the whole county covers the
I5i months from July 20, 1395, to November 4, 1396.3 The
return excludes the city of York, which had its own account,
and paid the amounts already stated in the preceding section ot
this chapter. The mimes of the county cloth-makers, numbering

1 Statute _v Ed. Ill, i. c. 4. Sec J. Lister, ' Notes on early History of the
Woollen Trade in Bradford and Halifax ', Bradford Antiquary, ii. ^— ;o.

- 17 Rich. II, c. 2.

' Particulars of the Account of Win. Skipwith, collector of ulnage and
subsidy of saleable cloths, and of the forfeitures of the same, in the County
of York, the City of York excepted, to wit, from the joth <lav of July in the
[Sth year to the 4th day of November in the 10th year ot Richard II (Excli.
K.K. Accounts, bundle ^4;, no. 15).

■3

70 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

357, arc drawn from all parts of the shire. The local grouping
of the contributors is vague, and the only possible classification
is under marginal headings, which give the following approxi-
mate distribution :

Amount of subsidy.

£ s. d.

Ripon and Boroughbridge (grouped together) .
Richmond, Bedale, and Allerton (grouped together)
Wakefield, Leeds, and Doncastcr (grouped together)
Pontefract, Howden, and Selby (grouped together)
Malton (standing alone) ....

The figures placed against these groups give approximately
the amount of subsidy paid in each area, but as the districts are
so vaguely defined the returns only serve to show that the most
active areas were around Ripon or in the centre of the county.
The cloths were divided into two classes :

(a) ' Panni stricti ', or narrow cloths, of which there were
22i pieces. Each of these was reckoned as being equal to one
quarter of a cloth of assize, and therefore paid one penny,
producing in all i8s. $d.

(b) Cloths of assize, which amounted to 1,202 whole pieces
and 9 yards. On these the subsidy, at fourpence per cloth,
amounted to £20 os. lod. Thus the total subsidy for the Riding
equalled £20 195. 3^. for 1,257^ cloths. These figures are for
15.I months, but, reducing them to a twelve months' basis, the
returns for one year are as follows :

Number of cloths ...... 974

Subsidy . . . . . £16 45. Sd.

The account ends with a list of the offences committed against
the ulnage regulations. No cloth was to be exposed for sale
until it had been examined and sealed and the dues paid ; the
penalty for infringement of this rule was forfeiture of the cloth,
and one or two men were punished in this year for a violation
of the law.

The next account, from November 4, 1396, to November 20,
J397 (i- <-'• 54 weeks), is much more illuminating, for now the
West Riding had been placed under the supervision of William
Barker of Tadeaster,1 whose duty it. was to gather in the revenue

1 Account of Win. Barker for year November 1396 to November 1307
(Exch. K.K. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 17).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 71

from this Riding alone. Hence the details are much more
copious, and local classification is more accurate. The rivalry for
first place in the quantity of cloth produced lies between Wake-
field and Ripon. Seven names appear under the heading of
Wakefield as paying subsidy for 173J cloths of assize. At Ripon
nine men are named as being responsible for the production of
i(>S;J cloths ; thus Wakefield has more cloths to its credit, and
pays a greater contribution to the Exchequer, than Ripon.

But this triumph is heavily discounted when we consider
the extent of country covered by the term ' Wakefield '.' The
only other town named in this area is Leeds, which had four
men accounting for 120 cloths. This meant therefore that the
two headings of Leeds and Wakefield included the whole district
containing Bradford, Halifax, and Huddersfield ; in fact, the
whole of the county to-day engaged in the manufacture of
woollen cloth. Under such circumstances it was only natural
that Wakefield and Leeds should make a brave show against
their more northerly rival.

The other centres mentioned are responsible for much smaller
quantities of cloth, and the whole list reads as follows :

Names.

Wakfeld ... 7

Rypon ... 10

Ledys ... 4

Pountfrett ... 14

Wethyrby ... 6

Doncastre ... 9

Barnsley . . . 6

Selby ... 4

Skipton ... 6

Rodirham ... 5

The total number of whole cloths on which payments were
made was thus 718^ plus 3 yards made by 71 master weavers,
and the total subsidy £11 195. b\d.

In the following year we have an account for November 20,
I397, to November 21, 1398,2 which shows a great decline in the
quantity of cloth produced and the amount of subsidy paid.

1 Wakefield and Leeds eventually split up into Halifax, Bradford, Almond-
bury, anil Leeds. See later accounts.

■ ICxch. K.K. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 18.

Cloths.

Subsidy.

173*

57/io

i68| & 8 yds.

56/34

120

40/-

K>54

35/3

35^

11/10

9/"

26 & 6 yds.

8/9

22*

7/6

21 cv 7 yds.

7/i I

6/-

72 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

Only 474 whole cloths were accounted for, paying a subsidy of
£7 iSs. In these last two accounts we have returns stretching
from November 4, 1396, to November 21, 1398, a period of just
over two years. During that time subsidy was paid on 1,192!
cloths, or an average annual output for the West Riding of
approximately 590 whole cloths of assize. Not by any means
a large quantity, but yet one must remember that there was
much manufacture for home consumption, and also that a whole
cloth of assize might, and did often, mean two or four smaller
pieces. Further, this average is admittedly unsatisfactory,
since it is based on a calculation from two years, in which the
output differed very considerably. But we have no other figures
from which it is possible to obtain a more accurate estimate,
and so we must be content with the facts as we have them,
surmising in the light of the 1396-7 figures that 590 cloths is
probably somewhat below the usual annual output.

In these early accounts we find mention of a surprising variety
of cloths and colours. There were ' panni stricti ', ' panni de
blankett ', ' panni de Cagsall ' (Coggeshall), russets, ' Panni
blodii ' (blue), greens, ' blewe mclde ', &c. .Scarlet cloths were
scarcely produced at all in the county, this manufacture being
left to other parts of England. Thus, although the cloths were
coarse and the processes were probably primitive, there was
a certain amount of variety in the products of the West Riding
looms.

From 1398 onwards until 1468 there is an unbroken absence
of ulnage accounts for the county. This is probably due to the
fact that the ulnage was ' farmed out ' to some person, who
paid a fixed annual sum to the Exchequer and then appropriated
to himself the whole of the contribution:., realizing profit or loss
according to the progress or stagnation of the industiy. What
was happening during that period of transition we would give
much to know, and the next list of ulnage returns raises so
many questions that the lack of accounts is doubly disappoint-
ing. Still, in spite of the absence of financial records, one can
easily see from local documents that the textile industry of the
West Riding was becoming more and more important, and thai
weavers, dyers, fullers, and other cloth-workers, or dealers,
were developing the industry all through the period of Yorkist

ii • FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 73

and Lancastrian strife.1 The absence of the names of Bradford
and Halifax from the early ulnage lists may possibly indicate
that the industry in those places was not of great dimensions
in the reign of Richard II ; or it may be due to the fact that
the deputies appointed by the ulnager to collect the money
throughout the Riding had their head-quarters at Wakefield
and Leeds, and therefore grouped all the contributions under
the names of these two towns instead of giving Bradford and
Halifax credit for the cloths which were produced there. What-
ever the reason, there must have been great progress during the
first half of the fifteenth century in order to explain the situation
as revealed in the returns for 1468. In 1439 Halifax had its
dyer, fuller, glover, and drapers, and in 1467 eight men of
Halifax were engaged in the work of fulling cloth. From lack
of data it is dangerous to attempt any explanation of this
progress. It may have been due to a migration from the city,
or merely an acceleration in the rate of progress amongst the
natives of the western parts of the Riding, who were favoured
by the lower cost of production and the general facilities which
these districts enjoyed.

It is indeed a great transformation which meets the eye in
the next ulnager's statement. The account is for the period
November 12, 1468, to Michaelmas, 1469, i.e. 46 weeks, and for
the whole county, including York, Hull, Doncaster,2 &c. The
form and contents are so interesting that it may be well to quote
a little of it in translation :

County oj York. Particulars of the Account of Thomas Trygot,
Approver of the Subsidy and Ulnage of Saleable Cloths in the
County of York . . . from the xij"' day of November in the
viiji!l year of the reign of our Lord King Edward IV. to the
Least of Saint Michael next following, that is to say, for three
quarters of a year and xlviij days.

City of York. Of John Clasyn, Christopher .

Marshall and other men of the City of c . . , .H

\- 1 - t 1 .1 11-4-1 Subsidy, xxv)" xi]

lurk, tor i,5o<> cloths sealed 111 the T -, - ', •■ ../

f r <•■: 1 .ir -i Linage, lxvj vir

aforesaid ( it y during the aforesaid 1 h '

period . . . . . . '

1 See 11. Lin« Roth, Yorkshire Coiners, article by Mr. Lister on 'The
Making of Halifax '.

- Kxch. Accounts, bundle 34O, no. 22. This account lias been incorrectly
catalogued, and was therefore overlooked l>v both Mr. Lister and Mi-^ Seller--.

DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

Of Thomas Pykburn, Christophers

ffricklcy, and other men of the'town of ( Subsidy, xj8 xd-

Doncaster, for 35 saleable cloths, and a | Ulnage, xviijd-

half, sealed there . . . . '

Of Richard Symmes, John Brokholc, \

and other men of Barnsley, for 88 sale- [ Subsidy, xxix8- vijd

able cloths and three quarters sealed 1 Ulnage, iijs- viij'1- ob.

there . . . . . .

Of Miles Parker, Richard Mason, and ) c , • , , ••„
,, r,,r .' r 1 , r 1 li Subsidy, lxxvii3-

other men oi Wakefield, tor 231 saleable \ TT1 • „ -.d ,

, . 1,., Ulnage, ixs- vir- ob.

cloths sealed there . . . . j s '

And so on ; the entries, arranged in order of magnitude, are as

follows

York
Ripon

Halifax .
Wakefield .
Leeds

Almondbury
Hull .
Pontefract .
Barnsley .
Bradford .
Doncaster .
Selby

Total

Cloths.

888

853
231
176J
160
148
106
88|
88.V

26-L
4,398

Subsidy and Ulnage . £82 io.s\ o\d.

Thus the output for the whole county for 46 weeks equalled
4,398 cloths ; this for a whole year would amount to 4,972 cloths.
Of these, 1,972 pieces were accounted for by York and Hull; the
figures for Beverley are presumably included in those for Hull, and
cannot have been at all important. The West Riding can there-
tore claim 3,000 clot lis. The year for which these figures are quoted
seems to have been a ' boom ' year, and there was a diminution
in the output during the subsequent period. According to the
accounts, subsidy was paid for the West Riding as follows :

Year. No. of clot lis for West Riding.

1469-70 2,586

1471-3 1,894 (average over 2\ years)

1473 5 2,188 (average over 2 years)

1475-8 1,780 (average over i\ years)1

1 Kxch. K.K., bundle 345, no. 24.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 75

Therefore, taking the annual average production over the
whole of this period, 1468-78, we get an output of 2,128 cloths.
Compare this with the average output for 1396-8, viz. 590 cloths,
and we see an increase of nearly 300 per cent., made largely at
the expense of the county capital.

These later ulnagc returns arc valuable for the evidence which
they afford about the comparative importance of the various
districts engaged in the production of cloth. Let us first present
the figures, and then point out the significant developments
which they indicate.

[468-9 (46 weeks).

Clot hi

1471-3 {2\ years).

Cloths.

1473-5 (2 yews).

Cloths.

York
Ripon
Halifax .
Wakefield
Leeds

Almondbnrv
Hull

Pontefract
Barnsley .
Bradford .
I >oncaster
Selby

1,596

888
853
231

160
[48
106
88J

NN^

3 5 2
20. ',

York

Ripon

Halifax .

Leeds

Alinontlbury

Hull

Barnsley

Wakefield

Bradford

Pom fret .

1 >oncaster

Selby

1,897
i,5i8J

355*

320

295

U7h
i6r
125J
io8£

4-4
261

York

Halifax .

Ripon

Almondbnrv

Hull

Leeds

Pom fret .

Bradford

Wakefield

Barnsley

I )oncaster

Selby

2.346|
1 ,493 1
[,386 \
427
426J
320
2 1 4 i

160
1 42.I
35*

From these data we see that York still retained the leading
position, although her supremacy had been much impaired, and
the next hundred years were to witness a further decline in her
output. In 1468 Ripon came second, but her position also was
threatened by the growth of a rival. That rival was Halifax,
a town not mentioned in the accounts of Richard IPs reign,
but now taking third place on the list. Beside these three
centres, the rest were insignificant. Almondbury, representing
the Huddersfield area, appeared next to Leeds, but Bradford
made its entry in very humble fashion. The number of recorded
places lying south-west of Leeds is large, and the output from
this area equalled that of York itself.

In the list for 1471 3 Halifax still had to be content with the
third place ; Leeds and Almondbnrv passed Wakefield, and
Bradford crept up one place. Finally in the third list, for 147;, 5,
Halifax outstripped its more northerly rival, and assumed second
place; Almondbnrv and Hull overtopped Leeds, whilst Bradford
advanced to the eighth place. These positions remained the

76 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

same in the returns for the following years, 1475-8, when the
accounts come to an end.

The outstanding feature of these statistics is the triumph of
the Halifax clothiers. From a position so humble as not to
merit the inclusion of its name in the early accounts, Halifax
had risen to a position of supremacy in the western industry,
and outdistanced all but York itself. Whilst noting this success,
we must remember that the size of the parish of Halifax, for
which these returns really are, was very great, embracing a wide
area of hilly country. Much of it had been entered in the
fourteenth-century accounts under the names of Leeds and
Wakefield, and so had helped to swell the total from these places,
whilst leaving the real home of the pieces without recognition.
Still, even admitting that the figures are not so wonderful as
they would appear at first sight, it remains beyond dispute that
over the area lying round Halifax there was a marked quickening
of industrial life during the fifteenth century. Nor was the
progress stayed during subsequent years. Halifax wares became
known throughout the country. They were sold at the cloth
fairs at St. Bartholomew1 and the market in Blackwell Hall,
London ; the stock-in-trade of a York tailor in 1485 contained
lengths ' de pannis laneis Halyfax et Crawyn ', and many other
cloths from the West of Yorkshire, including ' Halyfax tawny ',
' Halyfax grene ', ' Halyfax russet ', ' niger carsey Halyfax ',2 &c.
In 1560 there were 520 houses in the town of Halifax alone,
and the whole parish was declared to be so populous that it sent
12,000 men against the Duke of Westmoreland's rising in 1569.3

This progress was the subject of comment by many writers
during the sixteenth century, and was probably the cause of
the legend, accepted by all historians until quite recently, that
the population of Halifax township in 1450 was so small as to
be accommodated in 13 houses.4 Such a statement was entirely
untrue, but it was part of the glamour of romance which hovered
round the head of Halifax. Tudor writers waxed eloquent in

1 ("loth booths in Bartholomew Fair arc frequently mentioned in Halifax
wills. See Chapter V, on markets and merchants.

- York Wills and Inventories (Surtees Soc, vol. xlv), p. 301.

3 Camden, Britannia, ft. 700-10. Also most old Halifax historians.

' For a criticism of the statement see 'The Making of Halifax', by
J. bister, pp. 14.: 4, m Ling Roth, Yorkshire Coiners.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 77

their praise of the parish, and unsolicited testimonials were
frequently bestowed. Camden declared, ' There is nothing so
admirable in this town as the industry of the inhabitants, who,
notwithstanding an unprofitable soil, not fit to live in, have so
llourished by the cloath trade (which within these last seventy
years they fell to), that they are both very rich, and have gained
a great reputation for it above their neighbours '-1 Edmund,
Archbishop of York, wrote in 1584 of the populace of Halifax,
'It is a good people, and they well deserve to be considered
of ' ; - and Ryder (1588), having eulogized the Yorkshire
clothiers generally, singled out for special praise the ' inhaby-
tants of Hallyfax '. Their virtues were extolled as follows :

' They excel the rest in policy and industrie, for the use of
their trade and groundes, and after the rude and arrogant
manner of their wilde country they surpas the rest in wisdom
and wealth. They despise theire olde fashions if they can heer
of a new, more comodyus, rather affectinge novelties than allied
to old ceremonyes. . . . Yt sholde seem that desier of praise and
sweet nes of their dew commendacion hath begoon and mayn-
tayned ammonge the people a natural ardency of newe inven-
tions annexid to an unyealdinge industry, and by enforcinge
grounds beyond all hope of fertyllyty, so that yff the rest of
the county wolde in this followc them but afar off, the force and
welth of Yorkshier wolde be soon dubled.' ;J

In short, the Halifax area had witnessed a period of surprising
prosperity during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, insomuch
that its development was to contemporaries a matter for awe
and wonder, and to the Halifax man himself a perennial theme
for jubilant self-satisfaction.

The progress of Leeds, Wakefield, and Bradford, though not
so rapid, was little less important. Here the woollen industry
provided employment tor the greater part of the inhabitants,
and the output of cloth steadily advanced, flic fulling mill at
Leeds, which in 1381 was let for 305. per annum, '' was leased in
1488 for 405. ,;j so the profits accruing from that mill must have

1 Camden, op. tit., ft. 709—10.

- P. S. /'., /:'//.:.. Addenda, xxviii. 85 (1584).

1 ' James Ryder's Commendations of Yorkshire, addressed to Lord Bur-
leigh ' (15SS). Lansd. MSS. (Brit. Mus.), quoted in Lin^ Roth, op.cit., pp. U)2-$.

1 Minister's Accounts, bundle 507. no. 8228, 7 iV 8 Rich. II. For this
reference see Victoria Countv History, Yorkshire, ii. 401).

•"■ Materials for a History of Henry I'll (Rolls Series), ii. 329.

78 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

increased somewhat in the intervening period. Leeds and
Wakefield were becoming famous as markets and as the homes
of merchants. By the seventeenth century Wakefield was the
principal wool market of the district, whilst Leeds had become
the emporium for cloth. Wakefield ' chapmen ' x are frequently
mentioned during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and
a complaint made in the reign of James I bore witness to the
rise of a native trading class in the Riding. The complaint
occurs in a pamphlet analysing the causes of the decay of the
trade of Hull, and the grievance is stated thus :

' And that which is a further great and considerable damage
to the merchants of this towne (Hull) is a set of young adven-
turers that are lately sprung up at Leeds and at other places,
amongst the clothiers, who at litt'e or no charges buy and
engross as they please, to the great hurt of the inhabitants and
merchants of this towne.' 2

These upstarts we shall meet again when we consider the
methods of marketing and foreign trade, but it is desirable at
this juncture to note their existence.

When Leland came through Yorkshire in the reign of
Henry VIII, he made observations on the economic activities
of the towns through which he passed. His remarks give us
an interesting, though fleeting, glimpse of the centres of the
industry : 3

' Wakefeld apon Calder, ys a quik market toune, and meately
large ; well served of flesch and fische from the Se and by
ryvers, whereof dyvers be thereabouts at hande. So that al
vitaile is very good chepe there. A right honest man shal fare
well for 2 pens a meale. It standith now al by clothyng.

' Bradeforde, a praty quik toune, dimideo aut eo amplius
minus Wachfelda. It standith much by clothyng.

' Ledis, 2 miles lower than Christal Abbay, on Aire Ryver, is
a praty market, ... as large as Bradeforde but not so quik.
The toune standith most by clothing.'

Other writers make similar remarks, and supply abundant
evidence to show that the whole district of which Leeds, Wake-
field, Bradford, and Halifax were the head-quarters, was hard

1 Thus. I'eyntour of Wakefield, chapman, in debt for £4 (i486) {Patent Hulls,
4 Hen. VI, |)t. i, 111. 23).

2 Pamphlet by John Ramsden, of Hull, quoted in Hadley's History of Hull,
p. 115- 3 Leland, Itinerary, vii. 41-2.

FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 79

at work developing the textile industry. Further, there was
already some degree of local specialization, and certain districts
were becoming famous for the manufacture of distinct types
of cloth. Leeds had already settled down to making ' broad
cloth ', and kept almost entirely to trade in that variety during
the next two centuries. But the Halifax men, intent on paying
the minimum of taxation on their wares, ' were, for their own
private lucre and gain, and in diminucion of the King's subsidy
and ulnagc, encouraged rather to make kerseys than . . . cloths
of assize \l and so, as a writer declared in 1588, ' at Halyfax
there is no clothe made but yearde brode carsies ' .2

With the ulnage returns of 1478 we come to the end of our
statistics, and have no further evidence which gives anything
approaching a complete estimate of the number of cloths pro-
duced in the county. Fortunately, however, there is a docu-
ment, dated 1595, containing a survey of the Yorkshire industry,3
from which it is possible to glean a few figures, and to make one
or two rough comparisons. The author of this report had been
sent to carry out an inquiry into the extent of the manufacture
of ' new draperies ' in the county. He found scarcely any such
manufacture, but placed on record an account of the extent
of the older industry. Thus he found ' At VVackefeilde, Leedes,
and some other smale villages, nere there aboutes, there is
made about 30 packes of brode cloths every weecke, and ev'y
packe is 4 whole clothes ; the sortes made in Wackefeild are-
pukes, tawnyes, browns, blues, and some reddes ; in Leedes of
all colours '. If 120 cloths per week was the average output of
these places, we may assume that the annual production was
about 5,000. Compare this with the figures given in the ulnage
returns ; in 1468-9 these two towns were jointly credited with
40S cloths for 40 weeks, or about 400 for the year. Even sup-
posing the estimate for the Elizabethan period to be excessive,
the expansion must have been very £reat.

The same writer reported that ' At Penyston, Yellow, and
Blackwood, and some villages there aboutes, are made about

' See Chapter V for account of trials of 1613 and 1638.

■ Document concerning project tor set tint; up woollen concern at Skipton,
in Hist. AISS. Comm., app. xiv, pt. iv, Kenyon MSS., p. 57; (15SS).

:< Brother Peck's Certificate of New Draperies (1595), IKS.!'., Eli:.,
cclii, 2.

8o DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

1,000 peces of white Penystone '. A ' Pcnistone ' counted as
half a cloth of assize, so the output from the Penistone area
would be equivalent to about 500 whole cloths. In the ulnage
accounts the Penistone area would come under the heading
of Barnsley, the annual output of which in 1468-9 amounted to
about 100 cloths. Here again the development during the
Tudor period must have been considerable.

The comparison cannot be carried farther, since the Eliza-
bethan survey makes no estimate of the number of cloths
made in the Halifax or Bradford districts. But the witnesses
in a lawsuit of 1613 declared most confidently that the output .
of kerseys alone from the parishes of Halifax, Bradford, Bingley,
and Keighley amounted to over 90,000 a year. This was almost
certainly an exaggeration, but there can be no doubt that the
industry in this area made very great strides during the Tudor
period.

The result of all this progress was to give greater strength
to the West Riding, and to draw its industrial life and wealth
more into national regard. For centuries the district had
enjoyed comparative immunity from governmental interference,
since its cloths had been such as seldom found their way to the
wider markets, or attracted national attention. Now all this
was changing, as Northern Dozens and Yorkshire kerseys,
improved perhaps in quality, were purchased by such people
as the monks of Durham,1 or for the choristers at Cambridge,2
or passed to Blackwell Hall and the markets of Europe. The
entry of West Riding goods more prominently into the field of
national and international commerce turned many eyes to this
hitherto despised portion of the county, and the ' cloathing
townes ' began to receive attention from many quarters.

The first of these newly interested parties was the State itself,
which, in the sixteenth century, cast aside the air of tolerance
with which it had formerly regarded the North Country in its
regulation of the cloth industry. Now that the cheap Yorkshire
pieces were being carried in large quantities to Germany, Poland,
and Russia, they must be subjected to the same scrutiny as the

1 Thorold Rogers, Hist. <>f Agriculture and Prices, iv. io6.

- Several entries of northern russets and other northern cloths tor ehoiisters
at Cambridge about the middle of the sixteenth century. Rogers, <>p. cit.,
iii. 50$ ; prices vary from is. to $s. per yard.

ii FIFrEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 81

wares of other parts, lest by their inferior quality the fair fame
of English fabrics should be dragged in the mire, and the ' vent ',
or sale, of cloths be lost to this country. Hence there began
a long series of legislative attempts to bring the Yorkshiremen
on to the strait path of industrial honesty, and we must give
a whole chapter to a consideration of this State intervention.1

Secondly, the clothing area had gained some political strength.
In 1597 there was a parliamentary election, and on this occasion
one of the candidates for Yorkshire was Sir Thomas Hoby.
The following letter from the Archbishop of York to Robert
Cecil explains itself. Speaking of Hoby, the Archbishop says
he is 4 a gentleman of very great hope, but is not yet so well
known, and was hindered specially by a rumour, true or false
I know not, spread abroad in the clothing towns of the West
Riding, which yield the greatest number of freeholders. The
speech was that in the last Parliament his brother, Sir Edward
Hoby, did prefer a bill against Northern cloths, which they
thought ditl much concern them \-

Thirdly, the pocket of the West Riding began to receive more
attention from the State, and from others. This was especially
the case when the need for ships, in the last decades of the
sixteenth century, caused levies of vessels to be made on the
ports of the kingdom. The demands generally took the form
of ordering each port to supply one or more ships, fully manned,
victualled, and equipped, for a period of service at home or
abroad.3 The Yorkshire orders came to Hull, and in 1588 and
subsequent years York and Hull, after violent altercations as
to their respective shares, joined in defraying the cost of the
Yorkshire ships. In the early months of 1596 Hull was requested
to furnish one ship for the expedition of that summer. But the
port had at last awakened to the fact that an El Dorado existed
inland, and therefore made suit that the ' three great clothing
townes and places belonging thereto, viz. Halifax and the

1 Chapter IV.

"- The clothing area was not backward in its loyalty to Elizabeth. When
the I3ond of Association was drawn up, it was received with great favour by
' the meaner sort of gentlemen and of the principall freeholders and clothiers
... so that, especially about Halifax, Wakefield, and Bradford, 5,300 of that
sort have sealed, subscribed, and sworn thereto' (D.S.I'., liliz., Addenda,
xxviii. ioj). Letter quoted above is in Sa'isbury MSS., vii. 43''.

■' The story of this Ship Money encounter is drawn from the Salisburv
MSS. [Hist. MSS. Comm.), and the Ordinances of the Privy Council.

1526.13 G

82 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

Vicarage, Leeds, Wakefield, and their several parishes ' should
be compelled to share in the cost of the vessel. In a letter to
Robert Cecil Hull explained the reason for making this request.
' They (the clothing towns) are many ways relieved by this port,
by the uttering their cloth to a great proportion, and so have
their oils, wood, alum, &c, and like help^ for their trade brought
in by the shipping of this place, . . . and consequently divers
of them are not only clothiers, but merchants also, to the great
hindrance of the merchants here and at York.' * An order was
at once granted in accordance with Hull's request, and the
' cloathing townes ' were told of their liabilities. But with an
astuteness typical of the Riding the clothiers refused entirely
to stir a finger towards collecting the £400 demanded of them.
They declared that they belonged to inland towns bordering on
no river nor haven, ' nor having any vent of any comodity by
the Porte of Ilulle '.- The Privy Council, with obliging credulity,
believed this statement, and the petitioners were graciously
' excused from any payment whatsoever '.3

This was in the spring of the year. Autumn came round, and
with it the expedition returned, presenting to Hull a bill for
£1,400. Again the port sent its lamentation to the Privy Council,
and again the levy was imposed upon the West Riding.4 Letters,
petitions, commands, all were showered on the heads of the
clothiers, who, led by Sir John Savill and other justices of the
peace, took up a firm attitude of refusal to pay. The Privy
Council hurled its thunderbolts, the Council of the North joined
in with some forcible utterances, and the Archbishop of York
made attempts at peaceful persuasion. For over a year these
commands and entreaties were sent to the obstinate towns, but
Savill and his followers calmly ignored the efforts of Archbishop
and Council. On October 30, 1597, the Privy Council fulminated
once more. ' We have many times heretofore written our
letters for the contribution to be made by the clothynge townes
in the West Rydynge of Yorkeshire ', and the constant neglect
on the part of the local justices 'shows an evident note of slack-
nesse '.;> Still the money was not forthcoming, and at last, in

1 Salisbury MSS., vi. 58-9.

- Privy Council Ordinances, March 28, 1596, petition from Yorkshire.

:1 Ibid., April 1, 1596. > Salisbury MSS., vi. 356, August 30, 1596.

5 Ordinances of Privy Council, October 30, 1597.

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 83

February 1598, patience being exhausted, the Privy Council
summoned four of the local magistrates to London to explain
their passive resistance.1 Savill was especially reprimanded.
' You have not only refused to shewe your duties in contrybut-
ynge to so nccessarie and honorable a service, but have eluded
our earnest direction by dillatory, frivolus and framed excuses.'
Full of contrition, the cjuartet faced the Council, and were
informed that now ' the money must be gathered of the clothiers
and other chapmen, as of the welthier sort of the inhabitants of
that Rydinge. ... If there be any slackncsse, you must come
along hether, and make up for your defaultes '. At last the
clothiers were driven to surrender, and in the next Quarter
Sessions at Pontefract an assessment was made ' for the con-
tribucon of fower hundreth poundes to be made by the clothiers
and inhabitauntes of the Westridynge \2

Though defeated at this encounter, the clothiers met every
subsequent demand with similar silent obstinacy. Thus, in
1626, when Hull was ordered to provide two ships, it had to
go through a repetition of the former struggle, and eventually
wrote to the Privy Council, ' Wee have sent sondrie tymes to
them of Hallyfaxe, Leedes, and Wakefield, for their proportion-
able assistance . . . and yet we have received no monies, neither
from them nor from the countie '.3 In all this affair, it is im-
portant to note the attitude of the justices of the peace. They
were evidently on the best of terms with the people around
them, knew their needs and possibilities, and were prepared to
stand up, even against the decrees of the central authority, in
defence of their fellows. This spirit would mean much when the
regulation of industry was placed by law in the hands of the
local magistracy. The success of any Act would depend on
whether or not the magistrates of the locality thought its enforce-
ment would conduce to the welfare of the surrounding population.
This must be kept in mind when examining the attempts made
by the State to supervise the textile industry in the county. The
justices of the peace were the champions of local freedom in the
matter of the Ship Money ; they would be equally the friend of
the clothier against the demands of a new and oppressive cloth law.

1 Ibid., April 14, 1 ;oS.

- West Riding Sessions Rolls, r 598 : Pontefract. Yorks. Arch. Soc,
Record Series, vol. iii. ■'• D. S. P., Chas. 1, dxxv, 13, October 30, 1626.

G 2

84 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

Thus, to draw this chapter to a close, the West Riding cloth
field of Elizabeth's reign had attained a position of importance,
and was being recognized as one of the centres of general supply.
Essex might boast its bays and serges, Norwich its fustians
and worsteds, Devonshire its kerseys,1 but the cloths of Kendal,
the ' cottons ' of Manchester, and the Northern Dozens, kerseys,
and broad cloths of Yorkshire were becoming famed at home
and abroad, and the West Riding had already laid the founda-
tions of its reputation as the provider of cheap cloths to the
poorer classes of the whole world.

APPENDIX

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ENGLISH WOOLLEN INDUSTRY
IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY

Ulnage Returns 2 are available for almost every county in
England, and supply a mass of data showing the relative pro-
duction of woollen cloth in various parts of the country.
Unfortunately, we cannot be certain that the figures submitted
by the ulnager's representatives are exhaustive. The subsidy
may have been collected less thoroughly in some counties than
others : judicious bribes may have secured exemption for some
clothiers : the collector may have forwarded under-statements,
and kept for himself a part of the revenue : and finally there
may have been official exemptions from payment in some cases.
On the other hand, these conditions might exist in all counties,
or different conditions in different counties might to some extent
produce a similar margin of error. On the whole, the returns are
useful in affording a rough general comparison of the production
for sale in the various areas, and it will be seen that some
interesting conclusions can be reached.

Figures are obtainable for most counties for some part of the
period 1468-78. For Northumberland and Hertford the latest
returns are of a much earlier date, but with these two exceptions
the following list is drawn from accounts dated between 1468
and 1473. An average annual output would have been prefer-
able to a figure for some particular year, but the returns are not
sufficiently full to allow the calculation of an average over the
ten years following 1468. Further, in one or two instances the
return actually made was for a period shorter or longer than one
year. In such cases, the amount has been increased or reduced

1 Fuller, The Church History nf Britain, 1655 cd., p. 141.

; The Accounts ;ire under the Record Oilier reference, Exch. K.R. Accounts,
bundles 339-46.

FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES

to a twelve-months' basis. Such a step is open to the objection
that the production was not uniform all the year round, winter
being a bad period for drying and finishing cloths. Hence an
account of nine months' production might include the busy
season, and a fifteen-months' figure might include two busy
seasons ; calculations based on these figures might, therefore,
over-estimate the annual production. Happily, this calculation
was only necessary in the case of one or two of the smaller
counties, and does not therefore produce any great error. In
the case of Oxfordshire and Cornwall there is no separate figure,
as the returns are attached to those of adjacent counties ; but
from almost contemporaneous returns it is possible to estimate
the approximate output in these two counties. Subject to these
limitations, the production of woollen cloths for sale about 1470
can be stated as follows :

County.
Bedford .
Berkshire .
Bucks.
Cambridge
Cornwall
Derby
Devon
Dorset
Kssex

Gloucester, Co. of
Bristol
Hants
Hereford .
Hertford .
Hunts.
Kent

Leicestershire
Lincolnshire
London and Middlesex
Norfolk (County)
Norwich, City of
Northants.
Notts.

Northumberland
Oxfordshire
Rutland .
Shropshire
Somerset .
Suffolk
Staffs.

Surrey and Sussex
Warwickshire
Wilts.

Worcestershire .
York, Co. and City

Total 39,34;

Year.

Number of Cloths.

1468-9

, ,

1.293$

, ,

1469-70

H72-3

(approx.) 30

1469-70

1472-3

1,036$

1467-8

707 i

1 468-9

2,627|

3;586,vjTotal= 4,874*

1471-2

i.45o|

1 469-70

339*

1447-8

249 \

147 1-2

I469-7O

1,027

1472-3

286

I469-7O

983

2?J \ Total = 830

I468-9

557 i

U72-3

7 80 A

I469-7O

1 441-2

120

I468-9 (

approx.) 200

'472-3

I468-9

1 10

, ,

4.98i£

5,188

io8J

I469-7O

7 "9

I,2(K)

, ,

4.3 10

I 468-9

47 7 h

4.972

86 DECAY AND EXPANSION DURING THE chap.

The counties for which no returns were made are Cumber-
land, Durham, Westmoreland, Lancashire, and Cheshire, i. e.
those parts which manufactured only for domestic consump-
tion, or which were still exempt from subsidy on account
of the low value and coarse quality of their wares. All the
counties of the southern, western, and midland areas produced
saleable cloths, but in nine counties (Bedford, Bucks., Cam-
bridge, Derby, Hunts., Leics., Notts., Cornwall, and Rutland)
the annual output was less than ioo cloths. In three others
(Northumberland, Shropshire, and Staffordshire) it was between
ioo and 200, and in five others (Hereford, Lincolnshire, Herts.,
Worcestershire, and Oxford) it was between 200 and 500.
A glance at the accompanying map reveals the significance of
these facts, and points to the following conclusions :

1. The northern counties, excluding Yorkshire and North-
umberland (which really meant Newcastle), were of no impor-
tance in the cloth market or in the eyes of the Exchequer.

2. Two midland blocks of counties, (a) Derby, Notts., Leics.,
and Rutland, (b) Cambridge, Hunts., Beds., and Bucks., separated
by Northants., produced less than two cloths per week per county;
in four counties (Cambridge, Derby, Hunts., and Rutland),
less than one cloth was produced each week, and the whole
eight counties together made less than eight cloths weekly.

3. With the exception of Warwickshire (where Coventry was
responsible for seven-eighths of the production), Northampton-
shire (where the county town produced 765^- cloths out of a total
of 780^), and Yorkshire, the annual output was less than 500
cloths per annum in all the counties north and west of a line
drawn from the southern part of Hereford to the south-eastern
corner of Hertford, and thence up to the Wash.

Producing 500 to 1,000 cloths we find Dorset, Middlesex
(including London), Norfolk (including Norwich), Northampton-
shire, Surrey, and Sussex. The production in Middlesex had
been higher earlier in the reign of Edward IX7,1 but experienced
a heavy fall during subsequent years, and the average output
in the reign of Henry VIII was only 856 cloths. Norfolk and
the city of Norwich were evidently not great producers of
woollen cloths. Possibly the worsted industry was by this time
engaging the greater attention, and worsted cloths did not pay
subsidy. But all the figures for Norfolk show that this county
was quite a secondary held of woollen production. More pieces
were made in Northampton than in Norwich. Surrey and
Sussex together produced less than 1,000 cloths, but there is
no evidence to show the output from each county.

1 Production lor Middlesex, 1463-4, 1,377; 1466-7, 1,711 (Exch. K.K.,
bundle 340, no. 20).

ii FIFTEENTH AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES 87

Distribution

of the

WOOLLEN INDUSTRY

in I47O

.North" o^l

Cumber

Durham

,Westd

££

CLOTHS PER ANNUM

cvf» 3000
2000-3000
IOOO - ZOOO
S00IOO0

£ 3 ZOO - SOO

00 - 200

SfLU» 100

NO lecoitos

^Cheshire,
°o° o^Staffe0.^'

N ^ /N ^

WorfolkN

Leic*

V L

&-Blgjy

^^frS Kent

>Dorset;

I R ^Rutland

Clarendon Tress, Oxford

88 DECAY AND EXPANSION

Of the larger producers, eleven counties were responsible for
over 1,000 cloths each. Of these, five made between 1,000
and 2,000 (Berks., Devon, Hants., Kent, and Warwick), Essex
made over 2,000, four counties (Somerset, Yorks., Gloucester,
and Wilts.) over 4,000, and Suffolk alone over 5,000. These five
chief counties stood in order of production as follows :

Suffolk

5,188

Somerset

• 4.98ii

Yorks.

4,972

Gloucs.

• 4.874*

Wilts.

4,3io

Total . 24,326

Thus 62 per cent, of the total production of the country came
from five counties : 12^ per cent, from Yorkshire alone.

The above figures and the accompanying map show that the
West of England counties comprised the chief textile area.
Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, and Somerset made 14,166 cloths
(i. e. 36 per cent, of the total output), and if to this we add the
yield of the adjacent counties, Oxford, Berkshire, Hants,
Dorset, Devon, and Cornwall, the total for the nine counties is
18,884 cloths, i. e. 48 per cent, of the country's production.

The East Anglian area came second, though Suffolk was the
largest producer in England. Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Hertford,
and Middlesex together made 9,878 cloths, i. e. about 25 per cent.
of the total production.

To sum up, two main conclusions are apparent from the above
data :

1. That by 1470 the textile industry was largely concentrated
in three chief areas (the West of England, East Anglia, and
Yorkshire) and one smaller area (Warwick and Northampton-
shire). The West of England counties were the largest pro-
ducers, whilst in the northern counties (Yorkshire excepted)
and Midlands (Warwick and Northamptonshire excepted) pro-
duction was negligible.

2. That Yorkshire ranked third amongst the textile counties.
The adjoining counties were of little or no importance, and
hence as a clothing area the North of England was less important
than its southern and western rivals. As generations went by,
the Yorkshire production increased, until by the eighteenth
century Yorkshire alone produced as much as either of the
other two areas.

CHAPTER III

ORGANIZATION OF THE WEST RIDING INDUSTRY IN
THE FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES

(a) The Clothier and the Domestic System

Having traced the growing importance of the extra-urban
manufacture and the decline of the textile gilds, we can now turn
to an examination of the economic structure of the woollen
industry under the changed conditions. This leads us to a study
of what has become known as the domestic system, with the
clothier as the economic unit. The term ' domestic system ' is
admittedly unsatisfactory, for it emphasizes only one fact,
namely that manufacture was carried on in the home, in contrast
to the factory system which came afterwards. As such, the
term might be applied equally to that stage in industrial evolu-
tion which we label the gild system. The suggested alternative,
' commission system ', is open to criticism, and it seems impos-
sible to invent a really adequate title to describe, in a couple
of words, the distinctive characteristics of the industrial society
which came between the gild and the factory. Confining our
attention to the textile industry, we might use the phrase
' clothier system ', but usage has established the claims of the
older term. Let us therefore retain the name ' domestic system ',
understanding thereby that state of industrial life in which the
clothiers controlled the trade, with industry established in the
cottages scattered throughout the length and breadth of the
county.

The domestic system did not hold all the field, for a small
amount of manufacturing was carried on under factory con-
ditions. The expansion of the industry in the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries had brought into existence a number of big
producers, who in some eases gathered their many employees
under one roof, and established a factory. Of the existence of
the mill-owner (to use a modern term) there is conclusive
evidence, but very little descriptive data. Jack of Newbury in
the South had his counterparts in the North in the persons of

90 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

Hodgkins of Halifax, Byram (or Brian) of Manchester, and
Cuthbert of Kendal.1 These men are said to have been factory
owners, though we know little of them except their names.
But their existence shows that the economies of the division of
labour and of direct supervision were becoming recognized, and
the passage of the anti-factory Act of 1555 2 indicates that the
trend towards factory organization was becoming sufficiently
marked to merit national attention. But that Act did not
apply to the North Country, the inhabitants of which area were
left free to congregate looms as much as they pleased ; and yet
we do not find there any flood of factory organization. The
reasons for the compare tive rarity of the factory, especially in
the North, are probably to be found in the following three
factors. (1) The anti-capitalistic spirit of the age, so far as
industry was concerned, expressed in the Act of 1555. (2) The
absence of large sums of capital available for industry. This
would be the case especially in Yorkshire, where the clothiers
were comparatively poor, and where such capital as was available
went into commerce. (3) The primitive nature of the cloth-
making apparatus and processes. The utmost that a factory
could do was to gather together a number of spinning-wheels,
hand-looms, dye-vats, shearing-boards, &c. A factory so
equipped would allow supervision more effectively to regulate
the hours of labour, prevent idleness among the employees, and
maintain uniform standards of production ; above all, the con-
centration of employees on one spot prevented that waste of
time which occurred when wool had to be carried a distance
between each process. These advantages might have been
sufficient to cause an adoption of factory production; but against
them must be placed the initial cost of erecting a big building,
providing homes for workpeople, and other preliminary charges,
too heavy for a person not possessed of large sums of capital.
The production of a ' Northern Dozen ' occupied fifteen persons
for one week, so a factory would have to be large enough to hold
a great number of workers to produce say half a score of such
cloths weekly. In a few cases wealthy clothiers acquired
deserted monasteries at a low price, and were thus provided

1 Cooke Taylor, Factory System, early chapters, anil De (iibbins, Industrial
History of England, p. 66. 2 Statute 2 & 3 Philip and Mary, c. 11.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 91

with a big building ready-made ; l but, with the exception of such
instances, the initial costs made the factory impracticable.
Further, the Tudor factory could offer no advantages in the
way of power or accelerated technical processes. In these cir-
cumstances, the balance between advantage and disadvantage was
very slight, and the line of least resistance was to allow employees
to remain scattered. Until the eighteenth century, therefore, the
cottage was the centre of industry and the factory a rarity,
treated by travelling authors as a curio so strange as to merit
description along with the Strid at Bolton, the Dropping Well
at Knaresborough, or the cloth market on Leeds Bridge.

We turn therefore to the predominant figure in English
economic life, the clothier. Let us first define the word. Accord-
ing to the Statute of Artificers and Apprentices, 1563, the j
clothier was the person who ' put cloth to making and sale ' ; 2
and the documents of a lawrsuit in 1613 described four York-
shiremen as ' clothiers, or persons that do trade and sell Yorkshire
kersies '.3 The ' clothyear ' (to give the spelling as it appears in
some Yorkshire Tudor wills) was the person responsible for the
production of cloths. He provided the necessary capital, pur-
chased the raw material, saw it through the various processes,
and then marketed the piece. He was the master, the employer,
the ' head of the firm '. But the ' firm ' might be of any size,
from the family unit upwards, and the exact character of the
clothier's functions varied according to the size of his concern.
If he employed only his own family and one or two outsiders,
his own share of the work would of necessity be industrial as
well as commercial : he was wool-buyer, weaver, and cloth-
seller. If the scale of operations was large, with numbers of
spinners, weavers, &c., employed, the clothier would not engage
in any industrial processes himself, but confine his attention
to buying the raw material, employing people to work it up,
and selling the cloth. His employees might work entirely under
his roof, in which case he would exercise a general supervision
over their work. Sometimes a part would work in the clothier's
establishment, the remainder in their own homes, but in very

1 v.g. Malmesbury Abbey was so used after the Dissolution. See Ashley.
Economic Organization of England, p. 150. It seems very probable that many
factories had their origin in this way. - 5 Kliz., c. 4.

i See Chapter VI for details of this lawsuit.

92 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

many instances all the work was done in the employees' cottages,
in which case the clothier, stationed in his warehouse, would
control the distribution of raw material and the payment of
wages when the work was returned. Thus the way in which
the clothier spent his time depended largely on the extent of
his output, and that difference between the character of the
Yorkshire and West of England clothiers so frequently com-
mented upon by economic historians was entirely due to this
difference in the scale of operations. It was a matter of degree
rather than of kind.1 The almost purely commercial activity
of the Wiltshire clothiers was part of the division of labour
which becomes possible with large-scale production. Wherever
Yorkshire clothiers in the Tudor and Stuart periods attained
any great heights of prosperity and large output, they became
very much akin to their fellows in the West, commercial rather
than industrial. But whilst the big man apparently predomi-
nated in Somerset and Wiltshire, ' meaner clothiers ' formed the
greater part of the Yorkshire industrial army. This latter fact
was responsible for those features which characterized the
Yorkshire manufacture until the coming of steam-power and
the factory, the chief of which were as follows :

(i) Industrial labour on the part of the clothier and his
family was the general lot, and was accompanied in many cases
by comparative poverty. The typical clothier of the south-
western counties, working on a large scale, had become wealthy,
and according to a pamphlet by May2 (1613) increased in fame
and riches, his house like a king's court, his table replenished
with feasts, his hospitality bountiful, and with such plenty and
content on every side that crowned heads were highly pleased
with the entertainment received at his hands. The family of
such a clothier would scarcely condescend to engage in textile
work, or have industrial implements in the house. Hence there
must have been a marked contrast between the condition of the
clothiers' houses and families in the two areas.

(2) The small extent to which capitalism had developed in

1 The report of the Parliamentary Committee of 1806 has created the
impression that the differences between the industrial organization in Vorkshire
and the West of England were fundamental. This was not so.

2 May, ' A Declaration of the Estate of Clothing now used within this
Realm', Brit. Mus., 712. g. 16(1).

m FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 93

the Yorkshire industry had as its counterpart a very slight y
cleavage between capital and labour, and a freedom from such
serious labour disputes as marked the other textile areas.

(3) The inability of the small clothier to buy large quantities
of wool made necessary the rise of middlemen whose business it
was to provide the West Riding masters with wool according
to their needs, both as to quantity and quality. (See last section
of this chapter.)

(4) As the smaller men must sell their wares without delay,
and were unable to take them to London or the Continent,
numerous local weekly markets were necessary, with an army
of factors and merchants acting as a medium between the small
independent producers and the wider English and European
market.

Throughout Yorkshire wills, from the fifteenth century
onwards,1 we encounter the last testaments of clothiers in all
parts of the West Riding. The nature of these clothiers varied
with the man and the district, and there was an unbroken
gradation from the ' meaner ' up to the wealthy. One feature
was common to all, namely the alliance between farming and v
industry. Even the busiest clothier had his plot of land, and
some part of his sustenance was drawn from that source. The
word ' yeoman ' was often only an alias for ' clothier ', and it
was by the joint produce of the land and the loom that the
Yorkshireman found his livelihood secured.

The most numerous section of the Yorkshire textile com-
munity was that of the smallest clothiers, who were to be found
all over the Riding, but especially concentrated in the Halifax
area, where they seem to have constituted the greater part of
the population. We first make the acquaintance of these men
:n the Linage Returns for the reign of Richard II, when the
West Riding contained none but small producers. In the
Account for 1396 7, Emma Earle was the largest contributor of
ulnage, being responsible for 48 whole cloths of assize in 54
weeks. If, as was probably the case, each cloth really meant
two 'Dozens', the leading clothier of Wakefield produced I?
' Dozens ' in a week. The average for the whole of Wakefield

1 See volumes of wills published by Surtees, Yorkshire Archaeological,
Thoresby, Bradford Antiquarian, and other similar societies. For detailed
references, see Bibliography.

94 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

was less than one ' Dozen ' per clothier per week. In Leeds
the average weekly output of each of the four clothiers men-
tioned in the Account was just over one ' Dozen ' ; in Ripon it
was one-third of a whole cloth of assize, and for the whole
Riding the production amounted to about ten whole cloths per
clothier per annum. By the sixteenth century many bigger
producers had appeared, and the weekly output of the smallest
men was now, as a rule, one kersey.

The best description of the small clothier class is found in
the preamble to the ' Halifax Act ' of 1555.1 Doubtless, as in
most preambles, there is hyperbole in the praises, both moral
and material, but apart from this glossing the description is
accurate.

' Forasmuche as the Paryshc of Halyfaxe and other places
theronto adjoyning, bcyng planted in the grete waste and
moores, where the Fertilite of Grounde ys not apte to bryng
forthe any Corne nor good Grasse, but in rare Places, and by
exceedinge and greate industrye of the inhabitantcs, and the
same inhabitantcs altogether doo lyvc by clothe making, for the
greate parte of them neyther gettethe Corne nor ys hable to
keepe a Horse to carry Woolles, nor yet to bye much woolle att
once, but hathe ever used onelie to repayre to the Towne of
Halyfaxe, and some other nigh theronto, and thcr to bye upon
the Woolldryver, some a stone, some twoo, and some three or
foure accordinge to theyre habilitec, and to carrye the same to
theire houses, some iij, iiij, v, and vj myles of, upon their Headdes
and Backes, and so to make and converte the same eyther into
Yarne or Clothe, and to sell the same, and so to bye more Woolle
of the Wooll-dryver, by meanes of whiche Industrye the barrcyn
Gronde in those partes be nowe muche inhabyted, and above
fyve hundrethe householdes there newly increased within theis
fourtye yeares past.'

In view of these local conditions the district was granted
special permission to purchase its wool through middlemen
(wooldrivers), whilst the rest of the country was forbidden to
rlo so.2 Similar pictures were painted by witnesses in the
clothiers' lawsuits of the following century ; many spoke of the
parish of Halifax, with its 'very mounteynous and barreyn
soyle ', and its poor people, ' who, making every week a coarse
kersey, and being compelled to sell the same at the week end,

' 2 & 3 Philip and Mary, c. 13.

- See last section of present chapter.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 95

and with the money received for the same to provide bothe
stuffe wherewith to make another the week following, and also
victualls to susteyne themselves and their families till another
be made and sold ', supported themselves only by dint of
frugal living and ceaseless toil.1 Such clothiers were not peculiar
to Halifax, but formed the lower grade of independent workers
throughout the Riding. It must have been a hand-to-mouth
existence for such men. Unable to make long journeys into the
wool-producing areas, they bought their wool from dealers or
wool-staplers, made it up into yarn or cloth, and then sold the
yarn to weavers or the rough unfinished piece to merchants or
agents. Thus they trod the weekly round of production and
sale ; profits were small, but the men were independent, and
that was probably worth a great deal. They leased or owned
a cottage, with a toft of ground adjoining, on which they fed
a little live stock. They had their loom, spinning-wheels, a set.
of ' walker sheres ', and often a dye-vat or ' lead '. Employing
their own family, and occasionally one or two outsiders, they
produced one piece weekly, and so were able to jog along more
or less contentedly, provided no new burden was imposed on
them in the way of a levy for Ship Money or an increase in the
subsidy on their kerseys. One gets an interesting glimpse of
the family life of such men from such wills as the following,
wherein Robert Sydall, clothier, of Holbeck, makes the following
bequest : ' To Elizabeth, my wife, such vessels and furniture
as belongeth to her brewinge, and all that stock of money which
she haith gotten by her bakinge and brewinge.' Sydall also
shares out certain lands which he holds on lease, and to his wife
and children leaves ' one fatt cowe, and the fletches of a little
swyne that is already kill'd V2 Evidently the live stock kept
on the plots of land did much to provide meat and milk, whilst
the earnings of the wife's spare hours had been laid aside for
a rainy day.

One reason for the existence of this large class of meaner
clothiers is probably to be found in the fact that the kersey
was the staple cloth manufactured, especially around Halifax.
According to a document of 1588, six persons would be occupied

1 Depositions of witnesses in Metcalfe case of 14 Chas. I. See account in
Chapter VI. ; Thorcsby Soc. publications, vol. i, p. 3S4.

96 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

for a week at sorting, carding, spinning, weaving, and shearing,
in order to produce one finished but undyed kersey.1 The wool-
driver, by selling sorted wool, freed the small clothier from the
first of the above-enumerated processes : most kerseys were
sold without being sheared : fulling and possibly tentering
would be done by the fuller. Hence the small clothier, assisted
by four workers, would be able to carry through the carding,
spinning, and weaving of a kersey in a week. The four assistants
might all be members of the clothier's family, especially as
children were inured to work at a very tender age : but should
the family supply of labour be inadequate, an apprentice was
taken, or one or two women were hired to assist in spinning.
Thus there was a distinct connexion between the labour supply
required to make one kersey a week and the normal size of the
clothier's establishment. Further, it seems certain that there
existed a small class of independent men who were weavers
only.2 The preamble of the Halifax Act states that some of
the small clothiers only went so far as to work the wool up into
yarn, and then sold it. At the same time the Yorkshire wills
reveal the existence of independent weavers, who probably
purchased the yarn from the yarn-makers, and simply carried
out the weaving processes.

From the poorer clothiers there was a gradual rise to their
more wealthy neighbours, who engaged in a little farming as
a by-occupation, but whose chief interest lay in the production
of cloth in larger quantities. These men, who were to be found
especially in the villages near Leeds, lived in a state of simple
plenty.3 Their houses were surrounded by a garden or orchard,
and several closes of land were owned or rented, which, combined
together, allowed for the keeping of numerous domestic animals.
Cows, a horse or ass, swine, and poultry were always kept, and
as winter came along a cow or pig was killed and salted to
provide meat during the months of frost and snow. Of cloth-
making utensils there was a full set. The ' brode lome ' on

1 Kenyon .1/55., Hist. MSS. Comm., app. xiv, pt. iv, p. ^-^. Draft of
.scheme for establishing some cloth-making venture at Skipton.

: 1>. S. /'., fas. I, lxxx. 13, describes such a class of weavers. For a typical
weaver's will, see that of George Goodall, of Tong, 1552, in Thoresby Sot.
publications, vol. xix, pt. ii, no. 4, 1913.

3 See Surveys of Manor of Leeds, Wills, miscellaneous MSS., and Leeds
Parish Church Registers, all in Thoresby Soc. volumes.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 97

which the ' Northern Dozens ' were woven, the ' leade ' or
' lyttinge leade ', in which the wool was dyed, the ' shere borde '
and ' walker sheres ', with which the surface of the cloth was
cropped fine and smooth after fulling, all were to be seen in the
loom-shop or work-chamber.1 Outside, in the garth or close,
stood the ' wool hedge , on which the wool was spread to dry
after dyeing, and the long wooden tenter frame, on which the
piece, after shrinking in the fulling process, was finally stretched
to t lie desired dimensions and left to dry.

In most cases these larger clothiers were at the same time
employers and workmen. They took apprentices, who learned
the various branches of the trade during long years of service
under the master. They employed journeymen and women,
who either in the workshop of the clothier or in their own
cottages prepared the yarn and wove the piece. The clothier
then took the piece to the fulling-mill, or ' walk-miln ' as it was ^
still commonly called, and, after it had received a thorough
washing and milling, brought it home, sheared, dressed, and
tentered it, and finally carried or sent it to the market.

The character of these more wealthy clothiers can be well
realized by examining an inventory of the stock-in-trade of
one of their number. Let us take that of ' John Pawsone, late
of Kyrkgaite in Leeds . . . Clothier ', dated 1576.2 Pawson
belonged to what one might call the upper middle class of his
fraternity. His house was small, containing three chief rooms
— the ' Oifyse house ' or kitchen, which was the only room to
possess a fire-place ; the parlour, which also served as a bed-
room, and store-room for the ' xij beiff flickes ', or stock of
salted meat for the winter; and the chamber, which contained
the following stock of cloth-making materials :

' xiiij stone of cohered wool (i. e. wool dyed before weaving),
. . . fyve stone of Butter (for greasing the wool before working
it), a quartren and a half of allum (for use in dyeing). . . . Item,
xxvij stone of Cohered Woll, more certeyne thrums (waste ends of
yarn and wool), xv stone of whyte woll, vij paire of woll combes. ':}

1 At death it was customary to bequeath ' my best beast for my mortuary '
to tin' parish priest. In one or two cases the ' best loom ' took the place of the
beast. - Printed in Thorcsby Soc. publications, iv. 163-6.

;1 In view of the fact that worsted cloths were not made in the West Riding
until a century later, it is difficult to decide the use to which these combs
were put.

1526.12 II

98 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

Attached to the house were a workshop and loom-house,
a dye-house, and ' laith ' or barn. The contents of these rooms
were :

' In the Shopp and Lomehouse, Inprimis, xxj dossans in Clothe
(i. e. 21 pieces of cloth 13 yds. by if yds.), price xxxiiij1'-, one
shere borde coverynge, xxij8-, . . . Item, x stone of yarne att
spynners, and v stone of woll, viij'1- vs- One lome, Damyselles,
Bartrees, Home, Wheile (spinning-wheel), and other thynges
theronto belongyng.'

' In the Leadhouse {dye-house), Laithe and Back Yearde, One
Leade, . . . iiij tubbes, certeyne . . . yarne, baskettes, ij tenter
heades, tenter rope, a cock and two hens, two kye, three styrkes,
one horse, one pack saddle, two swyne, xxij9-'

In addition to these goods, there were some ' good debtes ',
a few ' Desperat debtes ', and notices of several leases and
holdings of land. Pawson had under his care three apprentices,
who slept at their own homes, and this, along with the quantities
of material in stock or out at the spinners' houses, shows that
his business was comparatively large.

Taking another instance, the will of John Hollyred of Halifax,
clothier (1574-5), makes special bequests alone to the extent of
£130. 1 One might multiply instances of similar men, clothiers
in comfortable or affluent circumstances,2 with all the requisites
for cloth-making, and also their many garths, orchards, ' hearbe
gardens ',3 tenter closes, and ' woll hedges '. At their death they
bequeathed considerable sums to their relatives and servants, to
the poor, or to ' mendinge of the hie wayes '. They made minute
provision for the distribution of jackets, doublets, hose, shoes,
houses, corn, cattle, horses, sheep, bedding, candlesticks, and
silver spoons. In some wills we get a glimpse of another side of
the clothier's life, as for example, in that of John Walker of
Armley, clothier (1588; :

' To my son, my sword and my yewe bowe, and sixe of my
best arrowes. To (another son) another bowe and sixe arrowes.' 4

Amongst such men the idea of large-scale production was not
unknown. In 1588 a detailed scheme, apparently for some

1 North Country Wills, Surtces Soc, vol. exxi, pp. 70-1.

2 See Testamenta Lcodicnsia, Thoresbv volumes, passim.

3 Will of Win. Sydall, Holbeck, clothier, January 1583—4: Thoresbv Soc.
publications, i. 383.

4 Will of John Walker of Armley, clothier : Thoresbv Soc, i. 385 .

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES

charitable institution, was drawn up, by which sixty persons
were to be employed under one roof at Skipton. What came of
the suggestion is not known.1 In practice some of the largest
men in Leeds employed over a score of workpeople, and a petition
from that town, dated 1629, says that many of them were
' dayly setting on worke about forty poor people in theire
Trade '.- In such cases the clothier would not engage in indus-
trial work himself, but resembled textile leaders of the West of
England.

It is amongst these men that we find the beginnings of the
great families which directed social and municipal life in their
locality during the next two centuries. Of them probably the
most important name was that of John Harrison, the famous
Leeds philanthropist, who was himself a clothier by trade.
Harrison's work for his native place puts him in the first rank
as a public benefactor.

' He builte one parish church, a very faire one of free stone
(St. John's, Briggate), . . . he founded an hospitall of twentie
; ilmes bowses, he built likewise a chapell to itt, and a howse
for a vicar to live in, . . . he built a free schoole, ... he builte
a whollc streete with faire bowses on booth sides . . . and att his
owne proper cost and charge did he all this, and left large
revenews to maintaine these thinges.' 3

Harrison's property extended north of Upperhead and Lower-
head Rows, and his income was very large. But it was prac-
tically all devoted to public service, and the Grammar School,
St. John's Church, and the provision for aged and poor were
amongst the chief of his benefactions. He was also a man of
great intellectual power, energy, and inspiration, and in his
capacity of deputy alderman (the equivalent of deputy mayor)
he did much to guide Leeds through critical times.'

Another figure of Elizabethan times is less famous in the
general social life of Leeds, and so, although he seems to have
been one of the most prominent industrial figures of his day,
very little is known of him. This was Randall Tenchc. Tcnche
was a clothier of no small importance, and an enterprising man,

1 Kcnyon MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm. Ucp<irts, app. xiv, pt. iv, p. 57;.

- I>. S. I'., Chas. I, exxxix. 24. Sec Chapter VII.

■; Life of M armaduke Rawd<m (Camden Soc. publications^, p. 1 .: 1 .

1 Price, Leeds and its XcigMh>urh",id, p. 198.

II 2

ioo ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

ever ready to explore new fields. In 1589 he was in negotiation
with Sir Francis Willoughby of Wollaton Hall, near Nottingham,
at a time when the latter was engaged in certain fancy-cloth-
making ventures. In a letter Tenche undertook

' the dyeing of Sir Francis Willoughby's wool, and the spinning,
dyeing, and working of Arres work of all sorts, which he is
emboldened to do, more especially as he has found out a work-
man or two who will join with him or be under him, who will
work any work that shall be set unto them by a painter in
colours, and to work the same in woollen yarn . . ., or in silk or
in silver or gold or altogether.'

For proof thereof Tenche was willing to visit Wollaton Hall,
' and Sir Francis shall draw a little carpet or cushion in what
colour shall be thought fittest for the same ; and Tenche will work '
it to the satisfaction of the worthy gentleman before the contract
be finally made. Tenche's work seems to have satisfied Sir
Francis, who was quite willing to pay him £50 per annum as
well as the desired wages to his workmen, 6s. Sd. per week.
The two began to draw up various plans for dyeing and weaving
these fancy wares, but nothing is known of the subsequent
history of the scheme.1

In his own county Tenche was chiefly famous as an orthodox
upholder of the law. In 1590 he wrote to the President of the
Council of the North of York, ' with the lull consent of all other
clothiers in the North partes', complaining that 'by reason of a
corupt practise of a great number of broggers, engrocers, wool-
gatherars, regratours and such like', all the wool of the county
had been snatched up, and could only be obtained by clothiers
at ' prisses . . . exceedingly enhaunsed and increased '.- In view
of this lamentable state of affairs, he pleaded for a vigorous
enforcement of the law against middlemen in the wool trade.
In the same year he was appointed, on the nomination of the
Privy Council, to cheek evil practices in the making of West
Riding cloths.3 The letter from the Privy Council to the Presi-
dent of the Council of the North was most flattering to Tenche.
After stating the evil practice to be dealt with, it declared that
4 forasmuch as this fraude . . . will best be suppressed by

1 1. filer in Middleton MSS. (Hist. MSS. Comm.), pp. 498-9, April 4, 1589.
1 Acts and Ordinances of the Privy Council, May 28, 1590, xix. 169.
J Ibid., December 24, 1590, xx. 163.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 101

th'aucthorising of some honncst and discrectc pcrsonncs for the
overseing of the said abuses ', the President ' is praied to license
Randoll Tenche, a man of honnest conversacion and good skill
and experience in such cases, together with one or two more to
joync him ', to take all possible steps to root out the fraud.
At a later date he was entrusted with the task of enforcing
another law l concerning the true making of cloth, and had
power to seize all pieces which did not conform to legal demands.
Again Randall discharged his duties with customary thorough-
ness : in fact, so energetic was he that he brought upon his head
the angry complaints of many of his victims, who appealed
against him to the Quarter Sessions at Wakefield, 1598. Hence
the order of the Court :

' Whereas this Court is informed that Randall Tenche and
others the Searchers of Leedes have seized many clothes of
dyvers personnes, who desire of this Court that the Searchers
may be called in, and showe cause why they dyd the same : yt
is therefore ordered that a warrant shalbe made against them to
appeare att the next Sessions and answeare for the premisses.' 2

Apart from these facts, little seems to be known of this
interesting figure. He was evidently of some importance in the
religious life of the town, and acted as churchwarden at the
parish church in 1591.3 His home was situated in the Tenters,4
or lands by the river side near the church, and here he had his
garth and tenter close.0 One of his sons was buried in the
parish church,6 and Randall himself died in the last clays of the
year 1628. 7 His name has sunk into oblivion, for, though he
was a stalwart pillar of Church and State, he did not endow any
churches or almshouses.

(/>) Apprenticeship

As we have seen, apprenticeship was an important part of
the gild system, and aimed at maintaining the standard of

1 39 Kliz., c. jo.

- Quarter Sessions Records, i ;<>S, Vorks. Arch. Soc, Record Scries, iii. 141.

3 Leeds Parish Church Registers, Thoresby Soc. publications, i. 2O9.

1 Kntrics in register always read ' Randall Tenche of the Tenters ', e.g.
Thoresby Soc, iii. 3 10.

:» Survey of the Man<r of Leeds, iMo, Thoresby Soc, xi. 411.

• Thoresby Soc, ii. 41.

' Murial Register, Leeds Parish Church, 102S <j : 'Jan. 1st, Randall Tenche
ot the Tenters', Thoresbv Soc, 111. }io.

102 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

v/orkmanship by demanding that every man, before becoming
an independent master, should have received a thorough train-
ing during a long period of service under the guidance of some
competent master. Apprenticeship had become systematized
under the old local control, and entry into it hedged about with
many formalities and restrictions. As the effectiveness of local
industrial regulation declined, national supervision became more
necessary. An Apprenticeship Law had been passed in the reign
of Henry IV, but its effect was rather to injure the towns than
to regulate the country industry.1 The expansion of the textile
industry in the new centres during the next hundred years was
accompanied by a comparative neglect of formal industrial
training. The State had not yet evolved its elaborate code of
economic law, and so cloth-makers were virtually free to act
according to their individual desires. In Yorkshire, as else-
where, men took up the manufacture of cloth without having
undergone any lengthy period of apprenticeship. Hence, in
the sixteenth century, many complaints were made concerning
the ' multitude of clothiers lately encreased in the realme ',
since ' every man that wolde had libertie to be a clothier ' :
and it was urged that laws should be made to ensure that ' none
shoulde meddle with clothemaking, but such as had been
premises to th'occupacion '.2 Various enactments 3 eventually
brought apprenticeship under legal control, but the North
Country was exempted from their scope until the great Act of
1563, 4 which surveyed the whole field of relationships between
master and man.

This Act spread its tentacles over town and country alike.
The enforcement of apprenticeship, and the maintenance of high
freehold qualifications for apprentices, marked all the clauses
concerning training for work. Merchants, mercers, drapers, and
'clothiers that put cloth to making or sale' were forbidden to
take any apprentice unless the youth was their own son or the
child of a ' fort y shilling freeholder '. The forty-shilling qualifica-

1 See Cunningham, op. cit., i. 449. Also Statute, 7 Men. IV, c. 17.

2 Ordinances of the Privy Council, 1550, vol. iii, p. 19.

3 e.g. 2 tc \ Philip and Mary, c. II.

1 5 KHz., c. 4. This Act exempted the makers of the coarsest wares ol
Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, and Wales, i.e. friezes, cottons, and
' huswives' ■ loth '.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 103

tion applied only to those living in corporate towns or cities,
such as York and Beverley : in market towns and rural districts
the freehold was to be of the annual value of £3. The local
magistrates were to see that this clause was enforced, and all
indentures of apprenticeship had to be duly registered and
endorsed by them. The Act also reiterated the demand for
a training period of at least seven years, and in order to guarantee
that all workers, whether employer or employee, should be
properly skilled, laid down the following rule :

' It shall not be lawfull for any person to sett up, occupy,
use, or exercise any craft, mistery, or occupation . . . except
he shall have been brought up therein seven yeares at the least
as an apprentice, nor to set any person on work in such occupa-
tion . . . except he shall have been apprenticed as is afore-
said.'

The penalty for infringement of this clause was 405. for every
month the offender had worked at the trade.

The Act applied to all existing industries, and the Quarter
Sessions records, both of the North and West Riding,1 show that
sonic of the clauses of the statute were enforced, especially that
demanding a seven years' apprenticeship. Instances similar to
the following are numerous :

Malton, Jan. 12th, 1607. ' Thomas Cooke, . . . webster, for
trading, having never served vij years' apprentice.' 2

Pontefract, April 1647. ' George Copley of Skelmanthorpe, did
for the space of eleven whole months occupy . . . the art, mistery,
and manual occupation of a weaver making woollen cloth, in
which said art, mistery or occupation he had not been educated
or apprenticed for the space of seven years.' He was therefore
fined in accordance with the provisions of the statute, £2 per
month, or {22 for his eleven months of illicit industry.3

Wakefield, Jan. 1648. Elizabeth Wayte of Thorne, mercer,
for carrying on the trade of a mercer tor ten months without
having previously served the necessary apprenticeship. Eliza-
beth had incurred the enmity of a neighbouring mercer, who,
being legally qualified, had informed the authorities of Eliza-
beth's misdemeanour, and in return received half of the £20 line
imposed upon the offender.1

1 West Riding Quarter Sessit>ns Rolls, 1507-1O0.;, ed. by J. Lister.

2 S'orth Hiding Q. S. Records (cd. Atkinson), i. ui.

1 II', st Riding Quart, r Sessions Rolls, Indictment Book B, April j;. j ; Chas. 1.
' Indictment Book B, Wuketield Quarter Sessions, Jan., 2? ('has. I.

io4 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

Thirsk, 1681. A Hewby yeoman indicted for using the trade
of a weaver without having been properly apprenticed.1

The master took his own son as apprentice, or accepted the
lad of some neighbour or friend. In addition to this, he was
liable to receive forced gifts of apprentices from the poor law
authorities. The poor relief system of the seventeenth century
made provision for the employment of pauper children in some
school or workhouse, or for them to be placed out in the hands
of a clothier or other ratepayer. Thus the clothier was destined,
sooner or later, to have an apprentice thrust upon him by the
churchwardens and overseers of the poor. It was wellnigh
impossible for him to refuse the child, and the following entries
indicate some of the attempts made to wriggle out of the
obligation :

Skipton Quarter Sessions, July 1638. ' Upon Informacon
given unto this Corte by the Churchwardens and Overseers of
the Poore in the parishe of Kighley that one Robert Cloughe of
that parishe refusethe to take his apprentice, beinge legally
tendred unto him, Itt is ordered that the saide Robert Cloughe
shall take the said poore child apprentice, if he have not a scald
head, or els be taken bounde to answeare his contempt before
His Majestie's Judges of Assize at the next Assizes.' -

At the same Court, ' Thomas Backhouse doth wilfully refuse
to take ... a poore child putt apprentice to him. Ordered that
the apprentice shallbe confirmed to him, and that he shalbe
taken bounde to answeare his contempte at the next Sessions,
. . . and that he shall pay and satisne the chardges that the
parishe hath beene putt for providing and maintaining the saide
poore child since he was tendred unto him.' 3

During the seven years of apprenticeship, the lad was entirely
under the control of his master, especially if provided with
board and lodging. Any attempt to abscond could be severely
punished,4 and should the master be seriously dissatisfied with
the pupil he might lay his case before the magistrates, who
were empowered to ' cause such due correction and punishment
to be ministered to him as by their wisdom and discretion shalbe
thought meet'.0 This might mean a flogging, expulsion from

1 XnrtJi Riding Q. S. Records, vol. vii, p. 53.

2 West Riding Quarter Sessions, Order J look A, July 1638. 3 Ibid.

1 April 5, i0o8, North Riding Records. M;in indicted for enticing |olm
Smith, apprentice, to leave his master.
6 5 Eliz., c. 4.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 105

the service of the master, or a period of incarceration in the
' Soletary Cells' which were provided in the Wakefield House
of Correction for ' the purpose of confining unruly apprentices,
vagrants, etc.' ! The parish apprentice was occasionally a burden
to his master, who missed no opportunity of ridding himself of
useless pupils. Thus, in 1639, a clothier of the Halifax parish
complained to Quarter Sessions that a parish apprentice, given
him three years before, was ' a Lunatique and a Caytiff, and not
fitt to doc him any service ',2 and in the following year a Brad-
ford clothier declared that the apprentice placed with him was
' blynde, and utterly disabled and unfitt for service '.3 In such
cases the applicant was released from this useless charge, and
another parish child given him. On the other hand, the appren-
tice was not without a measure of protection. His master was
not supposed to ill-treat or neglect him, under pain of the lad's
removal ; and if the master became bankrupt, or was manifestly
not discharging his obligations to the youth, the apprentice was
liberated by the justices, and could seek for a new master else-
where. Witness the following quaint order of the Pontefract
Quarter Sessions, April 1638 :

' Whereas Thomas Farrcy hath beene bounde apprcntisc to
one Matthew Usher of Wakefield, ... to the trade of a mercer ;
now forasmuche as the said Usher is decayed in his Estate, and
given over his Trade, and lyen two years in the King's bench,
and his wife lives by brewing or Tipling of Ale, and hath not
ymployed or assigned the said Farrey to any person of that
trade, but forceth him to live idlely and till Ale, and loose his
tyme and trade ','1

therefore the lad was freed from bondage, and allowed to seek
a master of better repute.

As we examine the system of apprenticeship in the light of

1 Order Hook of Quarter Sessions, quoted by J. Horsfall Turner, Wakefield
House of Correction, p. 122.

- Ouarter Sessions, Order Book A, 3rd October, 14 Chas. I (Halifax Sessions).

3 Ibid., p. 15, 1st October, 15 Chas. I.

1 Ibid., April 1638. Similar one in North Hiding Records: ' Whereas Thos.
Pant, apprentice to Christopher Simpson, of Kgton, shoemaker, complains that
he has not been employed in his occupation, . . . but hath been trayned up
these three yeres in wandering the country and playing Interludes, and for the
said Simpson is an obstinate convicted Popish recusant, . . . and warrants are
issued for his apprehension, . . . the said Pant shalbe free of lib apprentii 1
ship ' (North Riding Sessions, iOio, vol. i, p. 204).

106 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

the Act of 1563, the questions inevitably arise — Did it work ? Did
it achieve its aims ? Was it a permanent part and parcel of the
industrial organization ? To these queries it is difficult to give
a comprehensive answer. In the mind of the clothier there were
two interpretations of the term ' Apprenticeship '. The first
was that it was essential for future masters to be thoroughly
trained, and this could be best effected by a course of tuition,
the duration of which had been settled by custom at seven years.
Secondly, there was the legally ordained apprenticeship, hedged
in with freehold qualifications, attestations of local magistrates,
&c, as demanded by the Elizabethan Act. The first of these
views was generally admitted, and to some extent enforced by
the local courts. But even here it is difficult to believe that all
fulfilled the term of seven years. Such a period was far more
than sufficient for acquiring proficiency in the various processes,
especially since the average Yorkshire cloth was not a ' super-
fine ', and would not require very great skill or delicate work-
manship. Hence it is very probable that apprenticeship was
regarded by many as a matter rather of industrial convenience
than of legal necessity, and that the West Riding justices of the
peace were speaking of a practice common in the textile industry
when, in 1604, they complained of the ' unskillfull persons that
daileye sett upp trades and misterics in those thinges wherein
they were never lawfull apprentises \l

As to the observance of the ' freehold .' and other clauses of
the Act, we have thennswer to our query in a confession made in
1640 by the Yorkshire weavers themselves. It appears that
some men had been perusing the Act, and had seen the possi-
bility of making money by informing the authorities of the
manner in which various clauses were being disregarded by the
clothiers.2 The latter were up in arms at once, and dispatched
to the King 'The humble petition of the poore Clothiers ol
I. cedes, [lallifax, and other the Clothing Townes in the Countie
of Yorke '. In the petition they cited the clauses which were
the cause of the trouble, namely, ' that no Clothier shall take
any apprentice but hee whose father hath 405. of ffreehold

1 Complaint of justices of Agbrigg and Morley wapentakes to constables of
those parts. Printed in Old Yorkshire, vol. ii. pp. 41-2.

- The informer was the bane of life in some parts, but the tear of his
ai tivities did not deter the clothiers from straining the law.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 107

estate of Inheritance, to be certified under the hands of three
Justices of the Peace, . . . and also for everie three apprentices
to keep one Journeyman, and these upon pain of scverall great
penalties '. These clauses, the petitioners candidly confessed,
were ' never observed nor put in execution in ye said Countie of
Yorke, nor can be observed, for many wise reasons '. The
clothiers therefore asked that the clauses be repealed, and also
sought grace and pardon for those clothiers who were to be
brought before the next Assizes for offences against them.
A sentence imposed upon these men would ' tende to their utter
undoeing, if some remedie be not speedily had, there being not
one Clothier in ye Countie but'is giiiltie of ye Penalties of ye said
Statute \l

(c) The Journeyman
The extent to which journeymen were employed depended
largely upon the scale of the clothier's business. It is very
doubtful if any of the smaller men employed any male adult
labour, but in the case of the larger clothiers and the cloth-
finishing trades considerable numbers of journeymen were
engaged. The journeyman's position was carefully regulated
by the Act of 1563. Any clothier who had three apprentices
must employ one journeyman, with an additional one for every
further apprentice ; but in practice this rule was disregarded,
and the Yorkshire clothier made the matter one of personal
option, utilizing the services of apprentices or journeymen as
best suited his purpose. The employee was required by law to
have first completed a seven years' term of apprenticeship, and
in many cases looked forward to the day when, having saved
sufficient money, he would be able to become a clothier himself.
He was to be employed for not less than one year, and could
neither leave nor be dismissed before the end of that period.
His hours of labour were fixed by the Act of 1503 ; from March w
to September he was expected to work from 5 a.m. to 7 or 8 p.m.,
with not more than i\ hours interval for meals and after-dinner
sleep ; from September to March he must work ' from the spring
of the dav in the morning until the night oi the same day',
upon pain of losing a. penny for each hour's absence. These
hours were not strictly observed, except possibly by those who
1 D. >'. /'., Chas. I, cccclx. 64.

io8 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

worked under the employer's roof. Dyers, fullers, shearers, and
apprentices carried on their occupation under the direct super-
vision of their employer, and to them the legal hours of labour
might apply. But a great proportion of journeymen weavers
worked in their own homes, and were in consequence free to work
or idle when they pleased. These men often owned their own
tools, but occasionally the employer provided the necessary
implements.

The supply of male adult labour was strongly supplemented
by the employment of women and children. In 1588, one loom
consumed the yarn carded and spun by five or six persons, and
most of the work of preparing yarn for the weaver was performed
by women and young persons. Every cottage had its spinning-
wheel or distaff, as an almost essential part of the domestic
equipment. The clothier sent his wool out to the spinners, who,
in their homes, spun the mass of raw material into fibre ready
for the loom.

The technique in the various textile processes was primitive,
and the number of cloths produced appears very small in relation
to the number of persons engaged, and the time and energy
expended. From a document dated 1588 1 we gather some idea
of the distribution of labour in the industry, and the speed at
which cloths were produced. The document gives details for
the manufacture of broad cloths (as in Leeds), and for that of
kerseys (as in the Halifax area).

In the making of short broad cloths or dozens (12 yds. by
if- yds.), sixty workers were distributed as follows :

Persons.
Sorting, dressing, and dyeing the wool 12
Spinning and carding . . . 30

,tt . ... 1 of whom four were

Weaving and shearing . . .12 1111

^ h [ probably shearmen.

Odd jobs, taking wool to spinners,

and cloth to fulling mill . . o

This labour force in the course of a week worked 12 stones of

wool up into four ' dozens ' : in other words, fifteen persons were

employed for a week in producing a cloth 12 yds. by i;,! yds.

Such a piece was too wide to be woven by a single weaver, and

1 Kenyan AISS., Hist. MSS. Comm. Report, app. xiv, pt. iv, p. 573.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 109

the broad loom therefore oecupied the attention of two work-
men, who utilized the yarn prepared by three sorters, dressers,
and dyers, and seven or eight carders and spinners.

In the kersey trade the distribution was a little different, and
the sixty workers would be employed as follows :

Persons.
Sorting and dressing . . .6

Spinning and carding . . . 40

Weaving . . . . .8

Shearmen . . . . 6 of whom two were to

help the rest of the
workers.

Kerseys were usually sold ' in the white ', and so the list
made no provision lor dyers. The forty spinners could prepare
20 stones of yarn in a week, and this made 10 kerseys (18 yds.
by 1 yd.). Thus one kersey occupied six workers for a week.
The kersey, being a narrow cloth, could be woven by one weaver,
who apparently made 1] cloths per week, utilizing the yarn
carded and spun by live persons.

The apparent slowness of production was due to many causes.
The actual process of weaving occupied many days, by reason
of the crude method of passing the shuttle across the warp.
But before and after making the cloth many things had to be
done which took up much time. First came the journey from
the weaver's home to the clothier's head-quarters, to get the
supply of yarn. Then, when the yarn had been brought home,
that part of it which was intended for the warp had to be spread
out, wound to the back ' beam ' or roller, placed in the loom,
threaded through the healds or heddles which were to raise
and lower the warp threads in alternate series, and finally, after
being fully adjusted in the loom mechanism, fastened to the
front beam, on which the cloth itself was to be rolled. These
processes all required time, care, and patience, as any error in
the arrangement of the warp would cause trouble in the course
of the weaving. The weaving was liable to be interrupted by
a scarcity of yarn for the shuttle. Finally, the fulling, tentering,
and drying were slow processes, as the Yorkshire climate was
not suitable for the rapid drying of cloths. Thus, when one
takes into account the primitive methods of manufacture, the

no ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

passing of materials from hand to hand,1 and the climatic diffi-
culties, it is not surprising that a single cloth should represent
so great an outlay of time and energy.

The wages of the textile workers were regulated by the
justices of the peace, in accordance with the Acts of 1563 and
1603. The Elizabethan statute had been confined in its practical
application almost entirely to agricultural labour and the build-
ing trades, and there was some doubt whether it was really
intended to deal with the textile trades. In 1603, however, it
was declared that the Act of 1563 had ' been found beneficiall
for the commonwealth ', and its bounds were therefore more
carefully defined. The justices were now given instructions ' to
rate the wages of any labourers, weavers, spinsters, and work-
men or workwomen whatsoever, either working by the day,
week, month, year, or taking any work at any person's hands
... to be done in great or otherwise '.2 These assessments were
intended to state minimum wage figures for textile workers,
and any clothiers who refused to obey the commands of the
magistrates, or pay as great wages to their weavers and spinsters
as should be ordained in the assessment, were to be fined ten
shillings for each offence. The weaver was not to be underpaid,
if the State could prevent it. Further, in order to exclude the
employers' influence when assessments were being made, it was
ordered that no justice who was a clothier by trade should be
allowed to assist in the fixing of wages for textile workers.

The new Act was not at first administered with any enthusiasm
in the West Riding. The chief and petty constables were
apathetic in declaring the assessment which had been drawn
up, and in searching for offenders. This negligence roused the
ire of some of the more conscientious magistrates, and in Novem-
ber 1604 three of them expressed their severe condemnation
of ' the many complaints arisseinge betwixt masters and servants
. . . through the negligence of the Chief and Petty Constables,
and the masters and the men who do not obey the law as they
ought to do '. The constables were therefore ordered to rouse
themselves, and bring to justice all masters and men who should
continue to disregard the law.3

1 Sec Pawson's inventory quoted above ; amount of wool ' yarnc att spyn-
ners '. -' Statute, 1 Jas. I, c. (>, amending and extending 5 Eliz., e. 4.

J Document quoted in Old Yorkshire, vol. ii, pp. 41-2.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES in

To what extent this order was obeyed, and subsequent assess-
ments drawn up during the next forty years, it is impossible to
state,1 but it is certain that wages lists were actually framed
during the reigns of James I and Charles I. In 1641, for in-
stance, an assessment was issued, and the constables were ordered
to make its provisions known to all concerned. Six months
later it became apparent that the rates fixed by the justices
were being disregarded, and at the Doncaster Sessions there was
a general complaint ' that servants refuse to worke for reason-
able wages, and cannot be hired for competent allowance as
formerlye, makeing advantage of the much busines of the times '.
The magistrates therefore, ' takeing into consideracon the many
inconveniences that now doe and are like to arise therby if
some speedy course be not taken herein ', ordered the constables
to make a full and thorough proclamation of the rates fixed,
and of the penalties for disobedience, after which they were to
bring for punishment all such persons as they found ' refrac-
torye in not observing thereof, either master or servant '.

1 )uring the years which followed, the West Riding was too
much distracted by plague and civil war to give any attention
to the matter of wages. But when some measure of peace had
been restored the justices returned to the question, and at the
Pontefract Sessions, April 1647, they drew up a comprehensive
assessment. This document is the first of such assessments
accessible, but is doubtless very similar in form and figures to
its predecessors of the earlier years of the century. The assess-
ment touched all the West Riding industries — agriculture,
building trades, tailoring, mining, and textile work. The clause
relating to textile work ran as follows :

' Cloathworkers and Dyers.
Noe Weaver, Cloathworker, Shereman or Dyer Shall not take
fur his wages above iiij(i- with meat and Drinke, and without
meate and Drinke viij'1 And if hee be hyred by the yeare, and
it hee bee a very Skilfull workman in these Sciences, hee shall
have iij1'- per annum. And other comon weavers, Cloath-

1 This is due to the fact that the Quarter Sessions Records, prior to in,o,
are not accessible. After that date the records are continuous, being in tin-
custody of the Clerk of the Peace at Wakefield. Sonic of the Elizabethan
Sessions Records have been edited bv Mr. John Lister, and published by the
Vorks. Arch, ami Topogr. Soc. (vol. iii), and another volume is now in course
of preparation.

ii2 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

workers, Shearemcn, ffullers and Dyers shall not have for their
wages above ij '• xs- yeareley.' 1

There are many points to be noted in this short clause. The
first is that the assessment laid down a maximum figure for
the wages of the employee, and consequently any master paying
more than this amount was liable to a severe fine, as was also
the man who accepted an excessive wage. This feature runs
throughout the whole of this and other wages assessments.
' Shall not take above ' is the ever-recurring phrase, the key-
note of the proclamation. In no case was a minimum wage
stated, and apparently the master might pay as little as he
pleased ; the justices were only concerned to see that he did
not pay too much. This was contrary to the spirit of the Act
of 1603, which presupposed the fixing of a minimum rate for
textile workers, and, as quoted above, stated the penalty to be
inflicted on those clothiers who did not pay to their work-
people ' so much or so great wages' as were ordered by the local
magistrates.2 But in practice the assessments were confined
solely to establishing maximum rates, and all cases of punish-
ment under the Act were those of masters who had paid, and
servants who had accepted, higher wages than were allowed by
the assessment.3 The orders given to the constables in 1641
show clearly the attitude of the justices, and there can be no
doubt that the real motive in their minds when issuing any
assessment was to prevent workpeople from taking advantage
of any temporary or permanent scarcity of labour to extract
increased wages.

Secondly, it is somewhat surprising to find all classes of
cloth-makers placed in the same group, with one rate for all,
and that rate a time rate, eightpence a day. For those engaged
in dyeing, cloth-dressing, fulling, and shearing, a time rate
would be natural, lor their work was of such a kind that it

1 Doncaster Quarter Sessions, October 1641. Sessions Order Book A, f. [86.
' A proclamation of the Kates and appointment of the Several] wages for
Artificers, handycraftsmen, husbandmen, Laborers, Servants, Workcmen
and Apprentices of husbandry within the Westridding of the Co. of Yorke, &c.'
(Pontefract Quarter Sessions, April 27, 1647, Order Book C, p. 10). See
article by present writer in Economic Journal, June 1914.

- 1 J as. I, ( . (,.

:1 See, lor instance, the numerous offences brought before the North Riding
J.P.'s, North Riding Q. S. Records, vol. vii, pp. 34, 45-7. &c.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 113

would be difficult to pay a man according to the amount of
work done. Similarly, for those weavers who lived and worked
with their master, and devoted their whole time to weaving in
his loomshop, a time rate might be satisfactory. But a large
part of the weaving was performed by men who, though employed
by a clothier, carried on their occupation in their own homes.
These men were also in possession of a piece of ground, and
combined the cultivation of their patch of land with their
work at the loom. At times they had to wait for further supplies
of yarn, and these intervals were doubtless filled up with agricul-
tural work on a small scale. In these circumstances, one would
have supposed that the justices would have stated a piece rate,
and limited the amount which could be paid for the weaving of
each piece. In actual practice the piece rate was general, and it is
probable therefore that the assessment figures bore some relation
to the amount which a weaver could earn when paid by the piece.
A third point of interest lies in the comparison of the rates
paid to industry and agriculture. The most important maxima
fixed in the 1647 assessment were :

Agriculture. Maximum Wages.

Bailiffs or foremen hired by gentlemen or wealthy

persons per annum . . . . • £3 los- od.1

Chief servants in the employ of ordinary yeomen or

husbandmen . . . . . ■ £3 os- °d-

Female servants ....... 25s. to 30s.

Mowers of grass and corn, per day, with or without

food ........ $d. or lad.

Ordinary farm labourers, per day, with or without \ Summer, 3d. or 6d.

food ........ \ Winter, 2d. or 5^.

Building Trades.

Master masons and carpenters .... (id. or \zd.

... \ Summer, Ad. or Sd.

1 heir men . . . . . . . „r. . 1 < ,

[ \\ inter, 3d. or (mi.

Plumbers, glaziers, bricklayers, slaters, tylers, and \ Summer, sd. or qd.

others engaged in branches of building . . \ Winter, 3d. or 8d.

Miners.

Colliers, per day, without meat or drink . . lod.

Banksmen or drawers-up of coal, without sustenance Sd.

Clothworkcrs.

All classes, per day ...... ±d. or Sd.

It engaged for year, presumably with meat and \ Skilful, £3

< 1 rink ........} Common, £2 10s. o</.

Tailors, with meat and drink .... 2d. to Ad.

' In addition the bailiff received a livery or ioa". per annum in lieu thereof.
The large sums denote the maximum annual rates, and include food and
probably lodging.

1526. 1 2 I

ii4 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

From these figures it will be seen that textile workers were not
the most highly paid in the county. The ' very skilfull ' weaver
or fuller was to receive less than the skilful collier, less than the
higher grades of farm servants, less than the heads of the build-
ing trade, less even than the mower of grass or corn. The
superiority of mining wages over textile rates, which has lasted
up to the present day, was probably due to the presence of
a strong female element in the textile trade. The weaver was
not the sole bread-winner of the family ; his wife, and children
over four or five years of age, were all potential wage-earners,
a fact which would help to keep the male adult's earnings lower
than might otherwise have been the case. The weaver was paid
less than the harvest workers, and this had the effect of drawing
large numbers of the industrial population to the agricultural
areas in harvest time. The weaver laid aside his shuttle, and,
often accompanied by his family, went eastward to the Yale of
York and the East Riding to assist in mowing and reaping.
This annual excursion served as a summer holiday, a holiday
for which the weaver was paid more than he could earn by
working at the loom.

A comparison of the West Riding rates with those established
in other counties shows that the Yorkshire textile workers were
allowed quite as good wages as their fellows in East Anglia, and
better wages than those assessed in the West of England.

Best Common Fullers, Dyers, Shearmen.

County. Weaver. Weavers. Best. Others.

Yorks. W.R. £3 £2 10s. £3 £2 105.

Essex (1651)1 £3 and livery £1 10s. and £2 10s. and

livery livery.

Suffolk (1030) 2 £3 and livery £2 and livery £3 £2 10s. and

livery

Norfolk (1610) 3 £2 and livery £1 13s. 4d, £2 and livery

and livery

Wilts. (1604) 4 £2 and livery £1 6s. 8r/. Dyers £2 10s. £2

, , \ ■ 1 1 q 1 1 Shearmen ) , , „ ,

Devon (i6;4) ° 2 ha. or 8a. per day. .. .. [£2 £\ bs.hd.

Fuller \ ** 6

Turning from these assessments to the actual wages which
were being paid to workers in wool, we are faced with a scarcity

1 Thorold Rogers, Hist, of Agriculture and Prices, vi. 694-7.

2 English Historical Review, xii. 307-11. :) Ibid., xiii. K23-J.
1 Bland, Brown, and Tawney, op. cit., p. 349.

6 Hamilton, Quarter Sessions from Queen Elizabeth to Queen Anne (1878),
pp. 163-4.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 115

of data. Thorold Rogers gives no figures for the West Riding
industry, but a few faets are available from the evidence given
in the clothiers' lawsuits of 1638 and 1676, and from one or
two other sources. In 1638 the weaver would be under an assess-
ment similar to the one already quoted, and his maximum wage
would not be greater than that stated in 1647, namely, fourpence
with, and eightpence without, food and drink. In practice the
weaver was paid by the piece, receiving a certain amount for
each cloth worked. This payment in 1588 amounted to is. 8d.
for each kersey,1 and in the Leeds area 35. 4^. was paid for the
weaving of a ' dozen '. These rates had scarcely changed by
1638. - As seen above, a weaver was able to produce about
ii kerseys in a week, and statements were made in the lawsuit
of 1638 to the effect that one kersey was the weekly output of
the average weaver. At the most, therefore, his weekly earnings
would be 25. id., or less than 5^. a day. The weaving of a
' dozen ' occupied the attention of two workers for a week, who
for their joint labour received 35. 4</. If this had to be shared
equally between the two, the weekly wage of each was a beggarly
is. Sd., the same amount as was received by the kersey weavers
who only produced one cloth in a week. It was, however,
a common practice to set an apprentice to assist a journeyman
in weaving broad cloths, in which case the journeyman's share
of the 35. 4^. might amount to about 2s. 6d., an average of 5t/.
per day. This was the rate in 1588, and in 1676 :i the earnings
seem to have been about the same. According to one of the
witnesses giving evidence in the trial of that year, ' weavers of
Cloath can hardly earne fivepence a day . . . and find themselves
meate, though they be stronge and able to worke '. Another
man stated that the daily earnings were 6d., and a third
declared that 'the wages of a Clothier4 for weaveing of cloth
is but three pence a day besides meate ', which may be taken
as equivalent to at most 6d. per day. Thus the average daily
earnings of the weaver in the seventeenth century were less
than Gd., and therefore well below the maximum fixed by the

1 A'fHyoH MSS., Hist. C>>»i>>!. Report, app. xiv, pt. iv, p. 57 }.
- Kxchcquer Depositions l>v Commission, 14 Chas. I, Mich, ji, York.
' Ibid., jS Chas. II. Mich, jo, York and Lancaster.

1 The won! ' clothier ' is used here in a vaime sense, and really means
the employee weaver.

I 2

n6 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

assessment of 1647. It was n°t until the eighteenth century
that the weaver's remuneration crept up to the ys. or gs. per
week which was paid in the days of Arthur Young.

The spinners, whose wages were untouched by the assessment,
were very badly paid, and here again the wages of 1588 were
almost the same as those of a century later. Payment was by
piece, and the spinner received from is. 8d. to 2s. 8d. per stone,
according to the quality of the wool and the standard of the
spinning. It took a skilful worker about a fortnight to spin
a stone of wool, and so the earnings of spinners varied from
id. to 4J. per day,1 the lower rates generally going to children
and young women, or to adult women in the badly paid areas.
As one witness declared in 1638, ' A spinner may earn, some
twopence, some threepence, and the strongest a groat (four-
pence), and none usually earne more by spinninge for and
towards meat and drink and wages '. A fellow-witness con-
firmed this statement by declaring that ' the ordinary rate of
a stone of wool spinninge is eight groat (25. 8a.), and a good
spinner cannot ordinarily earne above threepence a day towards
meat, drink, and wages, and the most spinners adle (i. e. earn)
but twopence a day in the parish of Kighley '. In 1676 these
rates had diminished rather than increased. Witnesses declared
that ' spinners can scarce earne threepence a day, lindinge
themselves with meat ', ' a very good spinner can scarcely earne
twopence a day, they finding themselves with meate, a pound
of wool a day beinge as much as an ordinary person can carde
and spinne '. Others estimated the general wages at fourpence
for the best workers, whilst one man declared that in his district
(Lockwood) ' the wadges for spinninge is not above one penny
a day besides meate '.

In taking stock of these figures we must remember the rela-
tively larger purchasing power of money, and make allowance
accordingly. But it is also necessary to emphasize the fact that
between 1588 and 1676, the period when weavers' and spinners'
wages were stationary, there was a very great increase in general
prices. This was due in part to the debasement, of the coinage
in the early decades of the sixteenth century, and also to the
influx of silver from the mines of South America, which began

1 The same scale of wages for spinners prevailed in Wiltshire, 1605. See
Bland, Brown, and Tawney, op. cit., p. 351.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 117

to affect English prices about 1570. It is impossible to state
with any measure of accuracy the extent of the movement, but
one is safely within bounds in stating that prices doubled in the
century which followed 1570. 1 The effect of this increase on
the wage-earner must have been very serious. True, he would
be independent of market supplies of foodstuffs in so far as he
added agriculture and the rearing of stock to his industrial
pursuits. There would be the eggs from the poultry, the milk
from the cow (if the Weaver were fortunate enough to possess
one), and the slices of ham or bacon from last year's pig. But
the supply of cereals would have to be purchased from else-
where, especially by those who lived in the barren districts of
the Pennine slopes, and the rise in the price of wheat, oats, and
rye would have a very serious effect upon the purchasing power
of the weekly wage. Hence, whilst recognizing the big expansion
of the industry and admitting that many clothiers were finding
their way to riches, we arc forced to the conclusion that the
poorer classes of the county lived on the poverty line, and
that the vision of a Merrie England is dimmed when we see at
closer quarters the economic vicissitudes and general industrial
conditions of Tudor England. Profound shocks had been
experienced in every branch of national life, and in such upheavals
it is usually the poor who feel the blow first and are the last to
recover. In addition to the rise in prices, there was the dis-
solution of the monasteries, the enclosure movement, and the
constant drain of men and money for wars in Scotland and
elsewhere. In 1558 the Earl of Shrewsbury wrote of Yorkshire
that ' the state of the shyre was poore ... by reason of the
greate chardge they have bene at since the begynnynge of these
last warres about the furnyturc of bothc horsemen and foot-
men to the Borders '.2 Half a century later matters had not
improved, and Thomas, Lord Burghley, writing from York,
exclaimed to a correspondent, ' You will not think to what
pouertyc this country (Yorkshire; is growne into at this present.
. . . I pray (rod sends us peace, or els I dare assure you it wyll
brede gretc discontent in these Northe partes, where they say
there is nothyng dayly but payinge and punishynge '.3

1 On the question of prices, sec Cunningham, drowth, ii. 00-70 ; I.. I.. Price,
Moncv. (ind it* Relation to Prices, chap. iii.

- D. S. P., Mary, Addenda, viii. S;. •> D. S. P., Eli:., eclxxxi. 28.

n8 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

(d) The Wool Supply and the Middleman

Had we asked the Elizabethan clothier which aspect of his
work gave him the most cause for anxiety, he would probably
have replied, ' The obtaining of my raw material '.

There was a great diversity of wools throughout the kingdom,
in quality, nature, and price. Some wools were naturally suited
for particular classes of cloths, and the wool grown in one county
was frequently worthless to clothiers of that district, but met
the demands of some county which lay at the other end of the
land. This caused the rise of a considerable trade in the transit
of wools. The sheep of Yorkshire could not supply all the needs
of the Yorkshire clothiers. The quantity was inadequate, and
for many purposes the quality was not sufficiently good. For
this reason, the native wool of the West Riding was largely
handed over to the makers of the very coarsest cloths, whilst
the clothiers drew their supplies from other counties. A paper
dated 1615 1 states that the wool of Lincolnshire, Rutland,
Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Oxfordshire, and Buckingham-
shire was carried to Leeds, Wakefield, Halifax, and Rochdale ;
and from an earlier source (1588) we learn that ' the Hallyfaxe
men occupie fyne wollc most out of Lincolnshire, and there corse
wolle they sell to men of Ratchedall '.2 Thus there was a well-
developed system of internal trade in wool, and Yorkshire drew
its supplies from many of the most famous wool-producing
counties of that period.

This transference of wool was carried on in many ways. The
wealthy clothier went himself, or sent his assistants, into the
wool counties, and made his purchases either at the wool fair
or in the parlour of the wool-grower. The witnesses in the
lawsuits of the seventeenth century3 declared that they often
journeyed into the wool areas of Lincolnshire and Leicestershire
to purchase their supplies. We have an excellent instance of
such direct purchase during the early part of the same century
in the case of John Priestley, who lived in London, and made
a practice of riding out into Kent and the surrounding country
to buy wool from the growers. He then packed up the fleeces

1 I). S. P., fas. I, lxxx. 13.

- Kenyan MSS., Hist. .1/55. Comm. Report, xiv, pt. iv, p. 573.

J Depositions in lawsuit re subsidy and ulnage, 1638 (see Chapter VI).

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 119

and brought or sent them north to his brothers, who lived and
worked as clothiers at Soyland, near Halifax.1 Similarly, the
Leeds clothier - saddled his horse and rode out to the country
fairs at Ripon, Doncaster, and Pontefract, or to the moorland
farms, and there made his purchases.

But many could not afford to make these excursions, and few of
the clothiers had kind-hearted brothers in the capital. The
lower grades were therefore unable to buy in this direct manner.
They could not afford to make big purchases, pay down large
sums, or get long credit, and so lead home a team of laden pack-
horses. Also, the farmer required some surer means of sale
than the chance visits of prospective buyers ; the wool-fair was
often far distant from his own home ; and lastly he preferred
ready money to the notes of credit which the big clothiers might
offer. Thus between wool-grower and clothier there was a distinct
gap, which made exchange difficult and laborious to all but the
most wealthy. The situation called for the intervention of
a middleman, whose business would be to buy up the wool
from the farmer, sort and classify it according to its quality,
and then retail it to the clothiers in amounts to meet their
needs, and in quality and fibre to answer the demands of the
particular types of cloth. Such a man would bring the wools
of the East and Midlands to the North, and try to meet the most
varied wants of the clothiers for whom he catered.

The middleman, the woolchapman, the brogger, is a very
common figure in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
But the reputation of such men during this period was black,
and the treatment they received at the hands of the State was
very severe. They were popularly associated with all that was
b.ul in the trading life of the day, and seem to have alienated
every class by the dangerous monopoly for which they strove.
Countless complaints were made against them, and they were
accused of engrossing every fleece of wool in the kingdom, so
that none could be obtained even in the open fairs and markets,
except through their hands. The clothier found himself at their
mercy, and the farmer declared that he could not sell his wool
as he pleased. The sixteenth century saw a large increase in

1 Surtces Sue. (Priestley Memoirs), vol. Ixxvii, p. j<> ct seq.

1 Blome's Britannia states that Leeds clothiers frequented Ripon very much.

120 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

the price of wool, and the cost of a stone in 1570 was about
three times the sum paid for the same amount at the beginning
of the century.1 This was really part of the general revolution
in prices which marked the period, but it may be that the wool
dealers had some small share in enhancing prices. Whether
justly or not, they were blamed abundantly, and served as
scapegoats for the various economic grievances of the times.
The attitude of the public and the State towards the middleman
is seen in the Act of 1552. In that year legislation took the bull
by the horns :

' Whereas by the gredye and covetous myndes as well of
suche as have the grete plentye and habundance of sheepc and
woolles as also by the corrupt practyses of dyv'se Broggars,
Ingrocers, Woolgatherars . . . and sondrie other persons, ... it
manifestlye appeareth that the prices thereof be wonderfullye
and excedynglie enhaunsed and raysed, to the grete hurte,
detrimente, and decaye of the Realme ' ;

therefore it was decreed that none should buy wools, except
(1) the Merchants of the Staple of Calais, who exported it to
the Continent, and the Merchant Adventurers of Newcastle,
who were allowed by charter to export the cheap qualities of
Northern wools ; (2) the manufacturer, who intended to make
it into cloth.2

This meant the annihilation of the wool-middleman, since by
the above decree only direct purchases between grower and
clothier were to be allowed, and the intervention of a wool-
dealer was declared illegal. Such an order was also a fatal blow
to the system by which the small clothier of Yorkshire was fed,
and immediately the Halifax men rose in protest against the
Act, seeking exemption from its scope. With powerful plea
they stated their case, and the success of their agitation was
seen in the Halifax Act of 1555. The preamble has already been
quoted, with its picture of the clothiers' stern struggle against
a barren soil, and of their trudging to market, ' ther to bye
upon the Woolldryver, some a stone, some twoo, and some three
or foure, accordinge to theyre habilitee, and to carrye the same ',
on head or back, several miles to their homes. By persistence

1 Price per tod: 1500, 6s. o\d. ; 1570, 165. od. (Thorold Rogers, Hist, of
Agriculture and Prices, iv. 305-6).

2 5 & 6 Ed. VI, c. 7.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 121

in this rough mode of life and work they had achieved con-
siderable success, but were ' nowe like to bee undone and dryven
to beggery, by reason of the late statute made, that takethe
awayc the Woolldryver, so that they cannot nowe have theyr
wooll by such small porcions as they were wont to have, and
that thei are not hable to kepe anye horses wherupon to ryde
or sett theyr wolles further from them in other places '. In
consideration of this insuperable difficulty, it was enacted

' That from hensfurth, yt shalbe lawfull to any persons in-
habyting within the parishe of Halyfax to buye any wooll or
woolles at suche tymes as the clothiers may buy the same,
otherwyse than by engrossing and forestalling, so that the
persons so bying the same doo carye . . . the woolles so bought
by them to the Townc of Halyfaxe, and there to sell the same
to suche poorc folkes of that and other parishes adjoyning as
shall work the same in clothe or yarne . . . and not to the riche
and welthye clothyers, nor to any one to selle agayne.'

The wooldriver who sold his wares in any other part besides
I lalifax, and the purchaser who sold the same again unwrought,
was condemned ' to lose and forfeite the dooble value of the wooll
so sold or uttered '. Thus, in the special case of Halifax, middle-
men were allowed to buy wool, and bring it to the Halifax
parish, for sale to the meaner clothiers only. Those who could
afford the journey to the wool areas were still to make it, but
the services of the wooldriver were permitted, to meet the needs
of the poorer classes, whose weekly demand did not exceed one
or two stones per family.1

The Halifax Act is of further interest in that it served as
a beacon light and a precedent to the rest of the North Country.2
In 1577 a petition was presented from the clothiers of Lanca-
shire, Richmondshirc, Westmorland, Cumberland, and Durham,
protesting against the restraint of middlemen in the wool trade.
These counties put forward a very strong case, pointing out:
(1) ' The clothyers (are) cotegers, whose habylytye wvll not
stretch neythcr to buy anyc substance of wolles to mayntayne
any worke or labor, not yet to fetch the wooll, the markets
beyng four or five score myles away att the least.' (2) The wool

1 J-? Philip and Marv, c. i.;.

- Bill introduced March ;, 1502, ' to allow to buy wools in Lancaster and
Yorke, to sell againe in fairs and markets' (Holts? <</' Commons Journals,
vol. 1, March ;, 1 ^(>j).

122 ORGANIZATION OF INDUSTRY chap.

was needed in small quantities only, and for coarse goods,
rough ' cottons ', ' frizes ', &c.

The petitioners also quoted the Halifax Act, and declared
that the folk of Halifax were evading it, and utilizing it to get
the whole trade of wool-dealing into their hands.1 The request
of these Northern clothiers was eventually granted in 1585. 2

Similarly, in 1588, Rochdale, which was really a part of the
Yorkshire cloth field, complained of the proceedings which were
being instituted against certain Rochdale wool-dealers, and
declared ' that yf the same statute (of 1552) were executed in
this countrie, where the poore clothyer is not able to go to the
grower of the wooles, neyther the grower able to come hither,
ther were thowsandes of poore people utterlie undone '. The
Rochdale clothiers therefore asked for the same liberty ' which
the men of Halyfax have '.3 Their case was espoused by the Earl
of Derby, and eventually they obtained the desired freedom.4

Under cover of such licences, or in the face of the full rigour
of the Act of 1552, the middleman continued to rule the sale of
wool. In 1590 the clothiers of Leeds were feeling the incon-
venience of the monopoly, and Randall Tcnche headed a petition 5
to the Council of the North, complaining ' of a corupt practise
of great nomber of broggers, engrocers, wool-gatherars, . . . and
such like inhabiting therabouts, that have too much liberty of
buieng, keeping and occupieng of wooll ', and had made ' the
prisses of wooles exceedingly enhaunced and increased, not-
withstanding the sheepmasters and wollbreders are nothing
benefitted therby '. For remedy of this evil, Randall asked the
Privy Council to grant that the statute of 1552 might ' be pro-
claymcd and read in open markets and like places and assem-
blies . . . and that diligent inquiry bee made after all such
broggers, etc.', getting the names of all men engaged in such
work, and then ' take bondes of them ... in good somes of
money, with condicion that they shall not buy or bargaine any
manner of wools contrary to the tenour and forme of the said
Statute \6

1 D. S. P., Eliz., cxvii. 38, October 1577.

- Brit. Mus., Add. MSS. 34324, It. 8-10 (May 2.3, 1585). Also 1. 14.

1 Kenyan MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm., p. 505 (June 26, 1588).

1 Acts uf Privy Council, August 9, 1590, vol. xix, pp. 370-1.

'■ Ibid.. May 28, 1390 (vol. xix, p. 169).

* Add. MSS. 34324, f. 14.

in FIFTEENTH TO SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES 123

It seemed impossible either to end or mend the wool-chapman ;
firstly, because he was an economic necessity ; secondly, because
he was linked up in close alliance with the Merchants of the
Staple, who still possessed some strength ; and thirdly, because
the justices of the peace, in whose hands rested the administra-
tion of all these social and economic statutes, might enforce the
Act or leave it a dead letter, according to their temper and the
need of the locality for the wool-man. James I tried to solve
the problem by making certain places staple towns, at which
alone wool could be exchanged. Kendal l and Leeds 2 were
amongst the towns chosen, and all dealers were ordered to
become members of the Company of Staplers. This attempt
only helped to make still more difficult the work of exchange in
wool, and before long the middleman was as powerful as ever.
A general ordinance was made some time in the early seven-
teenth century, allowing the terms of the Halifax Act to be
extended over the whole clothing area, and the wool-dealers
were not slow to take an ell when allowed an inch. We may
conclude this chapter with a recognition of their triumph by
quoting a little more of the clothiers' petition of 1640. Here
the petitioners, after pleading for a stoppage of the apprentice-
ship prosecutions, mentioned the extension of the Halifax Act
alluded to above.

' But soe it is . . . that under Colour and pretence of doeing
good ... to ye Clothier (by bringing wools for him from a dis-
tance), they, on the contrarie, if any Countryman or any wool-
man that dwells farrc remote, doe bring in his wolle to ye Townes
of Lecdcs, Wakefield, Rippon, Doncaster and Pomfrett, which
are Markett Townes within ye Compasse of 20 miles of ye
clothing townes, and are such marketts where the Clothiers can
and doe usualie frequent, even there the said woollmen doe
come, purposelie to forstall ye woolle, soe that ye poore Clothiers
cannot be served but at theire handes againe, which is a very
greate grievance to them.'

It was requested, therefore, that ' the woollmen may be
restreyncd from buying and ingrossing the woolle comeing to ye
Markett townes of Leedes, Wakefield, Rippon, Doncaster, and
Pomfret '. The dealer had seized upon every stronghold of
wool-dealing, and secured his position as a permanent factor
in the economy of the domestic system.

1 D. S. P., J as. I, xcii. 28. * D. S. P., Cha*. I, cccclx. 64 (1040).

CHAPTER IV

THE STATE REGULATION OF THE YORKSHIRE CLOTH
INDUSTRY UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

' Tricks of the trade ' are not peculiar to the modern industrial
world, and in vliew of the many popular attacks which are made
to-day on the dishonesty of business it is refreshing to find that
questionable practices in industry are as old as industry itself,
and that ' business secrets ' of fraud and deceit formed part
and parcel of production long before the days of the power-
loom, the big firm, and the world-market. The record of our
own county is as disreputable as that of any other industrial
area, and the perverted ingenuity of the Yorkshire clothier
presented a constant puzzle to the forces of government, so long
as the State attempted to maintain a code of industrial ethics.

The regulation of the cloth industry by the State was guided
by two primary considerations. Firstly, there was a real and
genuine desire to keep the English pieces at a high and uniform
standard of quality, and to maintain the good name of English
fabrics both at home and abroad. As the export trade in cloth
grew, this motive became very important, and countless statutes
were prompted thereby, all of which aimed at keeping up the
reputation of our textile goods in the European markets.
Secondly, there were financial considerations, which regarded
the cloths from the point of view of revenue. As English wool
began to be worked up more at home, the revenue which had
formerly been drawn from the export of the raw material must
now be obtained from levies imposed upon the manufactured
article. Hence, just as the staple was intended to supervise
the finances of the wool revenue, so some machinery must be
devised for controlling the sale of cloths in the interests of the
Exchequer.

These two motives, interwoven almost inextricably at times,
but with the former eventually predominant, guided the State
regulation of the industry almost from the beginnings of cloth-
making down to the nineteenth century, when the State aban-
doned all attempts at controlling the quality of the goods, and

STATE REGULATION 125

contented itself with supervising the conditions of labour. The
attitude of the State was somewhat as follows : For the purposes
of revenue, the same quantity of cloth of the same quality must
always pay the same contribution to the national chest. There-
fore the most simple method was to order uniformity of dimen-
sions for all pieces of the same kind ; let the length, breadth,
or weight of each variety of cloth be laid down by law, with
severe penalties upon such as disregarded these specifications.
Then, with all cloths reduced to standards, let subsidy be paid
according to the nature and value of the piece. Again, in the
interests of honest workmanship, it would be better to have
uniformity of dimensions, for only by the rigid enforcement of
legal standards of length and breadth did it seem possible to
check the ' fraude and deceipt ' which for so long were the bane
of legislators. Laws were therefore enacted which fixed standards
of length, weight, and breadth, forbade the use of certain
materials or processes, and laid down in a more or less com-
prehensive manner the conditions of manufacture.

To pass an elaborate measure is one thing ; to have its
clauses enforced and obeyed is a very different matter. It is
not necessary to enlarge on the incentives to law-breaking in
such cases as this. The clothier made pieces with a view to
selling them, rather than for the purpose of demonstrating his
law-abidingness. The statutory specifications might not present
any difficulty ; but often they did, for it was seldom possible
to satisfy all the law's demands. Obedience sometimes meant
all the difference between profit and loss, especially if the needs
of the foreign markets and the regulations of the home govern-
ment did not happen to coincide. Hence the decrees of the
rulers ' up yonder ' in London were looked upon by many
Yorkshiremen as orders made only to be disregarded whenever
business enterprise and private gain disagreed with the laws
made for the common weal. Those who framed the laws saw-
all this, and realized that industrial legislation would be nothing
but a mass of empty phrases unless means were provided for
the enforcement of such decrees. For this reason they made
arrangements for the appointment of men whose business it
was to see that the cloth laws were obeyed, men with power of
search amongst the scattered clothiers of the rural areas, men

126 STATE REGULATION chap.

with authority to confiscate all products of illegal workmanship,
and, at the same time, men in whose hands lay the task of
collecting the subsidies on cloth for the replenishing of the
Exchequer. Thus we have the ulnager, and later the searchers,
appointed for the difficult work of collecting revenue and en-
forcing legal restrictions upon an industry which was becoming
increasingly flexible in character and more scattered in the area
of its activity.

These arc the broad lines of the subject ; we can now approach
it in more detail. The Assize of Measures (1197) regulated
measurements of almost every description.1 Concerning cloth
it was ordained that ' woollen cloths, wherever they are made,
shall be made of the same width, to wit two ells within the lists,
and of the same goodness in the middle and sides '. Here was
regulation of width and also of quality. The ' width clause '
was repeated in Magna Carta,2 and further declarations of
a similar eharacter were issued during the reign of Henry III.
English merchants, however, found these restrictions most
inconvenient, and many obtained liberty to deal in cloth of any
breadth, whilst foreign cloths imported into this country could
not be expected to conform to the English official measure-
ments.3

Edward I4 made a return to the Assize (1278), but admitted
a certain variety of standards and qualities :

' Henceforth every cloth of England worth tour shillings an
ell and upwards shall be of the breadth of two ells within the
lists, and other cloths of lower price shall be seven quarters (of
an ell) . . . and that all foreign eloths shall be 26 ells and 6
quarters wide. And that all cloth which is not of assize, exeept
the serges of the parts beyond the sea and of Scotland and
Ireland, for which there is no certain measure in this realm,
shall be confiscated.'

Here the length of a whole cloth was fixed lor the first time ;
foreign cloth was ordered to conform to English standards for

1 Roger de Hovcden, Chronica, iv. 33. The ' list ' was, of course, the
narrow strip of waste on both edges of the cloth, useful in tcntering, (Vc.

2 Magna Carta, c. 35 ' I'na latitudo pannorum tinctorum et russettorum
et habergettorum, scilicet duae ulnae infra listas.'

:) e.g. Statutes 9 Hen. Ill and 56 Hen. Ill ; see Close Rolls, '> lid. I, m. 7 d :
Madox, Exchequer, chap, xiii, p. 524.
4 Close Rolls, 0 Ed. I, m. 7 d (127S).

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 127

easier assessment of import dues, but the cheaper wares of the
North and West were allowed to be of any dimensions.

In order to enforce this declaration two men were appointed
to view all cloths exposed for sale, whether home-made or of
foreign manufacture, and to confiscate all wares not in accordance
with proper dimensions.1 Shortly afterwards the work passed
into the hands of one man, who was generally appointed for
life to the ' office of ulnage of canvas, linen, kerseys, serges, and
all kinds of cloth of London, York, Winchester, Bristol, Lincoln,
Essex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Kent, Stamford, Beverley, St. Osyth,
Devon and Cornwall '.2

This man was the ulnager, a person destined to play an
important part in the textile world for the next four centuries.
His work was to enforce the assize of cloth as fixed by the
government of the day, and to collect the subsidy levied on
cloth manufactured for sale. His province was the whole of
England and Wales, and consequently he was obliged to enlist
the services of a large number of deputy-ulnagers. There was
one for Yorkshire, Cumberland, Westmorland, and Northumber-
land, one for Lincolnshire, and one in each of the remaining
cloth-making areas of the kingdom. The deputies lived in the
locality to which they were appointed, and were responsible
for the enforcement of the assize in their respective districts.15
They were to examine and seal all taxable cloths before the
fabrics could be exposed for sale. Pieces which were not of
assize, or were exposed for sale without having first received
the ulnager's seal and sanction, were to be confiscated, and in
some cases were conveyed to the Tower of London, there to be
disposed of as the King should deem best.4 From this inspection
the cheapest saleable cloths were exempt. ' Cogware ' and
' Kendal cloths ', made from ' the worst wool within the realm
and sold chiefly to ' poor and mean people ', were of such small

1 Patent Rolls, 7 Ed. I, m. 3 (1270).

- Patent Rolls, g. Ed. II, pt. 1, m. j; (1315). Sec also Patent Rolls, 22 Ed. III.
pt . i, 111. 2~ .

1 Patent Rolls, 2j Jul. Ill, pt. i, in. i_\ and 25 Ed. Ill, pt. i, 111. 0. Also
22 Ed. Ill, pt. i. in. 2~ . E.g. John Pa thorn of York, draper, and Win. Belle,
appointed bv Win. Hervv, ulnager of cloth tor England, to be his deputies
in the County of York (Patent Rolls. 3 Rich. II, pt. li, in. 26 (1380)).

' Order to bailiffs, sheriffs, mayors, \c, to provide carriage for John
Marreys, King's linager, for conveying to the lower of London all cloths
arrested as forfeit for not being of assize (Patent Rolls, 1350, in. 1).

128 STATE REGULATION chap.

value that the State did not think it worth while to enforce its
decrees, or levy taxation, upon such cheap wares.1

A fixed assize of length and breadth was apparently of doubtful
value, and at times during the fourteenth century was abolished.
For instance, an assize of cloth was issued in 1328, 2 fixing the
dimensions of cloths in the raw state. In 1353 freedom was
given to make cloths of any dimensions, provided, however,
' that the King's Ulnager shall measure the cloth and mark the
same, by which mark a man may know how much the cloth
containeth '.3 Thirty-six years later, in 1389, the assize was
revived,'1 except for the coarsest qualities of cloth.5 This re-
mained in operation until 1393, when all persons were once
more allowed to make and sell cloth of such lengths and breadths
as they pleased, provided each piece was searched and sealed
by the ulnager before being sold.6 This Act was important, in
that it affected all kinds of cloth intended for sale, whatever the
size or quality.

The examination of saleable cloths, whilst important in itself,
was only the preliminary to the real work of the ulnager, i. e.
the collection of the subsidy on cloth.7 The ulnager was primarily
a financial agent of the Crown, and as such had to collect the
sums levied on cloths made for sale. When the cloth had been
sealed, the ulnager demanded an ulnage fee of one halfpenny,
and a subsidy of fourpence for each whole cloth of assize, or
sixpence in the case of scarlet cloths. The whole cloth of assize
was 26-28 yards in length, and 6— 6-| quarters in breadth.8 Half
cloths paid twopence, but by the statute of 1353 no subsidy
was to be paid for cloths containing less than half a cloth of
assize. The kerseys and many other cloths made in the West
Riding were less than half a cloth : hence they escaped not
merely the payment of subsidy but also the preliminary inspec-

1 Statute, 13 Rich. II, c. 10. 2 Statute, 2 Ed. Ill, c. 14.

J Statutes of the Realm, i. 330. 4 Statute, 13 Rich. II, c. 10.

5 The Act of 13 Rich. II, i, c. 10, has an interesting paragrapli on cheap
cloth : ' Forasmuch as it hath been a common custom to make certain cloths
in divers counties called Cogware and Kendal cloth . . . sold to cogmen out
of the realm, and also to poor and mean people within the realm, of the which
cloths a great part is made of the worst wool within this realm, that cannot
well serve for any other cloths ' ; these cloths were therefore allowed to
remain free of any regulation or taxation.

'• Statute, 17 Rich. II, c. 2 (1393).

7 Patent Rolls, ij Ed. Ill, pt. iii, m. 5 (1354).

6 Statute, 27 Ed. Ill, stat. i, c. 4. ' Quarter ' here means a quarter of a yard.

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 129

tion by the ulnagcr. This was all altered by the Act of 1393,
which imposed the payment of revenue on all cloths ' as well
kerseys as others '-1 From that time onward, the kersey makers
of the West Riding had to place their wares under the ulnager's
rod and pay their tribute. Since the average kersey made in
Yorkshire was equal to about a quarter of a whole cloth of
assize, it contributed one penny as subsidy. In practice, the
Kendal cloths, ' cottons ', and ' Cogware ' of the far north-
western counties remained exempt from control all through the
fifteenth century, and no ulnager's documents exist for the area
west of the Pennine Chain.

With the expansion of the woollen industry during the
fifteenth century the yield from the subsidy and ulnage became
a more important part of the royal revenue. Monarchs regarded
it as a constant and regular stream of income, which could be
utilized in paying off debts or in providing annuities for old
and faithful servants. For instance, in 1410 Henry IV granted
to one of his serjeants-at-arms ' twelve pence daily for life
from the issues of the ulnage and subsidy of cloths in the County
of York ','" an<J three years later he made a similar grant to
another serjeant ' of £34 115. 3^. yearly from the subsidy and
ulnage of cloths in the City and County of York '.3 When
Henry died, his widow received a large annuity, including
£33 6s. from the revenue on Yorkshire cloths, £100 from that of
Somersetshire, and other sums from the money paid by the
clothiers of Dorset, Southampton, Surrey, Sussex, and East
Anglia.4 To give a last instance, Edward IV, immediately
upon his accession to the throne, sought to reward the Nevilles,
and also to bind them more closely to his side, by handing over
to John Nevill, Lord Montagu, the whole of the ulnage of
Yorkshire, with all its revenues from subsidy, ulnage, and the
sale of forfeited cloths."'

1 Statute i; Rich. IF, c. j. : Patent Rolls, n Hen. IV, pt. i, m. i.

' Patent Rolls, 14 Hen. IV, in. i.S.

1 Patent Rolls, 1 Hen. V, pt. v, mm. 10 and 11 (1414). More ambitious
still was the grant in 144-'. to Leo, Lord of Welles, and late Lieutenant of
Ireland, ' ot the sum of 11^ marks \earlv . . . out of subsidy and ulnage of
cloth for sale in the County and City of York . . . and in Kyngeston-upon-
IIull . . . until he be satisfied of the sum of {2,000 and more, due to him by
the King ' (Patent Rolls. 20 Hen. VI, pt. iii. m. 15 (1442)).

• Patent Rolls, 1 Kd. IV, pt. iv, in. J.

1 5-"- 1 - K

130 STATE REGULATION chap.

The work of the ulnager was supplemented by the activities
of the searchers appointed by the crafts, who strove to enforce v
the legal assize, and at the same time attempted to maintain
the quality of the fabrics made in the towns. That this dual
system of inspection fully achieved its aim is very improbable.
The frequent revisions of the law and the declarations of muni-
cipal authorities and gilds seem to indicate that the mediaeval
cloth-maker was not invariably law-abiding. Numerous in-
stances of fraud and deceit are recorded, and commissions were
occasionally sent out to study the working of the Cloth Acts and
to suggest improvements in legislation and administration.1 In
short, it seems to have been impossible effectively to regulate
the industry even when it was largely confined to the towns.
Hence when the expansion of the following centuries began to
make itself felt, when the drift from the towns weakened the
control of the craft searchers and the rural areas became the
strongholds of the industry, it was even less possible for the
old local and national machinery to be effective. The industry
was becoming much more important as a source of national
wealth, but its development was on such lines that the old police
systems were more and more inadequate for keeping it under
supervision. One arm of control, that of the gilds, was losing
its strength, and it was therefore necessary that the State should /
provide stronger regulations to uphold a fair standard of quality
in the English pieces. So we enter a bewildering maze of legisla-
tion throughout the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, regulating
every detail of dimension for every variety of cloth, forbidding
certain processes, and prescribing the general and detailed
character of the manufacture. One Act succeeded another with
great rapidity, and the Yorkist and Tudor Parliaments evoked
some measures which in complexity and intricacy rivalled
a modern Insurance Act.

What were the tricks of trade against which these statutes
were directed ? Particular complaints occur from time to time,

1 There were constant attempts to evade the ulnage, and nearly every idnage
account contained records of forfeiture made by some one who had attempted
to sell cloth unsealed. In 1358 there was a Commission for the whole kingdom,
with seven commissioners for Yorkshire, because the ' King learned he is
greatly defrauded by the subtle machinations of merchants and others, who
are selling cloths beloie they are scaled ' (Patent Rolls, 3 J Ed. Ill, pt.ii, m.6d).

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 131

but the general faults which run throughout the whole story,
and which were concerned with all the processes, from weaving
onwards, can be briefly summed up as follows :

(1) The use of flocks, thrums (i.e. waste ends of wool and ,
yarn), and other inferior materials and rubbish in the weaving
of the cloth. This working of waste odds and ends into the
body of the cloth when weaving seems to have been a common
practice, which called forth general condemnation from pam-
phleteers and legislators.

(2) The mixing of wool of various kinds and standards of
spinning in the same piece, and also the use of better qualities y
of weft at the ends of the piece than in the middle. These prac-
tices caused the fabric to be composed of material of very uneven
quality and standard. The inequalities were accentuated after
the fulling, when certain parts had shrunk more than others,
and thus the piece would be uneven, of varying width, thickness,
and quality, exhibiting that strange effect known to contem-
poraries as ' cockling ' or ' banding '.

These practices, hpwever, were mere trifles compared with
(3) the frauds practised in tentering the cloth. The piece had ,
shrunk considerably during the washing and fulling ; the
extent of the shrinkage varied according to the fineness of the
yarn which had been used in making the cloth, and other con-
siderations, so that the size of the piece after fulling might be
doubtful. In the tentering process, the cloth was stretched
upon a l<»ng wooden frame, and was then pulled out to its final
dimensions. These measurements were those fixed by the
particular statute which was at that time in operation, and so
the cloth, no matter what its length alter lulling, must be
stretched to the stipulated legal length and breadth. This
often meant that the piece was excessively stretched, and the
cloth which could have undergone a little tentering without any
harm was, by this ovcr-t entering, rendered thin and threadbare
in places. In such circumstances ' medicine ' was applied to
restore the cloth to its pristine thickness and firmness. This
was done by covering the cloth with a coating or pigment of
sonic concoction, in which Hocks, waste wool, thrums, chalk,
oatmeal, and similar substances were to be found. Thanks to
this reinforcement, the cloth now appeared linn to the touch

K 2

132 STATE REGULATION chap.

and pleasing to the eye ; it was not until the fabric was worn
and the rain came down that the deception became apparent,
as the ' medicine ' was washed out and the cloth shrank towards
its minimum dimensions.1

It was against such practices as these that legislation hurled
its prohibitions. The frauds debased the name of English cloths
in the foreign market, and would lose for this country the
foreign cloth trade unless they were speedily checked. The
Government therefore did its utmost to stamp out all such
nefarious practices. It did not attempt at first to meddle with
the coarser wares, and Kendal cloths, ' frizes ', ' cottons ', and
similar qualities of North-Country textiles were generally
exempted from the force of these reformatory statutes. The
better class of goods, the kerseys and broad cloths, were not
excused, and many of the cloths on which the West Riding was
building up a thriving industry would therefore come within
the scope of these enactments. Certainly, as the sixteenth-
century Statute Book shows, Yorkshire needed to be watched,
for its reputation was in many respects very bad.

From the accession of Edward IV to the reign of James I.
there is an almost unbroken succession of enactments, all of
which attempted to encourage the cloth industry by making
orders for its moral welfare, and by forbidding dishonest
practices in the manufacture of textile fabrics. It would be
unprofitable to enter into the details of those statutes, but it is
possible to study their general character, and to note how the
framers of such legislation learned wisdom and gained experience
in the course of time. The Act of 1464 gives an excellent
illustration of the nature of these enactments.2 Its preamble is
typical :

' Whereas for many years past and now at this day the
workmanship of cloths and things requisite to the same is and
hath been of such fraud, deceit, and falsity that the said cloths
in other lands and countries be had in small reputation, to the
great shame of this land.'

1 These details of the nature of the frauds are drawn from pamphlets,
complaints such as Leake's Discourse (see below), and other State papers, in
addition to the statutes themselves.

2 Statute 4 Ed. IV, c. i. These Acts were generally worked out with
minuteness of detail, and attempted to provide as adequately as possible
for the control of the industry.

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 133

Therefore, for the reformation of the industry, it was ordered
that various kinds of cloth, ' after the full watering, racking,
straining and tentering of the same, ready for sale ' should con-
form to certain stipulated lengths and breadths. Clothiers were
forbidden to work lamb's wool, thrums, or chalk into the pieces,
and officers were appointed to sec that the Act was obeyed in
all its details.

This Act of 1464 failed to bring about the reformation expected
from it, and the statute of 1483 was intended as a supplement
and extension.1 The note of the new Act was its attack on
excessive tentering ; some cloths had been stretched to far more
than the legal limits, and pieces which should have been only
24 yards in length had been ' drawn out to xxx yerdys, and in
brede from seven quarters unto ye brede of ij yerdys '. The root
of the evil seemed to lie in the fact that tentering was done
privately, within doors, out of the public gaze. The Act there-
fore forbade the use of any cloth-stretching devices within
houses or workrooms. Tenters were to be set up in open places
only, and the mayors, bailiffs, and governors of boroughs, towns,
and villages were to survey these open places diligently, in
order to prevent excessive tentering. The assistance of the
local authorities was thus enlisted, a policy which was materially
developed during the next century. From the force of this
Act there were numerous exceptions, especially of the cheaper
northern cloths.2

Henry VIII, in the midst of his manifold activities, found
time to attend to economic legislation, and the cloth laws of
his reign were numerous ; but they always exempted Kendals,
Northern whites, ' frizes ', and Devon cloths, the cheap wares
of the period.3 Yorkshire, however, was not to escape, for in
T533 a commission was appointed to inquire into some aspects
of the West Riding industry. The details of the story are
scanty, but it is clear that the Yorkshiremen had been using
flocks in the manufacture of their cloths, in a manner contrary
to law. The commissioners had great difficulty in obtaining

1 Statute 1 Rich. Ill, c. 8.

■' Kendals, ' frizc ware ', a<\, were exempted.

' e.g. 14-15 Hen. VIII, c. 1 and c. 11. Also Statute 6 Hen. VIII, c. o, for
avoiding deceits in making woollen cloths, excluding Cornwall, and friezes
made in Wales, Lancashire, and Cheshire.

134 STATE REGULATION chap

any information ; witness the following letter, sent by Sir
Marmaduke Constable to Thomas Cromwell, and dated October 3,

1533 :

' Please it you bee aduised that accordyng to the Kyng's
comyssion to me and others directed for reformacon of fflokkyng
of clothes in the West Parties of the Shyre of Yorke, by force
whereof Sir John Nevyll, John Pullayn, and mysclff have
setten at Leydes, emong diuers of the clothmakers, wherby all
the polycye we could devyse came not any to the knawllege of
prove to be made agaynst the grett nombre of the offenders.
Whereupon we appoynted another settynge att Pountfrett . . .
trustyng by the same that the offenders shalbe brought to
better knawllege, and the Kynges grace to profyt.' 1

After considerable trouble, the commissioners succeeded in
drawing up a list of such as were weaving cloth with weft made
of flocks.2 This catalogue of offenders includes names from all
the cloth-making centres of the West ^Riding, and mentions no
less than 542 clothiers. Alongside each name stands the number
of illegal cloths which were found in the possession of the
offender. The general entry is one half-cloth, and the largest
culprit is entered for three cloths only. Evidently this manu-
facture of cloths by using flocks as weft was a very small and
insignificant matter. The explanation seems to be that the
clothiers, in the course of their occupation, gradually accumu-
lated a stock of flocks, thrums, waste yarn, &c. These scraps
they kept on one side until they had a considerable pile at their
disposal, when they worked up the whole into yarn of an inferior
quality, and wove it into a cheap cloth. This was scarcely

1 State Papers, Henry VIII, § 70, p. 139.

2 Exch. Accounts, bundle 345, no. 25 : ' Nomina coruni qui operaverunt
pannos licia vorat. trlocke.' 'this list contains 542 names, distributed as
follows :

Halifax . . .182 names Heaton . . iS names

Heptonstall . . 60 ,, Birstall . 18

Almondbury

Leeds

Elland

Huddersfield

Bradford . Total

Tlie names cover the whole of the cloth area, and a good percentage come
from what is now the heavy woollen and shoddy district. Amongst the
culprits appear most of the well-known industrial families of Yorkshire —
Baynes, Walker, Musgrave, Kitson, Harrison, and Wilson, in Leeds ; Crowther,
Hirst, Worm aid ' . , Walker, Holdsworth, tvc, in other parts.

82 names

Heaton

Birstall

Wakefield

1 )ewsburv

Batley

4°

Mirl'icld

-4

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 135

a forerunner of the modern shoddy industry, for shoddy is made
out of wool which has already been woven or knitted, and
worn, whereas these sixteenth-century clothiers were utilizing
the waste material which they accumulated in weaving kerseys,
Northern Dozens, &c. To the clothier this practice was obviously
a splendid piece of economy, and a utilization of waste products.
In the eyes of the law it was a deceitful and lawless device which
must be stopped. The commission reported to Thomas Crom-
well, who entered in his ' Remembrancer ', at least three times,
' To remember such as have caused cloths to be flocked in the
North, and to know the Kynges pleasure '.* Little was done,
for in 1534 a writer declared to Cromwell that in spite of the
commission ' they doe nowe the same (flokkyng and false cloth
making) moche more and worse than ever they dyd \2

Commissions and legislation appear to have produced little
effect upon the morality of the industry, and complaints began
to come from the foreign countries which purchased English
cloths.3 During the sixteenth century the number of varieties
of native fabrics increased rapidly, and it was therefore possible
for new types of cloth to escape the letter of the law, since they
belonged to a class not mentioned in the statutes then in opera-
tion. In 1552 a great and comprehensive attempt was made
to bring all existing varieties of cloth under the power of the
law, and to establish a thorough scheme of regulation. A com-
mission of ' certain wise discreet and sage knights and burgesses
of Parliament ' was given the task of inquiring amongst ' honest
clothiers . . . drapers, merchant taylors, cloth-workers, shear-
men and other artificers, ... of such matters as touch as well
the false as the true making of clothes, by whose declaration,
consent and advice, after divers and sundry meetings ' the new
Act was to be framed.

The first point of importance about this statute4 was the
variety of cloths for which regulation was ordered. No less than

1 Calendar of State Papers, Henry V 1 I I , vol. vi, nos. 1370, 1,71, and i^Sj,
October 1 533.

2 State Papers, Henry VIII, § SS, pp. 1 10-20.

* Prohibition bv Spain on foreign cloths. English cloths were admitted
for a time, but the writer said that this favour would be quicklv removed
unless the English cloth-makers amended the faults in their cloth. Written at
Yalladolid, September iS, 1 ; 38 (Calendar of Slate Pa pert, vol.xiii, pt.ii, no. 383).

4 Statute ;-o Fa\. VI, c. f>.

136 STATE REGULATION chap.

22 different types of woollen cloth were catered for, and in each
case full specifications were laid down. There were ordinary
kerseys, sorting kerseys, Northern cloths, Northern dozens,
Pennistones, Manchester, Lancashire and Cheshire ' cottons ',
Manchester rugs and ' frizes ', &C.1 The Act really did attempt
to embrace every variety of English woollen cloth which came
into the market, and in order to do so it had to make provision
for this great number of different fabrics.

The second feature of importance in the statute was the stress
laid on the weight of cloths. It had become obvious at last that
the provision of legal dimensions alone was insufficient, and
was even provocative of fraud, since it tempted the clothier to
stretch his pieces abnormally in order to bring them up to the
legal length and breadth. In order to remedy this defect the
new Act declared the weight of wool which must be put into
each piece, or rather the weight of the piece when washed and
dried, as well as the length and breadth of the fabric.

The dimensions stated in the Act were those of the cloth
when fully wetted and shrunk, and the weight was to be that
of the piece when thoroughly cleaned and dry. It was hoped
now that by measuring the piece before tentering its real size
could be ascertained. Makers of short-weight pieces were to
be fined, and really faulty cloths confiscated. No cloth was
to be stretched in tentering more than one yard in length or
a quarter of a yard in breadth.

For the administration of this Act searchers were to be

appointed. The mayors, bailiffs, and other chief officers of

cities, boroughs, and corporate towns were given authority to

appoint two or more ' discreet, honest and expert persons ',

who were endowed with full power of searching, measuring, and

sealing, and with the right to confiscate cloths which infringed

1 ' Pennistones ' or ' forest whites ' were cloths which seem to have been
made especially at Penistone, near Barnsley. Or they may have taken
their name from a coarse type of Yorkshire wool, known as Pennistone.
For instance, the Northern wares were ordered to he as follows :

Ordinary kerseys . . Length, 17-19 yds. Weight, 20 lb.

Sorting kerseys . . ,, 17-18 ,, ,, 23 ,,

Northern whole broad cloths, of the kind made around Leeds, were to contain
23-25 yds. by i| yds., 'and being well scowered, thicker!, milled, and fully
dried, shall weigh Ixvj lb. (66 lb.) at the least '. Northern dozens : Length,
12-13 yds.; breadth, 1 .J yds.; weight, 33 lb. Pennistone--: length,
12-13 yds. ; breadth. 61 qrs. ; weight, 2H lb.

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 137

the clauses of the statute. But all these provisions applied only
to towns, and to cloths which were finished or made within the
towns. There was no provision of machinery for the regula-
tion of the rural industry, and so, apart from the ulnager, whose
work was now little more than financial, the country cloths
might pass uninspected, provided they did not come into the
towns to receive their finishing touches. Hence the Act, full
of good intentions, achieved very little. It was amended and
strengthened in 1557,1 when attention was given to the broad
cloths of the West Riding, and, in a small degree, to rural cloths
generally. But still no reformation was effected, and the
famous complaint of Leake, written twenty years afterwards,
revealed a lamentable lack of orthodox industrial morality
amongst the clothiers of the North Country.2 Leake's chief
accusations against the Yorkshiremen and their neighbours
were :

(1) ' fflockes, chalke, and other false oyntementes cast uppon
clothe is specially used in the Northe partes, li'her no true clothes
are made, and this is the pryncipall poynte in the which the
clothyer doth offend ' :

(2) For faulty dyeing, ' all the coulored clothes made in ye
Northe is worst of all ' :

(3) ' And especially for streatchinge and strayninge, Suffolke,
Redding, and ye Northe partes . . . are greatly abused, . . . and
generally where the clothyer doth dresse clothe at home before
he sell itt, ther doe they moste stretchc and strayne abomnably,
(), 7, 8, 9, and 10 yardes.'

(4) ' All other sortes of lowe prised clothes, and Northern
clothes of all sortes and Kerseys, and cottons, frcysc, etc., will
not hold their contentes, bcinge wette.'

And so Leake's indictment continues, against every fraud,
conceivable or otherwise. lie condemns all manner of deceits
as practices which 'can naythcr bee answered before God nor
the World '. As to the cloth laws, ' better laws cannot bee
made, onely there wants cxecuc'on, for wante therof bothe
clothyer, alnager, searchers, mcrchantcs and rctaylers of clothe
be growen into suche securitye yt ye lawe is forgotten, and they
do what: they liste '. The magistrates, noting the prevalence
of such evil-doing, have let the laws fall into abeyance, ' and

' Statute 4- ; Philip and Marv, c. ;.

- J>. S. I'., /■./;/•., cxi. jjN. Also a copy in eclxxxvii. u<>.

138 STATE REGULATION chap.

therbye all the falsehood hitherto hath bene couered, as it were
under a bushell '. ' I am fullie of opinion ', concludes Leake,
' that . . . generallie for all clothes the lawes were never yett
observed in any place within the realme.'

These processes, so obnoxious to the legislator, were practised
as commonly in the West Riding as elsewhere, especially that
of stretching the piece to an excessive length, and then thicken-
ing it with a pigment of flocks. In 1590 x complaint was made
to the Privy Council of the ' great dcceiptcs used and permitted
in the chopping of flockes and rubbing the same into cloth by
the greatest parte of clothiers in the County of Yorke '. The
Council took the matter into consideration, and eventually
appointed Randall Tenchc to ' deface and cutt in peeces or
burnc all such blockes or bordes as have been or are now used
for the chopping of flockes '.

Whilst complaints were coming from within the country, the
murmur of discontent from abroad grew louder concerning the
inferior quality of some of the cloths which were bought from
England. In 1589 2 the Estates of Holland dispatched to
Elizabeth a complaint ' of the great defectes and fraudes in the
Englische clothes brought thether ', and in 1592 Monsieur
Carron, the agent of the Low Countries, resident in England,
presented a long list of grievances against English wares. He
declared that the fabrics imported into the Low Countries by
the Merchant Adventurers were ' not only full of holes and in
ccrten faults muchc worse than can bee seen outwards, but also
[were] narrower and shorter than they ought to bee, wherby the
merchants which cometh to buy them without openinge or
measuring of (hem, . . . when they sell them by the ell or measure
they find themselves shortened and deceaved of that which
they thought to have ; which is the cause that manic merchant
clothbuyers of the United Provinces can not of late profile anie
wayc by the said (-lot lies, but become poore '. Carron asserted
that the faults mentioned were especially prevalent amongst
the kerseys and ' Dozens ', which were often two yards below

1 Acts of Privy Council, December 24, 1590.

2 Ibid., December 28, 1589. In 1 593 the soldiers then in the Low Countries
were complaining that ' the apparel is not equal to the patterns, and is of
bad stuff which soon wears, the cloth shrinks, the stockings are short, and the
shoes bad '. This was due partly to Klizabeth's economy, and partly to the
antics of the Knglish clothiers (/;. 5. /'., Eliz., ccxliv. 821).

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 139

the proper length ; all of which, he declared, ' is wholie against
the goodwill of her Ma11" and contrarie to your good and laud-
able Statutes of Parliament therupon made, which ought to
be observed as well for the Lowe Countries as for Englandc '-1

These protests at last bore fruit in a renewal of industrial
legislation, and it is significant that the first sweeping enactment
concerned itself solely with cloth made north of the Trent.2
This Act of 1597 3 was surprisingly harsh in tone, and aimed
with deadly intent at ' checking the deceiptfull stretching and
taintering of Northernc Cloths '. The preamble was as illuminat-
ing as it was prolix ; it spoke of the ' many goode and wholesome
lawes heretofore made for the true makyng of good and true
clothes and karseis, which lawes, cither by some wants in the
statutes already made, or for lacke of the due cxccucon of the
saide lawes have not only not restrayned the great abuse in
makyng of clothes and karseis, but rather have increased the
same, insomuch that the Northernc clothes and karseis doc
yerely and dayly grow worse and worse, and are made more
light and moche more stretched and strayned than heretofore
they have bene, to the greate deceipt of all nations . . . and to
the shame and slaunder of the countrye where the same is
made, and in short tyme like utterlie to overthrowe the trade
of clothynge '. This great depravity the legislators imputed
chiefly to the ' greate nomber of tcntors and other engines
daylie used and practised . . . for the strctchynge and strayninge
of the . . . clothes and Karseis'. Therefore the Act, with righteous
indignation and firm determination to destroy the evil, root and
branch, declared that ' no person or persons within any of the
counties on the Northside of the Ryvcr of Trent shall strctchc
or strayne . . . any clothes, dozens, kersies, pennistones, rugs,
frizes, Kighley whites, ... or any other clothes made within the
counties aforesaid, upon pain to forfeit ("5 for every default.
And further that no person . . . shall use or occupie any tenter
or any manner of wrinche rope or engines to strctchc or strayne

1 Salisbury .1/55., Hist. .1/55. Comm., pt. iv, p. 21b, July 1502. Also
D. S. /'., /://.:., ccxlii. j?, July 1502 : 'The topic of the first live Articles
exhibited by M. Carron in the names of the State Gencrall of the Tinted
Provinces of the Low Countries.'

- As early as 1580 a Hill for the search of cloths made in the County of
Vork had been before the 1 louse of Commons, but had been abandoned
(House of C amnions Journals, i. 124). ' Statute 39 Khz., c. 20.

140 STATE REGULATION chap.

any clothes ' under a penalty of £20 fine. In other words, the y
use of tenters was entirely forbidden.

Secondly, all cloths were to be made of the weight and dimen-
sions stated in previous Acts, and the manufacturer was to place
on the end of each piece, before selling it, a seal, on which was
his own name, as well as the specifications of the cloth.

It was not intended that this statute should fail in its objects
through faulty administration ; further, it was not intended
that the rural industry should escape any longer from thorough
supervision. The Act therefore gave detailed and elaborate
orders for the provision of administrative machinery, both for
town and country alike. The Justices of the Peace were to
appoint searchers for the rural areas, whilst the municipal
authorities chose similar officers for the towns. The searchers
were elected for one year,1 during which time they had full
power to go, once a month at least, into the houses or work-
rooms of all workers in wool, to search for faulty workmanship,
and to measure and seal all cloths when ready for the market.
At the same time they were to hunt for tenters, and when they
found any they were to deface the frames so that they could
not be used henceforth.

The main provision of the Act 2 was ' Death to the tenter '.
This would be a staggering blow to every cloth-maker in the
county. There was scarcely a clothier of any standing but had
his tenter frame, on which he stretched the shrunk fabric,
after its visit to the fulling mill, into uniformity and legality of
length and breadth. Without tentering, the piece would be
contracted to small and uneven proportions, it would present
a dishevelled and unkempt appearance, and would not sell at
any profitable price. Industry without the tenter was impos-
sible. And yet the ' big folk ' up in London, ignorant of the
needs and the means of the clothiers, had ordered that ;tll strctch-

1 The searchers on election were to take oath, and be bound with a guarantee
of £40, to do their duty faithfully and thoroughly. The exhortation adminis-
tered them by the j.P. read as follows : ' You shall swear that you shall use
your best endeavours by all lawfull means dureing your continuance in the
otfice of searchers, ... to see all lawes and statutes concerningc clothinge bee
well and truely observed and kept, and thai you shall make a ton- presentment
with accompte in wrytinge at every generall sessions for your division within
the said Rvdinge of all your whole proceedinges in vour office, soe helpe von
God.'

- The Act was extended to the whole country four years later; 43 Khz.,
c. 10.

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 141

ing of cloth should cease, and threatened a St. Bartholomew's
Day on all tenters.

The Act was received with very mixed feelings by the various
parties concerned. The French Ambassador in London caused
it,1 along with other cloth laws, to be translated into French,
and disseminated in his own country, and the French Govern-
ment began to confiscate any English pieces which went into
that country bearing signs of stretching. In England the Privy
Council, which was chiefly responsible for supervising the
administration of such Acts by local authorities, dispatched
frequent letters to the justices of the Northern counties, exhort-
ing them to enforce the Act of 1597, and destroy the accursed
tenters. But the justices, who had fought so strenuously in the
battle over the Ship-money levies, did not intend to surrender
without a hard struggle on a matter which was much more
important in its permanent effects. They, who lived in the
very heart of the clothing area, knew that the tenter was a
necessary piece of apparatus to the clothier's art, and that the
industry could not be carried on without using the tenter
frames. They were also fully aware that any attempt to demolish
these tenters would mean an attack on the property of nearly
every clothier, and would bring about their own ears such
a storm of protest and opposition that their lives would be
unbearable. Hence, little wonder if they allowed their loyalty
to their county to outweigh considerations of obedience to Her
Majesty's Government. They ranged themselves on the side of
the clothiers, and refused to put the Act into operation. The
Privy Council sent long letters to the West Riding magistrates,
informing them of the confiscations which were taking place in
France, bewailing the fact that cloth came to the markets as
bad as ever it had been,2 and finally urging the need for a rigorous
administration of the Act. To those letters the justices pre-
sented a front of masterly indifference and inactivity, which
irritated the Privy Council in no small measure. At last the
Council threw persuasion to the winds, and spoke in terms of
anger to the disobedient Yorkshiremen. This was in 1600, after
two years had been wasted in peaceful persuasion ; and the

1 /). ,s\ /'., /:7k:., eclxix. 4;.

- /». >'. /'., KHz., eclxix. 45, declared that ' cloth coineth to the market
woorsc than better '.

142 STATE REGULATION chap.

wrath of the Privy Council was now turned against the justices
for Yorkshire, Lancashire, and Westmorland jointly :

' It ys not, or ought not to be unknowne unto you that there
ys a statute made in the xxxixth yere of her Majesty's raigne,
against the deceiptfull makinge ... of certaine clothes. . . .
Nevertheless, notwithstandinge the Statute so latelie made with
soche care and provicion to redresse and remedie thes sclanderous
abuses, by which the credit and estymacion of our cloths ys so
moche demynished and sclaundercd as of late there ys an edict
sett forth by the French Kinge by which all Englishe clothes
which shalbe brought into that realmc are declared confiscable
that have bene tentered or stretched, or made of two wolles,
rowed, cockled, and stuffed with flockes.'

Still, in spite of the good intentions of the legislators, the
laws are left inoperative by those who should enforce them,
and cloth is as bad as ever it was. Concerning this ' contempt
of the lawe and prejudice of the Common Wealth ', the Council
continues, ' wee have cause to note a greate wante of care in
you (i. e. the Northern magistrates) in that you neglect the due
execucion of that lawe, and therefore wee doe will and com-
maunde you in Her Majesty's name that you will have due
regard hereafter to see the said statute observed and put in
execucion accordinge to the tenor, purport and true meanynge
of the same in all places within the countie '. The justices are
to enforce the Act at once, and order that all tenters shall be
completely defaced. The letter concludes with a stern note of
warning : ' Otherwyse . . . you will be called to a strict accompt
for the neglect of your duties, . . . and further notice maie be
taken of soch of you as shalbe fownde negligent and remisse
herein, as other more carefull persons maie supplie their
places.'1 Even such a minatory epistle failed to make the
justices stir in the matter, and six months later, in 1601, the
Council declared in most injured tones, ' nothinge hathe bene
as yet don for rcdres of the said deceipt, . . . and wee cannott
but fynde it strange that you should use such slackness in
a reformation ... of so greate waight and ymportance '.2

Hard words indeed, but not sufficiently strong to move the
justices to attempt the impossible. What matter it the French
monarch had ordered all English cloths taken into France to be

1 Acts <<f tin Privy Council, August 24, 1600, vol. xxx, pp. 602-3.
- Ibid., January .12, iCoi, vol. xxxi, p. in.

iv UP TO THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 143

soaked in water, and was confiscating those which shrank under
that test ? The tenter was a necessity for trimming up the
piece, and one might almost say that no tentering meant no
profit. Hence protests were sent to the central authorities
from the justices of the peace, clothiers, and merchants.1 The
traders who were engaged in selling the English wares declared
that the practice was carried on by their foreign competitors,
and that it would be impossible for English cloth to gain a
market abroad unless tentering was allowed. They stated,
with how much truth one cannot say, that Muscovites, Russians,
and ' they of Barbaric ' desired cloth which would shrink, and
did not in the least object to stretched cloth. Finally, they
urged that unless the cloth could be stretched it would be too
costly for the inhabitants of those regions to which it was
formerly exported.2 The result of these agitations was to obtain
a number of exemptions from the full force of the Act, and
these privileges were eventually crystallized in a statute in
1023. :5 In this new Act, tenter-frames were permitted to exist
and to be used, but they were to be so constructed that no "
more than a certain specified amount of straining could be
effected by them. The distance which the bottom beam of the
framework might be lowered was not to exceed a certain amount,
and all tenters which violated these conditions by allowing
more than the legal ' chase ' were to be defaced instantly, and
their owners fined 40.?. for the benefit of the poor.

This was a great triumph for the clothiers, for the permissive
Act amounted in practice to an admission of the injustice of
the anti-tenter laws, and a surrender to the clothiers. Probably
the passing of the new statute made no actual dilference in the
procedure of the industry, and certainly it tailed just as much
as its predecessors to achieve anything substantial. True, the
various enactments were not quite dead letters.1 Searchers

' Thf |.I'.'s of Lancashire gained tin- concession in 1O00 that tenters
.should he permitted to remain in existence, hut were to he so made as not to
allow excessive tentering (.Ids <>f I'nrv Council, Januarys [Ooo-i, vol. \x.\i,
p. 78). J Cotton MSS. (Brit. Mus.), (".alba K. vol. i, .S-io-J, April 1005.

! Statute JT [as. I, c. I>8.

1 In West Riding Ouartcr Sessions Indictment Books one occasionally
encounters cases of excessive tentering being punished, hut such cases are
comparatively rare. One man 111 104S was lined t jo for the otlence (Indict-
ment Hook I>, Wakefield ( hiarter Sessions, January K>4<)). In the Sowerby
Constable's Accounts, mention is made ol warrants for bringing such as had

144 STATE REGULATION

were appointed, and clothiers were hauled before the magis-
trates for deceitful making of cloth and for excessive tentering.
But in spite of the activity, more or less spasmodic, of these
local inspectors, there was little improvement in the ' tone ' of
the industry, and the cries of fraud and deceit continued almost
without abatement during the seventeenth century. New types
of cunning workmanship came into prominence, new complaints
were voiced, and new attempts made to check these practices,
either by reinforcing existing laws and reviving old forms of
regulation, or by inventing new methods of control. These
attempts will form the subject of a subsequent chapter, but we
can conclude this section by quoting the lamentation of May
in 1613, to show how completely the Tudor legislation had
failed to fulfil its purpose. May cites a long list of nefarious
practices, and piles a terrible indictment upon the heads of the
clothiers. He then concludes as follows :

' Whiles the true making of cloth endured in reasonable
manner, it was most vendible in all parts. But what maketh
those now to refuse it, being brought to their ownc doors, which
before time earnestly sought it at ours ? Falsehood ! . . . What
maketh the gentleman complain of the wool that lyeth on his
hands ? The clothier complain of his dead sales ? The mer-
chant complain of his losse ? All but falsehood ! How thick
are certificates of falsehood returned upon our merchants from
beyond the seas ! In provinces beyonde the boundes of Christen-
dome, when a Turk or Infidel brusheth his garment bare that
he may number the threads, and findeth here and there holes
and faults, then our Christian profession is called into question
by these prophane people. In Kingdoms nere us, these abuses
have bene founde so odious, and their people so much wronged,
that they have made laws and edicts to banish our cloth out of
their countries, rather desiring our wool wherewith to make true
commodities. In our own countrie, where muche of our wool
may be vented, the falsehood of clothing is so common that
every one striveth to wear anything rather than cloth. If
a gentleman make a liverie for his man, in the first showre of
raine it may fit his Page for Bignesse ! ' l

made deceitful cloth ; there is a warrant for one man who had (locked some cloth,
and another for refusing to take up the office of searcher (Halifax Antiq. Soc,
1902). In 1648 it was stated at the Leeds Quarter Sessions that there was
great complaint of the abuse of clothiers in making tenters of greater chase
than was allowed by the statute, and searchers were consequently ordered to
give careful attention to the matter, and deface all offending frames (Quarter
Sessions Order Book C, 101 a and 148 a).

1 The True Estate of Clothing in the Realm, by J. May (16 13).

CHAPTER V

MARKETS AND MERCHANTS: THE ORGANIZATION
OF HOME AND FOREIGN TRADE IN YORKSHIRE
CLOTH, IT TO THE RESTORATION

Long before 1600, Yorkshire pieces had become a commodity
of commercial importance. As we have seen already, the wares
of York and Beverley had been noted in their day, and during
the sixteenth century the produce of the Northern counties
generally was meeting a certain kind of demand, both at home
and abroad. The broad Northern Dozen and the narrow kersey,
which were the best of the Yorkshire fabrics, commanded only
low prices when compared with the high-class fabrics of the West
of England. Pcnnistones, ' Keighley whites ', and other varieties
made in Yorkshire and the North belonged to even lower grades
of quality. The merchants of the Northern ports were partly
within the bounds of truth when they declared in 1591 that ' the
clothes shipped in those cuntryes (counties) bee course clothes,
and most of them made of course wooll of the growthe of those
cuntryes and ffloxe and thrummes '.*

Such fabrics met the needs of the poorer classes in Yorkshire
and elsewhere. Many of the pieces were therefore sold in the local
cloth fairs and markets, where, as in the eighteenth century,
clothier and merchant met on certain fixed days. Scarcely
anything is known of these markets until the days of Defoe,
beyond the fact that they existed.'- The merchants or factors
who purchased the pieces then sold some of them locally, but
the great bulk of the cloth either passed to London, and thence

1 I). S. /'., KHz., cexxxix. 54(1591). The broad cloth, cither in its full length
of _'4 yds., or as a ' Dozen ' of 12-13 yds., represented the highest grade of
Northern fabrics. It was made of the best wool, chiefly drawn from Lincoln-
shire or other southern counties. Next in order of merit came the kersey,
which was very little inferior in quality to the broad, but longer and not so
wide. It was made of the same brands of wool as the Dozen, and sold at
i.s. (hI. to Jv (id. per yard in the early seventeenth century, when broads
sold at 4-s-. to 5-s\ These two cloths were the staples of the Yorkshire industry
and export trade. See next chapter for details as to further varieties and
standards oi manufacture.

- I\>r account of Yorkshire cloth fairs see Chapter XI. Also Chapter VI
for position of merchants.

15^6.12 L

146 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

to other parts of England, or went, via London, York, Hull,
Newcastle, or Chester, to serve the poor of Europe.

At the same time many of the wealthy clothiers took or sent
their own cloths to London, instead of relying on the Yorkshire
markets for sale. This trade between Yorkshire and London
was of great importance, and thousands of pieces travelled south
each year, to be sold at the annual fair of St. Bartholomew or
in the more frequent sales at Blackwell Hall. The yearly fair
in London was opened on the day before the Feast of St. Bartholo-
mew,1 and continued over the two subsequent days. The venue
was the churchyard of the Priory Church in West Smithfield,
and the fair had become famous as a cloth exchange.2 Here
the booths of the clothiers were erected and the pieces exposed
for sale ; at night the gates were locked to prevent the theft of
the goods. The cloth booths seem to have been the freehold
property of the clothiers, who used them annually for the
display of their wares and at their death bequeathed them to
their heirs. Yorkshiremen journeyed regularly with their goods
to this great textile concourse, and owned cloth booths there.
Thus in 1518 William Hardy of Heptonstall in his will made the
bequest of his booth at ' Sainct Bartholomews juxta London ' 3
to his wife and children ; in 1542 Henry Farrer of Halifax
assigned to his son Brian his ' boith within Sancte Bartilmews
in London, to be hade and holden to the saide Brian and to his
heres and assignes for euer '.4 Others held stalls on lease, as
for instance John Crossley of Huddersfield, who in 1562 made the
following bequest :

' To my eldest sone, William . . . all my interest and tearme
of yeares which I have, or ought to have, of and in one standinge
or bowthe in the clothe faire called great Sainct Bartilmewes,
nere west Smythefield of London.' 5

This annual journey to the fair must have been a great event
to the clothiers, who approached the capital with mixed feelings
of wonder and fear, much akin to the emotions of the modern
countryman when he makes his first visit to the metropolis.

1 ' Halifax in the Days of Henry VIII ', by J. Lister, in Halifax Almanack,

I9I3-

2 Ashley, liconomic History, I. ii. 214. Sec also Encycl. Brit., nth edition,
iii. 450. 3 Halifax Wills, ed. by Clay and Crossley, p. 53.

1 Ibid., i. 156. 5 Ibid., i. 53 n.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 147

Fears for the safety of their precious cloths might well be enter-
tained in an age when the length, breadth, and weight of a cloth
were fixed by law, and when these legal data were constantly
being revised and amended. The clothier living away up in
Yorkshire would have some difficulty in keeping abreast of the
latest statutory demands, and so when he reached London
he might with good cause entertain doubts about the legality
of his pieces. Hence we find that in 1558 ' dyvers clothiars
of sundry partes of the realme, havinge repayred to this Barthyl-
mews Fayre with a greate nomber of course clothes and karseys
to be uttred and solde there do forbeare to open their said
clothes and put the same to sale, fearing they be not made
according to the Statute ordeyned in this behalf '. In order
to clear away such doubts, and to dispel the fears of the clothiers,
the Privy Council called before it a number of those concerned,
including, amongst others, ' John Sutclif of Hallyfax, John
Hardy of the same, John Lyster of Manningham, William
Lunsdale of Selby, Ollyver Brigges of Bewdeley (Co. Salop),
who occupyeth in the Northe partes '. With these men the Privy
Council conferred, the state of the Cloth Acts was considered,
and every possible step taken to allay the fears of the clothiers.1

The fair was an annual occurrence, and hence did not provide
facilities for continuous intercourse between the provincial
clothiers and the London traders. As the cloth trade grew, the
capital became more and more important as a market for cloths
made in the country. Clothiers wished to sell their wares to
the people of London, or to London merchants for export.
They needed, therefore, some more convenient channel through
which their cloths could flow week by week into the hands of
London buyers. The need was met by the institution of Black-
well Hall.- This Hall was a building in Basinghall Street,
purchased by the Mayor and Commonalty of London in 1397
to serve as a market for country clothiers and drapers. Here,
and here alone, countrymen were to expose and sell their cloths,
and sales could take place only between Thursday noon and
Saturday noon in each week. Strict rules were drawn up for
the control of the market, and offenders punished by the con-

1 Acts of the I'rivv Council, Auk. 23, 1;5,S-

- Ashley, I. ii. J 15, anil Cunningham, (irowth, i. 382.

148 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

fiscation of their goods.1 As the commerce in cloth expanded,
the importance of Blackwell Hall grew proportionately, since
there was no relaxation of the monopoly of sale which the Hall
possessed. Hence pieces were forwarded from every part of the '
country, on pack-horses or by sea, to this central sales-room, and
in the seventeenth century special rooms were set apart for the
produce of the various districts. There was a ' Northern Hall ',
which in 1622 contained over 5,000 pieces waiting to be sold ;
there was a ' Manchester Hall ', full of ' frizes ' and ' cottons ',
whilst Wiltshire, Suffolk, and other parts of the country claimed
their local ' Halls ' (as the rooms were euphemistically called),
each with its keeper or clerk.2 Later in the century two other
buildings were utilized as cloth markets, the ' Welch Hall ' for
coarse goods from the western areas, and Leaden Hall for the
wares of East Anglia and the new draperies of Yorkshire. The
country cloths, when ready for sale, were packed up in bundles
suitable for carriage by pack-horses or for transmission by sea,
and then the clothier either took them himself to the capital
or, as was more frequently the case, dispatched them by a
professional carrier.3 The goods were forwarded to some
agent 4 or factor in London, who took them to the Hall and there
disposed of them, charging his client with a certain proportion
of the receipts as commission. Those clothiers who accompanied
their goods might have a stall of their own in the market, but
during the seventeenth century the factor succeeded in encroach- _
ing upon the trade to such an extent as practically to forbid
any sales by the producer. Bitter complaints were constantly
being made of this monopoly and tyranny on the part of the
middleman,0 and legislation attempted to keep him in check.6
But the factor was a necessary part of the industrial organization

1 Early in the fifteenth century, drapers' and merchant taylors' companies
obtained the right to search all cloth exposed for sale, and to mark it according
to its size (Ashley, op. cit., I. ii. 214).

- I). S. I'., fas. I, exxviii. 73-7.

3 In the seventeenth century there was a constant stream of carriers
plying between Kendal, Wakefield, and London (Kendal Corp. MSS , Hist.
MSS. Comm., Report x, pt. iv, p. 317).

4 See Surtees Soc, vol. lxxvii, p. 19. The Priestley family had a factor in
Blackwell Hall. Sec also will of John Hollyred of Hallyfax, clothier, 1574
(copy in hands of Mr. J. Lister) : ' I have in Blackwell Hall Foure score and
one peces of Kerseyes, in the Hall that Mr. Gray kepes.'

5 See pamphlet extracts in Smith, Memoirs of Wool, vol. i, pp. 315-30.
" Statute 8-9 Will. Ill, c. 9.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 149

of the century, and so he throve out of the needs of the many
clothiers who used the London market for the disposal of their
wares.

Blaekwell Hall was taken advantage of by the State to facili-
tate the inspection of cloth in accordance with the various
cloth laws, and several Acts declared that all goods going to
London should be searched there.1 Further, the cloth-dealing
companies of the capital attempted to take advantage of the
market to engross all trade into their own hands, and forbade y
any direct dealing between the country manufacturer and the
consumer. Though never quite successful in this policy, the
companies and the city authorities in unison could make matters
exceedingly unpleasant and inconvenient for the outsider,
especially by the levy of excessive hall dues and fees. This was
particularly the case after the Restoration, and in 1664 the
clothiers and merchants of Leeds petitioned the Commons,
complaining that the city of London had increased ' ye auncient
Hallage for ye entrance and pitcheinge ' of the cloths, which
obliged ' a pitchinge lodgeing and long continuance of our
clothes in Blaekwell Hall and Leaden Hall ', with consequently
heavier charges, so that the petitioners did ' every day meet
with new discouragement and inconveniences in their trade \~
The House of Commons tried to remedy these grievances, but
the city quickly reimposed its heavy dues, and continued its
attempt to ' make the foreigner pay '.3

The cloth sold in London might be for distribution in London

or in other parts of England, amongst the poorer classes of the

population. But English cloth, and with it Yorkshire cloth,

had now become the most valuable article of foreign trade,

just as English wool had been in the thirteenth and fourteenth

centuries. The export trade was now a very important factor

in the textile industry, so important that any diminution of

the foreign demand brought depression, unemployment, and

distress upon large numbers of the English cloth-makers. During

the Tudor period our fabrics found their way into almost every

part of Europe. ' Bristow frizes, Welsh cottons, Manchester

1 Rymcr, Foedera, xx. 22,1-2.

1 IK S. /'., Chas. II, xcv. 82— f> ; also vol. 440, in. 14.

;l See pamphlets on wool (0>;8), Brit. Mus. 712. g. 16.(22). Yorkshire
cloths were obliged to pay 8d. per pack (10 cloths) tor hallage.

150 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

cottons and Northerens ' equally with the best qualities of white
and coloured cloths, were exported to the Low Countries, to
the various parts of High and Low Germany, to Muscovy,
Russia and the Baltic area, to France, Spain, Italy, Barbary,
Hungary, ' and contries beyond the same '} In the seven-
teenth century the troops of Russia were dressed in English
fabrics, and the gentlemen of Poland used to clothe their
attendants with English cloth until, after the various wars of
the early seventeenth century, they were too impoverished to
be able to afford the rough but durable wares of England, and
had to be content with the still cheaper fabrics of their own
country and of Silesia.2

In this export trade the three great cloth areas shared. East
Anglia was now essentially the home of the new draperies ; in
the West of England goods both of high and low quality were
produced, and Yorkshire comprised the third important source
of supply for the export trade. In 1623, a time of depression,
the merchants of York claimed to have shipped more than
50,000 kerseys during the previous thirteen months,3 whilst
in the famous lawsuit of 1638 a witness who was keeper of the
ulnage seals declared that 80,000 kerseys were manufactured
annually in the county, of which 60,000 were exported by way
of York, Hull, Newcastle, Chester, London, and other ports.4

The Yorkshire ports naturally played the most important
part in the exportation of the Yorkshire cloth. York had to
a very large extent lost its industrial activity, but had developed
its commerce instead, so that it was now, in the seventeenth
century, the home of many merchants, a city renowned for
its pleasant society, its venison pasties, its ' good fires, good
chere, and good company '/' Hull had developed considerably
during the Tudor period," and was now the port: and fort of the
Humber. Its harbour had been renovated so as to give better

1 I). S. P., Eli~., xv. 67 (1560).

2 Sellers, Ordinances of the Eastland Merchants (Camden Soc), Intro., p. lix.

3 I). S. P., J as. I , exxxviii. 120.

4 Evidence of J. Crabtree of Halifax, innkeeper, who ' kcepeth the booke
of the scales for the whole viccarage of Halifax '.

'J Eife of Marmadukc Rawdon of York (Camden Soc, 1863), p. 84.

6 At the time of the Reformation, Hull sold all its church plate and jewels,
and paved the town with the proceeds (Calendar of State Papers, vol. xii,
pt. i, p. 481).

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 151

accommodation for the loading and unloading of ships. At
the same time increased provision had been made to protect the
town and shipping from the ravages of pirates and hostile
fleets. Henry VIII had ordered the building of blockhouses and
other fortifications,1 and in the following century the scheme
of defence had been extended, so that the port was now sur-
rounded by strong walls, only to be entered by drawbridge
and portcullis, and all bristling with arms.2 Mull was now the
4 Key of the North ', and, as Fuller quaintly remarked, the key
had been well mended and the wards of the lock much altered,
for they succeeded in shutting out Charles I when the Civil
War began.3 The trade of Hull was both coastal and foreign.
The traffic with London and Newcastle was important, and
ships left the I lumber for most of the ports of Europe, especially
those facing Hull across the North Sea. Cloth was one of the
chief, if not the chief, articles of export. Grain4 from the basins
of the Ouse and Trent, and lead 5 from the mines of Derbyshire,
also figured prominently at times in the bills of lading, and
Hull was for many years the centre of the Greenland whale-
fishing industry,0 the northern market for fish, and the chief*
port to which wool was brought from the southern counties.

Now let us turn our attention to the men who were carrying
on this foreign trade in Yorkshire cloth. The first fact to be
noted is that they were Englishmen, and very often Yorkshire-
men. Even as early as the thirteenth century English traders
were engaged in foreign commerce, and it is probable that
the importance of these men has been vastly underestimated
by economic historians. Rut at that time the Englishman
undoubtedly had to take second place to the alien. It was the

1 I). S. P., Eli::., cxi. 10.

- Baskerville's Tour, temp. Chas. II, Portland MSS. {Hist. MSS. Comm.),
ii. 31 }. Cclia Ficnncs entered the town over a drawbridge.

;1 Charles himself had spent over £1,600 on fortifying the town (I>. S. P.,
('has. I, xvii. 130 and 140 ; also xviii. 433).

' Hurley MSS., vol. 300, if. 26-8. Also D.S.P., Eliz., cxix. 50 (1577),
licence to mayor and burgesses of Hull to transport 20,000 qrs. of grain in
twenty years.

5 P. S. P., Chas. II. vol. 265, f. 17 (1669). Just departed from Hull, three
ships for Bordeaux, with coals, cloth, butter, &c. One ship for Holland, with
lead, cloth, and rape seed. One lor Hamburg, ' richly laden with cloth ', and
three other vessels preparing for Virginia.

" Bigland, Topographical and Historical Description of the County of York
(1S12), pp. 508-9.

152 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

Italian and the Hansard who bought up the supplies of wool
from the monasteries and at the big fairs, and exported it to
the textile centres of Italy, Flanders, and Germany. High
finance was in the hands of the Florentines, and the import
trade in spices, silks, and general luxuries was carried on chiefly
by foreigners.

With the reign of Edward III * the high tide of alien commercial
supremacy began slowly to ebb before the rise of a strong native
mercantile class. This movement continued with much irregu-
larity and frequent halts during the two subsequent centuries,
until by the end of the Tudor period the alien influence had
almost entirely disappeared, and English foreign trade was
really ' active ' and carried on by natives. In its early stages
the battle was waged by the wool merchants, organized even-
tually in the Company of the Staple. In its later stages native
cloth merchants played a prominent part and reaped the
greater share of the benefits which accrued. Of the trading
companies which then took up the control of English commerce,
two in particular drew their export commodities from Yorkshire
and traded largely in Yorkshire cloth. These were the Societies,
Fellowships, or Companies of the Merchant Adventurers and the
Eastland Merchants ; in them the merchants of the county
were enrolled ; by them Yorkshire pieces were carried to the
Continent.

The two companies were alike in that their chief export trade
was in cloth, though the Merchant Adventurers exported only
white cloths, whilst the Eastlanders could only traffic in coloured
pieces. They were akin in that they were associations of men
rather than of capital. They were not based on joint-stock
principles. The company ordered the rules of life and the laws
of trade, but had ' no banke nor common stocke, nor common
factour to buy and sell for the whole companie, but every man
tradeth apart and particularlic with his own stocke, and with his
own factour or servaunt '. The companies differed in the market

1 For details of the rise of the native merchant class, see Law, The English
Noiiveaux-Richcs in the Fourteenth Century (Trans. Royal Hist. Soc, New-
Series, ix) ; Guiseppi, Alien Merchants in England (Trans. Royal Hist. Soc,
New Series, ix) ; Cunningham, Growth, i. 290 ; Ashley, Economic Organiza-
tion of England, chap. iv. See also Patent Rolls, 14 Ed. Ill, pt. iii, m. 55 d ;
also Close Rolls, 13 Ed. Ill, pt. iii, 111. <S.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 153

which they supplied, having the bounds of their respective
activities clearly mapped out in their charters, with one small
area open equally to the members of both companies.

Of the two organizations, that of the Merchant Adventurers
was the older and more important.1 As internal trade developed
in England, special trading classes grew up, such as the mercers,
drapers, and grocers, with men earning their livelihood solely
by the exchange of commodities. Some specialized in retail
trade, whilst others devoted their attention to wholesale trans-
actions. These wholesale traders formed the raw material out
of which foreign merchants were evolved, and gradually there
arose an important class of English merchants dealing with
foreign ports. These men received favours from the English
kings and from foreign rulers, such as the Count of Flanders.
They built up trade centres abroad, especially in the Low
Countries, and here they began to organize some common life
and scheme of government. In 1407 a charter was granted to
all English merchants trading abroad to erect and maintain
proper means of government to watch over their interests
and regulate their actions in foreign parts. This grant did not
establish the Merchant Adventurers : it only gave powers of
sell -government to all English merchants when abroad, and in
accordance with this grant local groups of merchants organized
themselves and drew up common rules in various foreign towns
during the fifteenth century.

Throughout that century, the adventurers, as these cloth
merchants were now generally called, grew in strength, after
many a hard fight against the Staplers, who exported wool,
and the Hansards, whose trade in cloth was now seriously
challenged by the Englishmen.2 During this period there was
also a movement towards concentration and centralization, and
the various local organizations were being brought within the
told ot one adventurers' society. In this unification of the forces
of English traders abroad the London element predominated,
and London merchants and mercers, organized in a fellowship,

1 The following pages give only those details concerning the Adventurers
which arc necessary in order to understand the work of the Yorkshire mer-
chants. See Wheeler, ./ Treatise of Conuneree (iooi), and Lingelhach, Tin
Mere/unit Adventurers of England (igoj), for a lull treatment of the topic.

- For this early history see Lingelhach, op. cit., preface.

154 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

succeeded in gaining the mastery over the whole body of traffic
with the Low Countries. This control amounted to something
approaching a monopoly, and by the end of the fifteenth century
traders from the provincial ports were loud in their complaint
of the manner in which the London organization of ' mercers and
other merchants and adventurers ' was imposing financial levies
and trading disabilities on the foreign commerce of those who did
not belong to the capital. The most famous of these protests
was contained in the petition of 1496, in which the merchants
from the outports railed against the men of London, who ' by
confederacie made amonge theym self of their uncharitable
and inordinate covetise for their singuler profitc and lucre,
contrarie to every Englisshcman's libertie and to the libertie
of the (foreign) Marte there . . . have contrarie to all lawe reason
charite right and conscience, . . . made an Ordinaunce . . . that noe
Englishman resortyng to the seyd Martes shall neither bye nor
sell any godes . . . except he first componde and make fync with
the seid feliship merchauntes of London . . . upon payn of for-
feiture to the seid feliship ... of suche Merchandises godes or
wares so by him bought or sold there '. This fine or entrance
fee, amounting to £20, had been instrumental in crippling the
trade of many provincial merchants, and the Yorkshire cloth
exporters had suffered as much as any others engaged in the
Netherlands traffic. .In response to this petition, an Act was
passed in which the London fellowship was confirmed in the power
to levy a fine or entrance fee, but that fee was reduced to ten
marks (£6 13.?. ^d.).1

This enactment was of great importance to the men of the
outports, and York benefited considerably by the terms of the
statute. Here the mercers had become a large and flourishing
body, and had received a royal charter of incorporation in 1430.
'1 lie merchant class grew up as a specialized branch of the
Mercers' Company, and the merchants turned their attention
to foreign trade. They traded with the Netherlands throughout
the fifteenth century, and acted to some extent in harmony

1 'I he London mercers and merchants had first levied this line in the name
of the fraternity of Si. Thomas of Canterbury, and originally the levy was
a cmite small one It had been subsequently increased, until it stood at
£20 in the time of Henry VII. See Statute 12 Hen. VII, c. 0. Also Lingelbach,
"p. cit., preface.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 155

with merchants from other Northern ports.1 In fact it seems to
have been the custom at one time for the London merchants
and mercers abroad to be organized under the control of one
governor, and for the merchants and mercers of York, Hull,
Beverley, Scarborough, and all other ports north of the Trent
to be grouped together under another independent governor.
During the fifteenth century this sytem fell into abeyance
before the encroachments of the London organization, and the
southern merchants rode roughshod over the interests of their
northern rivals, to the great inconvenience of the latter. Even-
tually the men of York complained to Edward IV, who issued
a proclamation in 1478 ordering the governor of the London
merchants to mend his ways : ' From hensfurth ye (shall)
demeane and intrete ye said mercers (of the Northern ports) in
the parties beyonde the see with all favour and honestee accorde-
yng to ye said auncient custumes ... as ye lust to do us singler
pleasor and would answer to us at your peryll.' - How much
regard was paid to this command we do not know, but it is
certain that the heavy financial levy continued to be imposed
upon the Northern merchants and mercers until its reduction
to ten marks by the statute of 1497.

With the granting of this cheaper privilege, the merchant
class in York sprang forward into increased activity and larger
operations. Numbers of mercers enrolled themselves in the
ranks of the central organization, known by this time as the
Fellowship of the Merchant Adventurers of England, and a local
Court of Merchant Adventurers was added on to the York
Company of Mercers. Eventually this wholesale traders'
branch eclipsed the retail section, but there was never any sepa-
ration into two bodies, and the retail trader and the whole-
sale merchant remained side by side in the same organization.
Other ports soon had their Merchant Adventurers, organized in
local courts, but also enrolled in the larger body.3

During the sixteenth century the growth of the society was
continuous. Its membership increased, as did also the number
ot cloths which passed through the hands of its members. It

1 Sellers, 'The Merchant Adventurers of York', Brit. Assoc. Handbook,
IO<»>, p. :i ;.

- Hunted by Miss M. Sellers. The Merchant Adventurers of York : pamphlet
published 1913 (York). J Sellers, Brit. Assoc. Handbook.

156 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

gained privileges abroad, and strengthened its position both in
England and in foreign ports. The pieces exported were almost
entirely white cloths, which were dyed and finished in the Low
Countries, where they were said to provide employment to
20,000 persons in Antwerp and 30,000 in other parts of the land.1
In the latter part of the century wars in the Low Countries
caused complications, and necessitated frequent removals of
the Company's head-quarters ; but operations were extended
nevertheless, and the trade with the Baltic and Germany
shared with the Eastland Company. Hence in 1601 Wheeler
was able to declare that ' the Merchant Adventurers do annually
export at least 60,000 white cloths, worth at least £600,000,
and of coloured cloths of all sorts — kersies, bayes, cottons,
northern dozens, and other coarse cloths — more than 40,000,
worth £400,000, in all £1,000,000 sterling '. Probably these
figures are too large, for Wheeler was here defending the organiza-
tion of which he was secretary.2 But admitting this, the state-
ment serves to show the greatness of this Tudor trading company.
In 1564 and 1586 new charters were granted by Elizabeth
defining very clearly and comprehensively the scope and powers
of the society, and arranging for its government and administra-
tion.3 As we see it at this time the company consisted ' of
a great number of wealthy and well-experimented merchants
dwelling in diverse great cities, maritime ports, and other parts
of the realm, to wit — London, York, Norwich, Exeter, Ipswich,
Newcastle, Hull, &c.', men who had ' linked and bound them-
selves together in company for the exercise of merchandise and
seafare, trading in cloth, kersie and all other as well English as
foreign commodities vendible abroad '.4 There were men from
all parts of the country united in this fellowship, but not as
shareholders of a joint-stock company. All obeyed the rules
and ordinances of the central authority or of the local court.
The members sent their cloths to Europe in the same ships, and
might make partnerships among themselves. But the company

1 Newcastle Merchant Adventurers, Preface, p. xxxvi. A letter (1564) states,
' The subjects of King Phillip doe gaine verly by woll and wollen cloth that
cometh out of England almost /6oo,ooo ' (Brit. Mus., Sloane MSS., vol. 817,
f. 21, quoted by Cunningham, ii. 224).

2 Wheeler, A Treatise of Commerce (1601), p. 24.

J Lingelbach, <>p. cit., pp. 19-69. 4 Wheeler, <<p. cit., pp. 10 and 19.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 157

itself was not an association of capital. It left each man to carry
on his own business and conduct his own affairs, provided he kept
to the stipulations laid down by those in authority. What then
was the value of membership ? In the first place, membership /
admitted a man to a share in a monopoly. The society had
succeeded in breaking down the monopoly of the Steelyard,
only to erect another one in its place. None but members of
the company could export cloth to the special area of control
allotted to the company, and any member guilty of selling the
goods of a non-member was severely punished. This monopoly
was often defied, especially in the seventeenth century, by
' interlopers ' who competed with the real Adventurers, to the
constant annoyance of the latter. Still, in spite of these men,
the monopoly was on the whole well maintained. Secondly,
the company had its head-quarters abroad and attempted to
make commercial bargains with foreign Powers. This was
a great part of the work of the Merchant Adventurers, who were
sufficiently wealthy and strong to be able to extract favours,
temporary or permanent, from the home Government, or from
Continental rulers. Along with this the company tried to
ensure to its members protection from violence and loss of goods •''
when travelling by land or by sea. This was exceedingly im-
portant in those centuries of active commercial jealousy and
international strife, and if the authorities could only provide
safe escort by sea, and protect the merchants on land, they had
met a very pressing need. Thirdly, the company did its best
to regulate the markets with a view to preventing a general
glut at any time or in any area. This was perhaps the most
difficult task of all, since markets were opened and closed to
English goods according to the diplomatic situation of the
moment, and the company was forbidden by its very nature to
turn to other parts of the world in order to get rid of wares which
had been denied entry to the old markets. Also there was
an absence of that intimate inter-relation between the producer
and the merchant which is necessary to check over-production.
The clothier went on making cloth with little regard to the state
of the market, expecting the merchant to take his pieces as
a matter of course. Hence the Adventurers tailed to avert
many serious trade depressions, due either to inflated supply

158 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

or to some sudden prohibition on the part of a European govern-
ment.

The Fellowship traded by special licence to a certain part of
Europe. Its territorial limits were the mouth of the Sorame
on the one extreme and the Skaw on the other. Between these
points the society was given an absolute monopoly of English
trade, whilst it shared on equal terms with the Eastland Merchants
the trade of Denmark (Copenhagen and Elsinore excepted),
Jutland, Silesia, Moravia, Lubcck, Wismar, Rostock, Stettin,
Stralsund, and the Oder mouth.1 The company was a fellowship
of English merchants and of Englishmen alone. No alien could
qualify for membership, and no Englishman married to a foreign
wife or holding real property abroad could claim admission.
Further, entry could be obtained only on terms akin to those
which regulated admission to the craft gilds. A person might
be made an honorary member ; he might purchase admission
by paying a high redemption fee ; he might gain access on the
grounds of patrimony when he attained the age of twenty-one
years ; or, lastly, he might enter through the ordinary gateway
of apprenticeship.- A youth who desired to be an Adventurer
became apprenticed to some free brother of the company at
the age of sixteen, and served for a period of eight years, during
which time he attended his master's business both at home
and abroad. Then, armed with his certificate of fitness and ' dew
servyce ', he presented himself at the next Court, held at some
trading centre abroad.3 Here he took the oath, paid his entrance
fee, purchased his livery, and became a recognized freeman of
the Fellowship. lie was not yet full-grown, however, for a
maximum limit was fixed to the quantity of his trade for fifteen
years. In each of the first three years he could not export more
than 400 cloths; in the fourth year not more than 450, and
then the maximum increased 50 cloths per annum, until at his

Si i

fifteenth year he was permitted to export 1,000 pieces.'4 Al

lor the first seven years he might keep one apprentice, from

the seventh to the twentieth year he might take two, and

after that the number was limited to three.'' Aided by appren-

1 M. Sellers, Ordinances of the- Eastland Merchants, pp. xvi-xvii,

- lirit. .Issue. Handbook, Vork, 1906, p. 221.

3 Lingelbach, "\>. cit., pp. 23—8.

1 Ibid., p. 32. "j Ibid., pp. 31-2.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 159

ticcs and journeymen, he was to devote his energies to trade in
cloth, and this trade was almost entirely wholesale. The mercer
element in the organization still survived in the provincial
branches, but the division between the wholesale trader and the
retailer was now quite distinctly marked. At York, for instance,
it was ordained that there must be no cutting up of cloth for
purposes of sale by merchants, no keeping of an open shop
or ' shew house '. Members were also forbidden to stand at:
the corners of the street or in other men's shops, or frequent
any ' comon Inn ' where chapmen were wont to resort, but at
the same time they were prohibited from hawking their wares,
or from keeping any shops in the country districts.1 In place of
these practices, the Merchant Adventurers of York had a hall
and here the merchant was ordered to make his purchase
from the clothiers who came to this market with their wares :
' No brother of this fellowshipp shall hereafter go to se or buye
anie clothe broughte to this Cittye to be sold in no place but
in our Hall therefore appoynted, in paine of a fine.' - The
punishment for infringement of these regulations was generally
confiscation of the goods concerned, and the records of the
Newcastle Merchant Adventurers show that such confiscations
were of frequent occurrence. The company also fixed the dates
of sailings, and arranged them so that the consignments should
reach the Continent in time for the four large cloth fairs which
took place each year. The ships sailed in as large numbers as
possible, accompanied by a convoy, provided the Government
could spare a frigate or two.

fhe affairs of the Company as a whole were administered by
a central executive, which had its head-quarters, not in London,
but abroad, 'flic centre of the association migrated from place-
to pi. ice during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, impelled
chiefly bv political dangers and commercial rivalries. Bruges,
Antwerp, ami Emden were in turn the centres of the trade,
and in 1504 the Burgomaster of Hamburg invited the Adven-
turers to nuke that town their head-quarters.3 Hamburg
seemed a doubtful centre, but those in authority decided to test
its value as a market, so in 1507 they ordered each port to

1 M. Sellers, lint. Assoc. Hand! k, p. 225. J Ibid., p. J-'4-

■' Cunningham, Growth, ii. 224— ~.

160 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

dispatch cargoes to that city. The letter to York stated that
' of late the Citie of Hamborowe have at our speciall instance
and sewte graunted to us divers goodly privileges upon hope
yt we shulde occupie and use somme trade thither, and for that
purpose have according to their grant prepared a howse for us '.
Therefore the Court requested the merchants of York to engage
in some trade with the Elbe port, and ordered ' that ye first
four shippes which shalbe laden aftar the last daye of Marche,
. . . shalbe laden and departe for and to the said Citie of Ham-
borowe V The venture was successful and the trade soon
settled on Hamburg. Here, with minor temporary migrations
to Stade and Middelburg, the Adventurers stayed throughout
the seventeenth century, and became known generally as the
Hamburg Merchants.2 At these head-quarters the real govern-
ment of the company was to be found. There was a Governor
and a Court of twenty-four Assistants, chosen by the General
Court of the Fellowship. In the hands of this elected Court
the real legislative and executive power rested. ' It not only
made the Statutes and Ordinances but it was also entrusted
with the duty of enforcing them. It administered the general
affairs of the society, represented its interests with the Govern-
ment and with strangers, and maintained order and discipline
among the members of the Fellowship.' 3 The decrees of the
Central Court were obligatory upon merchants of all the local
districts ; even London received its orders from this source,
and the Court had almost complete power in the selection
of the officials of the local branches.4

Local branches of Merchant Adventurers were to be found in
all the large ports. In the case of Newcastle, the Adventurers
claimed entire independence of the central body, and declared
that they were in no manner subservient to the Merchant
Adventurers of England, an assertion of autonomy which was
the cause of long and acrimonious quarrels between Newcastle
and the larger organization. York, Hull, Bristol, Ipswich, &c.,
all had branches which were admittedly under the control of the
central authority, and were ruled by the Court of Assistants
which sat abroad. This subordination was the outcome of the

1 M. Sellers, lirit. Assoc. Handbook, p. 218.

- Cunningham, op. cit., pp. 228—9.

:' Lingclbach, op. cit., pp. 66-7. ' Ibid., p. 63.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 161

encroachments which were made by the central body during
the fifteenth century, and was none the less complete even when
the local branches had obtained considerable powers by means
of royal charters. The branch at York is an excellent illustration
of this. Here the Merchant Adventurers' organization, evolving
from the Company of Mercers, had been deprived of its indepen-
dence abroad by the growth of the national Fellowship. In 1581
a charter of incorporation was obtained from Elizabeth. After
lamenting the alleged decayed state of commerce in York, the
charter gave very considerable powers to the ' Society of the
Merchant Adventurers of the City of York ' (societas mercatorum
adventurarum civitatis Ebof) for controlling all men exercising
the art or mystery of merchant or mercer within the city and
its suburbs. Thus the Merchant Adventurers of York were to
control both the internal and external trade of their city.1

This control was to be in the hands of a Court, consisting of a
Governor and twelve Assistants, who were to be elected annually,
and who would make laws and regulations binding upon all
under their sway, with power to fine or imprison those who were
guilty of disobedience.2 The Court enforced the eight years'
apprenticeship, forbade illicit trading amongst the merchants
and mercers, repelled the invasion of interlopers, insisted on
the wearing of livery, and generally ordered and controlled the
occupation, morals, and manners of its members. But although
giving these important local powers, the charter was very careful
to keep the provincial body in a position of subservience to the
Central Court of the Merchant Adventurers of England. The
local Governor and his Deputy were to be members of the larger
company, and the Central Court had a voice in the election of
these men. Apprentices at the end of their period of service
were compelled to go to the foreign Court to receive their
freedom, and decrees from head-quarters had precedence over
all local by-laws.3 Thus the society at York, whilst possessing
considerable powers of self-government, had to bow to the com-
mands of the larger body.

The Eastland Merchants were very similar in their aim and
organization to the Merchant Adventurers, though their company

1 Cross, Gild Merchant, vol. ii, p. 2S2.

2 M. Sellers, op. at., pp. 221-2. 2 Ibid., p. 222 ; Lingelbach, pp. 07-8.

1126.12 M

162 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

was not of such ancient standing, and was certainly much
smaller in the scale of its operations. Trade with the Baltic
ports had grown up during the fifteenth century in spite of the
opposition of the Hansards, and English merchants carried cloth
there, bringing back corn, flax, hemp, timber, and the other
commodities which the Baltic area could supply. The story
of this trade is obscure until the granting of a charter by Eliza-
beth in 1579. This charter was bestowed upon the ' Governour,
Assistants and Fellowshipp of the Marchaunts of Eastland ',
in order to help these ' expert and exercysed marchaunts in
their lawfull and honest trade ' and to restrain those unskilled
and interloping traders who, as ever, were said to be degrading
the fair fame of English commerce abroad. The company
resembled that of the Merchant Adventurers in its general
structure and in most of its details. It had its well-defined
geographical limits ; Norway, Sweden, Poland, Letto, the Gulf
of Pomerania, and the islands within the Sound were closed to
all Englishmen who were not free of the company. Thus East-
landers held control over such ports as Danzig, Elbing, Brauns-
berg, Konigsberg, and Revel on the cast coast of the Baltic,
and Elsinore and Copenhagen in Denmark. They were for-
bidden, on the other hand, to trade in Holstein, Hamburg, or
the Elbe mouth, these being the preserves of the Adventurers,
but were given free passage through these parts ; finally, one
expanse comprising much of the south and the west coast of the
Baltic was open to members of both companies on equal terms.1
Like the Merchant Adventurers, the Eastland Company had
its Central Court, consisting of a Governor, his Deputy, and
twenty-four Assistants, but this Court was held in London,
and not abroad, with the result that the power and the govern-
ment of the organization fell largely into the hands of London
merchants, much to the dissatisfaction of those from the out-
ports. This Central Court had power to issue ' Statutes, Lawes,
Constitucyons, and Ordinances' binding on the whole Fellow-
ship, and was able therefore to assert a large measure of authority
over the rank and file. In practice it succeeded in establishing
an autocracy, placed the ordinary member, and especially the
provincial member, in a position of insignificance, and virtually
! Ordinances of Eastland Merchants, pp. xi and 147 ; also p. xiv.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 163

destroyed the value of his vote.1 The officials were surrounded
with pomp, circumstance, and ceremony ; no criticism was
allowed from members, and any merchant who was found
scoffing at the Court or its members was fined £5. This Central
Court issued ordinances of every conceivable kind ; elaborate
codes of etiquette and ethics were drawn up, and all fighting,
' reviling, indecent speeches, tanglinge, lewd communications ',
and other lapses from grace were punished by severe fines.
The Court had large financial powers ; it could levy dues of
various kinds, and therefore placed taxes on the person who im-
ported, the merchandise he brought with him, and the vessel
in which the goods were carried. A stint was established, which
limited the amount of goods each member could export, and the
Central Court fixed the dates at which shipments could take place
from the English ports.2 At times this restriction weighed heavily
on the outports, as, for instance, in April 1625, when the mer-
chants of Hull and York addressed the following petition to the
Privy Council : ' At a generall Court of the Eastland Company
held at London in ffebruarie last, it was agreed by the Merchants
of London and the coast Townes that the first time or season
for shipping of cloath into the Eastland this yeare from Hull and
Newcastle should be the 21st of March past and the last of
April instant, And that no goods should be put aboarde theire
shippes for the Eastlandc after these tymes upon a great penal tie.
The Petitioners had not dared shipp at that time ' because of
the Dunkirkers who were hanging off the coast, and therefore
they did not dispatch their cloths in the time allowed, for want
of a convoy. Now the time for shipping was past, but the wares
of the Yorkshiremen still lay at the port, and could not be
dispatched for fear of the ' great penaltie ' which would be
inflicted by the Central Court of the Company. The petitioners,
therefore, asked the Privy Council for permission to ship their
cloth and make the journey, in spite of the Company's regulation
to the contrary.3 All these points serve to illustrate the auto-
cratic nature oi the Eastland Company's government; in fact,

1 In 1616 it was declared that, 'the power of ruling the whole company,
of making Bylaws and appointing officers, is by the Charter vested in ye
Court of Assistants only, and if all ye generality of ye Company were present,
they could have no voices in any question ' (ibid., p, 136b

- Ibid., p. xxiii. -l I). S. I'., Chas. I, vol. ;:i, p. 33 (April 1 ' >2 5 ) .

M 2

164 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

the ordinary unofficial member was ' hampered by many restric-
tions, his speech curtailed, his manners regulated, his morals
supervised ', by an oligarchic Court which imposed taxation
without allowing any measure of representation.1

The Eastland Merchants, like the fellow Company, had their
local courts and branch organizations, but here again the power
of the central authority was strongly in evidence. The charter
of 1579 allowed courts to be established ' as well within some
convenyente place within our cyttie of London, or els where
within our domynyons as also within the said Realmes and
domynyons of the Easte partes afforesaid ', i.e. at the outports
in this country or in the foreign centres of trade.2 York, Hull,
and Newcastle, which were strongholds of the Eastland traffic,
soon had their local bodies, but these provincial communities
were kept under the thumb of the London assembly. The local
courts were administered by a deputy, aided by a secretary
and beadle, and their work was purely administrative, devoid of
any legislative power. The Central Court made laws and ordin-
ances without the knowledge or consent of the districts, and then
ordered the branches to see that they were properly administered.
The London governors placed their nominees in the local offices,
levied impositions, regulated the times of shipping and the
quantity of goods to be exported by the provincial merchants.
Apprentices were compelled to journey to London in order to
take up their freedom, and almost the whole of the money paid
in entrance fees in the districts had to be forwarded to head-
quarters. Occasionally, however, the northern Courts obtained
concessions, as for instance when the London executive con-
sented not to admit any northerner to the freedom unless he
held a certificate or testimonial from a northern Court,3 and in
1681 the Londoners declared, in a letter to York, ' we have
lately denyed some from Leeds their admission for want of your
certificates '.4 But such concessions were small, and in both
the companies the central authority possessed large powers of
jurisdiction over the districts, powers which, as we shall see, the
outports strongly resented.

1 M. Sellers, Eastland Merchants, pp. xxii and Ixxii.

- Ibid., p. 144. :' I). S. P., Chas. I, cccvii. 73-4 (1035).

1 Ouoted by M. Sellers, Eastland Merchants, p. lxxxiii.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 165

In these big trading companies the exporters of Yorkshire
cloth were enrolled.1 Hull and York had their local branches
of each company, between which harmonious relations existed,
especially during the second half of the seventeenth century.
This was natural, for their interests were allied whilst their
spheres of action were different, and hence they were not to
any great extent in competition with each other. The Eastland
Merchants had special entrance fees for Merchant Adventurers,
who were admitted on paying a fine of 40 marks (£13 65. 8d.),
whereas other men were charged £20 for admission. Many
merchants were members of both companies. In 1661 the
Eastland Merchants of York numbered eighty members, of
whom fifty-four were Merchant Adventurers also. By being
a member of both companies the merchant possessed the right
to exploit the whole field of the North Sea and the Baltic.
Occasionally the companies held joint meetings, generally of
an extraordinary nature, and at times they had joint officials,
both having the same beadle, and with the Deputy of the East-
landers also acting as Governor of the Adventurers in York
from 1646 to 1698.2

The chief consideration which these Yorkshire cloth mer-
chants had at heart was the development of their northern trade.
In pursuing this object they found themselves faced with two
great difficulties, namely, (1) dangers on sea, and the opposition
of foreign powers, (2) the competition of London rivals, and the
despotism of their central organization. The first of these
obstacles received a great deal of attention from the central
executive, both societies doing their utmost to gain concessions
from foreign powers with whom they came in contact, and to
protect shipping from attacks at sea. The second was the cause
of long and bitter quarrels between the northern merchants and
their southern rivals. The Central Court of the Merchant
Adventurers was largely under the control of London mer-
chants, although its meeting-place was abroad, and thus both

1 The two companies embraced practically the whole of the Yorkshire
merchant class. Sons of the best-known wealthy families were constantly
being enrolled as apprentices, and entering into commercial life. Ralph
1 horesby in 1084 went to London, and became a freeman of both companies.

- Eastland Merchants, pp. xxxv-xxxvi. In December 165 1 the Adven-
turers and ICastlanders of York held a joint meeting to protest against the
seizure of some ships at Rotterdam (Eastland Merchants, p. xxxiii).

166 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

companies were ruled by a limited number of rich metropolitan
traders. As one writer complained (1585), in lamenting the
temporary stagnation of Hull, ' The merchants are tyed to
companies, the heads whereof are citizens of London, which
make ordinances beneficiall to themselves, but hurtfull and
chargeable to others in ye country '.x The northerners often
objected to the rulings of the central power, and either at their
individual local courts or in joint meetings of the various
branches gave utterance to their grievances against the autocrats
at head-quarters. York was the leader in the fight against the
London Eastland Merchants, and succeeded in obtaining some
small concessions, though it failed in its greatest struggle
(1663-80), when it attempted to procure a local legislature.2
The Merchant Adventurers of Newcastle, who claimed indepen-
dence of the national body in domestic affairs, led a similar
revolt against the government of the Merchant Adventurers
of England. All this antagonism sprang from a sense of bitter
rivalry and opposition against the London merchants, who
were accused of damaging northern trade alike in England
and abroad. We have already noted the existence of this
struggle in the fifteenth century, and subsequent years brought
no greater degree of harmony or goodwill. In 1548 the New-
castle Merchant Adventurers decreed that no man ' should latt
no loftes, scellers norc housses to no Londyncrs nor straungers ',
or ' from hcnsfurth bye no maner of marchaundice of any
Londyner nor of none other straunger '.3 Some years later a
writer from Hull lamented that ' by means of ye said companies,
all the trade of merchants is drawn to London '.4 During the
seventeenth century this feeling rose to great heights of bitter-
ness, and was the cause of constant demonstrations of antagon-
ism between the northern ports and the capital. In 1651 the
merchants of York convened a general meeting of their fellows
from Newcastle, Hull, and Leeds. At this conference it was
decided to ' ioyne in peticioning the councell for trade agaynst
the ffayres and marts held by the Londoner, that noe Londoner

1 D. S. P., Eliz., clxxvii. 56.

2 Eastland Merchants, pp. lxxvii and lxxx : also Cunningham, op. (it.,
ii. 242 and 242 n.

3 Newcastle Merchant Adventurers, pp. ;i and 64.
1 I). S. V., Eliz., clxxvii. 56 (1585).

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 167

. . . directly or indirectly shall come or send to keepe any fayres
or mart on the north side of Trent . . . chiefly because the
northern Traders are exceedingly prejudiced by their coming
downe, they haveing layd their moneys and creditt to furnish
the countrie. Soe that by these ffayres the Londoner ingroseth
allmost all the trade of the northern partes, and in equity
and reason the benefitt of trade should be equally disposed into
all the vaines of the commonwealth \l Similar sentiments were
expressed in a letter written in March 1655 by the merchants
of York and Hull, requesting Adam Baynes, M.P. for Leeds,
to procure a convoy for a cargo of cloth. The letter concluded
by urging Baynes to prompt action, and declared ' If at the day
prefixed wee demurr to saile for want of Convoy ! its 100 to one
but the Londoners will be at the Markett before us . . . and if
they be, ... it will tend very much to the prejudice not onely
of us that are Adventurers, but alsoe of the Northern Clothiers.
Wee, Like little fishes, are swallowed up by a great whale !
London hath almost ingrossed all the traid of this Nation into their
owne hands, specially for goods importable, more's the pitty ! '2
Antagonism towards the Southron was a sentiment which
most northern merchants could share. But this unanimity did
not prevent the existence of feuds, at times almost as bitter,
between the two Yorkshire mercantile centres, York and Hull.
Hull possessed a good strategic position on the Humber, and
so could control the trade which passed inland, either for the
Ouse or Trent. The port had been exceptionally favoured by
Henry VIII,3 and Elizabeth's minister Cecil frequently granted
further privileges. In 1592 Hull attacked the fairs which had
been granted to Gainsborough,4 and then set to work to check
the growth of Grimsby and other ports at which southern mer-
chants entered the north country. So successful was this
campaign that in December 1592 the Privy Council ordered
4 that from henseforthe no marchant either of the Cittie of
Lundon or of any other Cittie, towne, or place within the realme

1 Newcastle Merchant Adventurers, i. [66-7, March 25, 1651.

- Hurtles Correspondence (Brit. Mus.), xi. jj;, Leeds, March 1, 1654—5 .

1 Henry VIII, Calendar of State Papers, vol. v, p. 1 1 ,;u (22), 1532. ('.rant
to Mayor and Burgesses that no stranger shall sell or buy merchandise to
any stranger within the borough, except at fair time, on pain of forfeiture
of the »oo(ls.

1 \( ts of Privy Council, June 14, 1592.

i68 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

shall carry convey or transport . . . any kindes or sortes of
marchandise (coles and milnstones only excepted) to any porte,
creeke, or haven within the Northerne partes of this realme
of England between Boston and Hartlepoolc, . . . unless he be
first admitted into the incorporation of the towne of Hulle '}
Then came the encroachment upon the liberties of York and its
merchants. So heavy were the levies imposed upon the traders
from the county town and their goods2 that in 1623 the men
of York petitioned the Privy Council for relief against ' the
grievance and wrong done unto them by the maior and burgesses
of the Towne of Kingston-upon-Hulle '. It appears that Hull
was attempting to monopolize the import trade in corn, and to
exclude York from any share in that trade, by engrossing and
forestalling all corn which entered the Humber. Further, when
York traders, who had exported over 50,000 kerseys in thirteen
months, brought back corn in return, the Mayor of Hull refused
to allow the grain to pass up the river, but insisted upon its being
sold to men of Hull ; for which reason, declared the petitioners,
the corn market of York was empty, and the cloth trade
discouraged.3 This was only one of many occasions on which
Hull attempted to cripple some part of the trade of York, and
to control the commerce of the county. During the latter part
of the century the Eastland Merchants of the two ports were
generally on unfriendly terms. Hull was loyal and obedient to
the decrees of the Central Court, whilst York was in a ' chronic
state of dissatisfaction ' and revolt.4 York desired local self-
government, and disliked having to pay its dues and impositions
to head-quarters through Hull. These and other factors com-
bined to keep aflame the animosity between the two com-
mercial centres.*

Lastly, the merchants of the two historic ports looked with
unfriendly eyes upon the traders who came from other parts
of their own county. As quoted in a previous chapter, Hull
complained in the reign of James I that ' a set of young adven-
turers had lately set up at Leeds and other places amongst the
clothiers, who at little or no charges buy and engross as they

1 Acts of Privy Council, December 22, 1592.

-' Lansdowne MSS., Burghley Papers, vol. ex, f. 65.

;! 1). S. P., J as. I, exxxviii. 120.

1 Eastland Merchants, ed. M. Sellers, Preface, pp. lxvi-lxviii.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 169

please, to the great hurt of the merchants and inhabitants of
this town '.* These West Riding merchants generally sprang
from local families of clothiers. The father would be a clothier,
probably on a rather large scale of business, selling his cloths
in the market at Leeds, or at Blackwell Hall and Bartholomew
Fair. Thanks to the father's energies and thrift, the son was
able to become apprenticed to some merchant, and in time set up
as a fully qualified merchant and member of the trading com-
panies, taking the wares of the West Riding to foreign parts.
One instance of this is seen in the rise of the Denisons, a family
prominent in the history of Leeds. George Denison, born in
1626, lived at Woodhouse, and engaged in the occupation of
a clothier. His son, Thomas, became a merchant and member of
the Merchant Adventurers ; Thomas's son in time followed the
same career, and was elected Mayor of Leeds in 1727 and 1731.2
Other branches of the family had a similar history. The Denison
family had its origins in clothiers' cottages. Its members
afterwards numbered three knights, a baron, a viscount, a
Speaker of the House of Commons, a judge, a colonial governor,
and a bishop, not to mention Mayors of Leeds and lesser digni-
taries. The history of other families is largely a repetition of
the above story ; and this line of development accounts in part
at least for the rise of the Armitagcs, the Jacksons, the Metcalfes,
the Walkers, the Wades, and other families which have played
a large part in the economic and political life of Leeds.

These West Riding merchants were naturally in closer touch
with the cloth-producing area than the traders from the port
towns, and a large proportion of the traffic in broad cloths and
kerseys fell into their hands. They were, however, compelled
to join the trading companies, and enrol themselves as Adven-
turers or Eastlanders, or both, ranking themselves along with
their ' bretheren at Yorke '.:! But the aristocratic merchants
of York did not welcome this upstart breed of traders. The
Leeds merchants were not willingly recognized, and as no new
member could be admitted to the local residencies without the
consent of the members of that branch, the York merchants

1 Pamphlet, by John Ramsden, quoted in Had ley's History of Hull, p. n;.
- Thorrsby Soc. publications, xv. j ;j.
1 Huvnes Correspondence, xi. J25.

170 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

were able to bar the entrance of this new blood. In 1681, for
instance, the London Court of Eastland Merchants informed
the York branch that it had lately refused admission to a number
of men of Leeds, because these candidates had not been able
to produce a certificate of approval from the York officials.1
Similarly, the merchants residing in York did not approve of
these West Riding merchants living in the cloth area, instead
of sharing in the social life and civic expenses of York. In
1654, therefore, when the traders of Leeds were seeking to make
some arrangements with their brethren of York, probably about
the next cargo of cloth, the Eastland Merchants of the county
town haughtily replied ' that if ye Merchants of Leeds and other
yl live in Clothing Townes will come and inhabitt in port
Townes, we will joyne with them in anything yl may conduce
to ye good of this country V2

Such were the two institutions which controlled the export
trade in Yorkshire cloth at the end of the sixteenth and through-
out the first half of the seventeenth century. They gained many
victories abroad, and opened up new markets for English
commercial enterprise. The cloths which they exported from
Yorkshire and the northern counties were not of the best
quality, and this was recognized by the state when levying
customs. Thus, in the later years of the reign of Elizabeth,
the customs were fixed at 6s. Sd. for a whole cloth of assize.
This was a heavy burden on cloths of small value, even when
three, four, five, or six pieces were counted as equivalent to one
whole cloth. In 1591, therefore, the merchants of Newcastle,
York city and county, and other northern centres, along with
those of the western counties, complained of the excessive rate
which was levied on the cloths of these parts.3 They asserted
that a customs levy of 65. 8d. was a very heavy impost on
fabrics made of coarse wools and low in price. The case was
referred to the Lord Treasurer, who admitted the justice of the
complaint, and recommended that the customs dues should
be reduced by two shillings per whole cloth for all these coarse
northern cloths, whilst one piece in every five should be free of

1 Eastland Merchants, Preface, p. lxxxiii.

- [bid., ]). 76, October 30, 1654.

6 D. S. P., Eliz., cexxxix. 54, June 1 591 .

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 171

any impost, being counted as a wrapper for the other four.
These recommendations were carried out, and the northern
merchants paid reduced customs, with the ' gyfft of the ffifthe
cloth for a wrappar ' free of duty. The concession was of great
value to the trade, and the merchants stoutly resisted any
attempt to abolish this preferential treatment when subsequent
revisions of customs were being made.1

Foreign trade was beset by many dangers, not least of which
was that of capture by pirates, or by the ships of some hostile
country. Security at sea was a luxury seldom enjoyed by
Tudor and Stuart merchants, who really were 'adventurers' in
a double sense of the term. Piracy was rampant, and powerful
associations of pirates patrolled the North Sea and the Channel.2
Throughout earlier centuries, cargoes of wool, cloth, lead, and
coal had been seized on the high seas, and the coast towns
and villages were always liable to be raided by a horde of these
wild men of the sea. Or if the pirates were subdued, the ships
<>t a hostile country were scarcely less dangerous. England
was generally on unfriendly terms with some Continental power,
and this enmity expressed itself in regular seizures of goods and
vessels. Even if no state of actual hostilities existed, political
and commercial rivalries were sufficiently strong to justify
an attack on a foreign ship and the confiscation of its cargo.
Instances of such occurrences are abundant. Thus, in 1319,
fifteen merchants of Beverley, along with other traders, loaded
three ships of Flanders, then lying at Hull, with cloths of
Beverley, sacks of wool, woolfells, and other merchandise to the
value of £4,000. This rich cargo was on its way to Flanders,
when ' certain armed malefactors ', subjects of Count Robert
(it Flanders, attacked the ships, captured them, and escorted
ships and cargo to Flanders, where they shared out the booty.
The English government repeatedly made representations to
the Count on behalf of the Beverley merchants, but without
avail. Edward 11, therefore, following the regular custom,
retaliated by ordering the seizure of the goods of Flemish
merchants who were then in England. Action was stayed for

1 See revival of question, P. >'. I'., fas. I , cxi. OQ-7J.

: Cunningham, Crowth, i. ?<>i . Also Give I lav, History ■<( Commerce (1007),
eh. iK.

172 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

a time, as the Count promised to send envoys to England to
settle the affair. But the envoys never came, and so Edward
ordered the seizure of a large quantity of Flemish merchandise,
and imprisoned several Flemings until the Count adequately
recompensed the English merchants.1 Similar occurrences were
frequent throughout the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth
centuries, and bore witness to the dangers to commerce, whether
coastal or foreign. In 1577 a writer complained of the great
prevalence of pirates up and down the coast, which was prevent-
ing fishermen and merchants from venturing out of harbour.2
In the last years of the sixteenth century Dunkirkers haunted
the Yorkshire coast, chasing the coal, cloth, and fishing fleets
and racking the nerves of the whole sea-going population ; 3
later, in 1625, the Eastland Merchants dare not put out to
sea with their cloth ships, for fear of the Dunkirkers who were
hanging outside the mouth of the Humber.4 England still had
no adequate navy, and during the various wars of the seventeenth
century the Dutch and other enemies were able to inflict
severe blows upon the country by harassing its mercantile
ventures.

Merchants tried to fortify themselves against these dangers in
many ways. The ports occasionally acted on their own initiative,
and in 1577 Hull armed certain ships for the purpose of stamping
out piracy. The attempt was attended with success, and the
ships captured Lancelot Greenwell, a notorious pirate who had
given Hull merchants a vast amount of trouble.5 But generally
the merchants looked to the government to provide protection.
They paid Ship Money, customs, and other dues, and therefore
they expected in return some measure of security in their trade.
The northern merchants voiced the general opinion when, in
1651, they asked ' that in regard wee pay so greate custome and
excise, wee may bee constantly supplyed with convoy and secured
from the great danger of the enemyes, and that the merchants

1 Close Rolls, 13 Ed. II, m. 14, October 24, 13 19.

2 D. S. P., Eliz., Addenda, xxv. 11 (1577).

:' Ibid., eclxx. 109. 4 D. S. P., Chas. I , dxxi. t,^.

r> Ordinances of Privy Council, October 29, 1577. Piracy was almost one
of the learned professions, and a sound business investment. Thus in 1527,
the Abbot of Whitby, two gentlemen, and a number of other men prominent
in the affairs of the East Riding were the financiers of a famous piratical
band (Yorks. Arch, and Topogr. Journal, ii. 247).

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 173

may have some reasonable reparacions for their losses at sea by
robbers from tyme to tyme, in respect of the greate tax they pay
for the maintenance of the navie V Hence, when the periodical
shipments were ready to be dispatched, the merchants of the
ports from which the consignments were to go wrote to the
government, asking for a convoy, or for some other guarantee
of safety. Prior to the existence of a national navy, the govern-
ment allowed the merchant ships to take soldiers with them to
provide the necessary defence. For instance, in 1483, the
merchants of Hull were granted permission ' to take up as many
souldeours and mariners as shalbc requisite for the defense
and Waughting (waiting) of certain shippes, now being at poort
of Hull, laden and chardged with Wolles and Wollfelles to the
Staple of Calais '.'- With the improvement and extension of the
navy, it occasionally became possible to spare men-of-war, and
throughout the seventeenth century ships were detailed to act
as convoys to the mercantile fleets. The northern merchants,
who in 1625 had missed the market for want of a convoy, were
compensated in the following year, when three ships were sent
' to wafte the cloathe ffleets of the Northeren partes bound unto
places of securities ', and also ' to wafte the said shipps home
againe in their retourne '.3 This grant of a convoy was repeated
on several occasions, the most famous of which was that of 1630.
In that year, at the earnest petition of the cloth merchants of
Hull, York, and Newcastle, a vessel called the Reformation
was sent, under the command of Sir Henry Mervyn, to convoy
sixteen ships, laden with cloth, to the Low Countries, Hamburg,
and the Eastlands.4 This was a large cargo, comprising the
wares of Adventurers and Eastlanders, and the ports were jubilant
at the prospect of a safe and profitable journey. The Mayor
and Corporation of Hull wrote to the Privy Council, thanking
them for the favour granted,0 and the authorities of York
followed suit, expressing ' the comforte . . . received by his
Most Excellent Maties gracyous and royall favour, in that it
pleased his Ma"' in our greate extremity, after sundry losses
by pyratts, and when wee had noc power oi ourselves to help

1 March 25, 1051 (Newcastle Merchant Adventurers, i. 166).

- September 10, 2 Rich. Ill, Harlcian MSS., 433, tt. [59 b and 187 b.

1 !>. >". /'., Chits. I, xxv. 22 and 47.

1 Ibid., clxiii. 59. ' Ibid., clxvii. 3.

174 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE chap.

ourselves, that then his Mat,e out of his princely disposicion '
should send Sir Henry Mervyn.1

The mercantile fleet set out from Hull on May 18, 1630,
under the aegis of Mervyn. On the 21st the men of Hull sent
their letter of thanks to the Privy Council, and were congratulat-
ing themselves on the assured success of the expedition. Imagine,
therefore, their dismay and surprise when they saw some of the
ships returning up the Humber the following day. The story was
quickly told, how, soon after getting well out to sea, Sir Henry
had sighted a Spanish warship, and had set off to the north-east
in pursuit, instead of keeping to the straight course for Holland.
The merchants and mariners had protested angrily against
this diversion, whereupon Sir Henry calmly replied ' That if
they would not go his way, they could go their own '.2 The
merchants had argued in vain, and Mervyn eventually left
them, to follow up the Spaniard. Some ships put back into
port, and two of them were lost on this sad return journey.
The others evidently continued their voyage, though with what
result we do not know.3

During the period of the Civil War, the Commonwealth, and
the wars with the Dutch, the state of the high seas was more
dangerous than ever. Hence, year after year the Yorkshire
merchants inundated their Members of Parliament or the Govern-
ment with requests for convoys. These letters are so full of
energy and interest that one is worthy of quotation : 4

' Leedes,

' isU March, 1654-5.
' (To Adam Paynes, M.P. for Leeds),
Honoured Sir,

' Wee, whose names are hereunto subscribed, make it our
humble request on the behalfe of our selves and other merchtts
of Yorke and Hull, that you would be pleased to procure us
from the State a good Convoy, to be if possible at Hull the last
day of this moneth, to take charge of Thomas Robinson's shipp
and goods, (and his lugg alsoe if need bee for one), for the Porte

1 D. S. P., Chas. I , clxviii. 27. - Ibid., clxvii. 7.

:i In 1627 lour York merchants had their vessels seized by the Dunkirkers,
entailing a loss of /ooo. They therefore asked Buckingham for permission to
take compensation from a ship of Rouen, which had been captured by some
Englishmen (I). S. I'., Chas. I, lxxxiv. 29).

' Baynes Correspondence, xi. 225.

v UP TO THE RESTORATION 175

of Hamburge in Germanic. And what charges you or any that
you employ shall be ;it, wee shall thankfully repay.

' Sr, if it please you to consult Sir Thomas Witherington
herein it will not bee amisse, for wee beleeve the Deputie and
rest of our bretheren at Yorkc have desired his favour and
Assistance as being a matter of moment to this poore Country !
Though there be noe visible enemies to annoy us, yet pickaroones
and lurking knaves there may be in the way to come from farr !
for roavers at Sea are seldome or never out of their way ! they
will goe any way for a rich Bootie. Sr, wee know you soe much
to be our good friend, and a zea'lott for the welfair of your
Country, as that wee shall not trouble ourselves to lay downe
any motives before you to incite you to the worke, onely this
one ',

namely the fear of the London traders, who, as already quoted,
seemed like great whales to the northern minnows. For that
reason alone, if no other, Baynes was intreated to be sure
to secure a convoy, so as to enable the Yorkshiremen to
reach the foreign market promptly and in safety. Baynes had
also to extract another favour from the Commonwealth authori-
ties. In these times of national danger the ordinary sailor was
at any moment liable to be pressed into the service of the navy.
Therefore, having gained his point in the request for a convoy,
Baynes at once asked for a licence for the sailors on the two
cloth-laden ships ' yl [they] may be freed from being prest,
ffor if they loose the Markett at Hamburgh the 10th of the next
month, the Dutch will rcape the bencfitt of it, and the pore
people of the Northe loose halfe a yeares imployment, this cloth
being the fruits of halfe a yeares labour '}

Twice a year at least the Yorkshire merchants carried their
cloths to Hamburg or to the Baltic, and on every such occasion
they sought the protection of the State. In the later years
oi the Commonwealth and during the wars of the subsequent
reign they often failed to gain the desired provision. Occa-
sionally the convoy was promised but did not come,2 and often
when it came it was hopelessly inadequate, and could otter no
satisfactory guarantee of security to the merchant ships. Thus
in r()()(> there was a fleet of fifty sail at Hull, * very riche ladened

1 Letter to Lambert, March jo, 1055 (/>. S. P., Intcrr., xcv. 84).
: />. >'. /'., Intcrr., exxx. 40 and 44, September 1656 ; convov promised
but did not come.

176 YORKSHIRE CLOTH TRADE

with lead, cornc, butter, and clothe, with other goods, vallewed
at ioo,ooolu and above '. This great mercantile flotilla was
provided with one man-of-war to guard it on the high seas.
The solitary ship had been convoying a fleet of eighty coal ships
along the coast, and had ' met with fower great [Dutch] men of
warr about 40 guns apeese ', with very disastrous consequences
to the colliers. The four Dutch vessels now hung about the
entrance to the Humber, waiting for more merchant fleets to
plunder, and hence the fifty laden ships dare not stir out of the
estuary, although it was now November, and the time for
sailing to the Continental markets had almost passed by for that
season. No wonder that ' the people in those parts murmor
crouelly that these coasts are noe better garded, and say they
pay all there great sesments to small porpose, and thatt in
Olliver's time there was better care taken to. secure the coast
trade than is now '.1

It was amidst such difficulties as these that the Yorkshire
merchants sought to develop their foreign trade, and to expand
the market for northern cloths. Bound by the restrictions of the
companies, open to the opposition of neighbouring or distant
ports, and devoid of continuous security on the waters, foreign
trade was far from being an easy road to opulence. That these
were not the only obstacles will become evident in the next
chapter. In this chapter we have attempted to describe the
general organization of foreign commerce, the nature of the
societies which did the pioneer work in the Continental markets,
and the constant state of insecurity which prevailed on the
North Sea during centuries of warfare, undeveloped international
law, and rival commercial empires.

D. S. P., Chas. II clxxviii. 92.

CHAPTER VI

SOME MILESTONES IN THE SEVENTEENTH
CENTURY

The textile history of Yorkshire during the seventeenth century
is full of complications and vicissitudes. The first sixty years
are marked by a series of events of a more or less catastrophic
nature, under the influence of which economic progress became
very difficult, if not altogether impossible. There were distrac-
tions at home, where plague and civil strife were demanding
their heavy toll. State attempts to regulate the industry had
disastrous effects upon its prosperity, and the efforts which
were made to push the sale of English cloth abroad were met
by the opposition of foreign governments, who were desirous of
establishing economic independence and of fostering their own
national industries. Forces, economic and political, were acting
and interacting in blind and often purposeless conflict. National
and local interests clashed in bitter rivalry ; economic thought
was laboriously pushing through to the light ; the laws of
economic action were dim and vague, and those who set them
forth generally did so with interested motives. Under such
circumstances the textile industry pursued a chequered career,
and it was not until the later decades of the century that it
really set out on that course of prosperity which preceded the
Industrial Revolution. In this chapter we shall consider those
events which were most potent in their influence on the welfare
of the Yorkshire industry.

The first great event of the century, so far as Yorkshiremen
were concerned, was the famous trial of 1612-14, one of at least
three in which the interests of the Yorkshire clothiers were at
stake. The trial was a test of strength between the clothiers
and the ulnage officials, so it: will be necessary to state in a few
words the exact position of the ulnage at this period.

By the end of the sixteenth century the ulnager had been
largely displaced by the local searchers, and his work was now
entirely financial. All cloths had to bear the ulnager's seal

1526.12 N

178 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

before they could be sold. The clothier paid subsidy and
ulnage, obtained his seals, and was then allowed to expose his
cloths for sale. Should he attempt to evade his obligations to
the ulnager he was liable to heavy penalties, including forfeiture
of his cloth. But provided that the seals were obtained and the
fee paid the ulnager or his representative did not trouble about
the dimensions or quality of the cloth. These aspects of regula-
tion he left to the searchers, who were appointed by the justices
of the peace in accordance with the legislation outlined in
a previous chapter.1

The ulnage of the county was farmed out by the Crown, and
during the sixteenth century the farm of the ' ulnage of sale-
able woollen cloths in the city and county of York and the
town of Kingston-on-Hull ' changed hands frequently. In the
reigns of Edward VI and Mary it was held by the Wentworths 2
and the Waterhouses, who paid about £96 a year as rent to the
Crown. Later it passed to Sir Walter Raleigh, and in the
reign of James I it became the property of the Duke of Lennox,3
who had by that time absorbed the ulnage of the whole king-
dom. Occasionally the tenant-in-chief sublet a part of his
holding to others, as in the case of Lennox, who re-farmed the
Yorkshire ulnage to Sir Thomas Vavasour, Sir John Wattes,
and Sir John Middleton. These men employed two deputy
ulnagers, George Nixon and Thomas Snydall, who carried on
the actual administration and collection of the ulnage fees,
appointing assistants where necessary to help in the distribution
of seals and the collection of the ulnage dues. It was the business
of these officials to live in the heart of the clothing districts,
and to go to the houses of the clothiers, when sent for, to seal
the cloths and to receive the necessary fees.

What were the dues on each cloth ? What ought they to be ?
These were questions around which centred several agitations

1 The u Inzer's men and the searchers were not always in perfect harmony.
Thus in 1018 the deputy-ulnagers of Leeds declared that the ' Comon Searchers
appointed . . . for searching of cloths do usually set their search seal to cloths
that arc not truly contented . . . and that the said searchers who are by their
office and oath to search truly the cloths within their charge are clothiers
themselves, and do usually make faulty cloths themselves as other clothiers
dd. ' Copy of Memorandum transcript kindly lent by Mr. J. Lister.

- Calendar of State Papers, vol. xxi, pt. ii, 770, f. " (1547).

3 D. S. P., Chas. II, xvi. 87.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 179

and lawsuits during the .Stuart period. In these eontroversies
law and long-established eustom were at variance, and usually
custom gained the victory. To go fully into the details of the
cases would lead us into a maze of legal and technical data of
very little real interest ; but the broad features of the dispute:
are easy to understand. The amount of subsidy on a whole
cloth of assize was 4^., and the ulnage \d. When the smaller
Yorkshire cloths first came within the scope of these charges
in 1393 each kersey was reckoned as a quarter of a whole cloth,
and so paid subsidy of id., whilst on every four kerseys \d.
was paid as ulnage. Eventually the \d. fee seems to have been
dropped, and in the sixteenth century id. per kersey was the
only payment made by the clothiers. In the meantime, however,
the variety of Yorkshire cloths was increasing rapidly. The
' Northern Dozen ' still remained about 12-13 yards in length,
but kerseys had been increased considerably in size, and
might be of any length up to 18 yards. Still, although they
approximated now to a third, or possible one-half, the dimen-
sions of a whole cloth of assize, they only paid id. as subsidy.
Other varieties of cloth had also been increased in length, but
were paying small fees, especially the long cloths (32 yards),
which should have been contributing about 4</., but were still
paying z\d. These customary payments were evidently accepted
by the collectors, who were content to confine themselves merely
to giving out seals and receiving pence, without taking any
measurements, for a witness in 1590 declared that he had
' never known any cloths measured which have been bought,
and sold within the county of York, by the ulnager or collector
of the subsidy, nor by any others by their appointment '. It
was custom alone which had kept the subsidy on kerseys down
at i</., and a great opportunity therefore presented itself to any
staunch upholder of the law who might care to demand payment
proportionate to the size of the cloth.

There was a. slight preliminary skirmish in 1596,1 when a
collector of these dues attempted to compel two Birstall men to
pay more than z\d. per piece for certain long cloths which they
had made. But the real struggle did not take place until the
following reign, when 'a pennv .1 kersev was the battle-cry.
1 Hxchcquer depositions, jS-o Kliz., Mich., no. 2$, York and Hull.

X 2

180 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

At this time Sir Thomas Vavasour, Sir John Wattes, and
Sir John Middleton had taken the Yorkshire ulnage in farm
from the Duke of Lennox, and had as their deputies George
Nixon of London, and Thomas Snydall of Halifax. The aim of
these men was to increase the levy on kerseys from id. to i\d.
They declared that the statute of 1393-4 decreed that subsidy
should be paid in proportion to the dimensions of the cloth,
and that since three Yorkshire kerseys now equalled one whole
cloth of assize, the payment should be 4|d. for the three (i. e.
the amount of subsidy and ulnage for a whole cloth), or in
other words i\d. each. In further justification of this demand,
the deputies pointed out that the Customs authorities now
regarded three kerseys as equal to one whole cloth when levy-
ing Customs charges. Therefore let the kersey pay its just and
proper tribute, instead of stealing into the market under false
pretences. But the ulnage collectors recognized that it would
be an unwise policy to attempt to levy the extra \d. all at once,
and therefore decided to proceed as gently as possible. In May
1611 the collectors began to demand i\d. per kersey, and by
means of arguments and threats succeeded in obtaining the
additional \d. from some clothiers. St. Bartholomew's Fair was
drawing near, and large numbers of clothiers were preparing
their consignments of cloth to send to that great meeting ground.
But no cloth could go unsealed, and as the deputies refused to
seal any cloths unless the clothiers paid the increased subsidy,
many submitted and gave the sum demanded.1 Whereupon,
deeming the time to be ripe for a further advance, Nixon and
Snydall began to demand i\d. per cloth. This was in November
161 1. The makers of kerseys were in arms at once, in opposition
to the new demands. They applied as usual for their seals, and
tendered id. for each cloth, only to be refused by the deputies.
Many therefore dispatched their cloths unsealed, either to the
Yorkshire ports or to London, and the deputies retorted by
seizing all the unsealed cloths upon which they could lay hands.
Some men had their pieces captured in their own districts, and
had to pay a heavy ransom, in addition to the i\d., in order
to get them back. One man, Thomas Davye, of Midgeley in
the parish of Halifax, had ' Tenn of his owne carseyes . . . sezed
1 D. S. P., Jus. I, lxv. 78, August 18, 1611.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 181

and taken att Hull by a pursuyvant, and by one Nixon '. He
had asked for seals before dispatching his pieces, but Snydall
the deputy had refused to give them out for less than i\d.
each, and so, fearful lest he should lose the continental market,
Davye had dispatched the goods unsealed, only to have them
confiscated at the port. The packs of cloth which were being
forwarded to Blackwcll Hall or St. Bartholomew's Fair shared
a similar fate, and a number of clothiers were arrested for the
resistance which they had offered to the ulnager's men. Finally,
adding insult to injury, the deputies threatened ' that if the
clothiers of the Vicarage of Halifax would not agree with the
ulnager the payment would be enhanced to 2d.'

The demand for an increase of 50 per cent, in the amount of
subsidy and ulnage was accompanied by other acts of aggression
on the part of the ulnage officials. The clothiers were now
subjected to new inconveniences, against which they had no
power of redress, since the deputy could always punish them
by refusing to issue seals and by seizing the pieces. The chief
annoyance was the discontinuance of the practice which had
formerly allowed the clothiers to procure their seals quickly
and cheaply. This grievance was well expressed by one of the
witnesses in the subsequent lawsuit. ' The farmers [of the
ulnage] have used to keepe severall deputyes or sealers in
severall towneshippes or hamblettes of the Parishe of Hallifaxe,
to be readic to scale the carseyes there made with more speed
and conveneance, and they have also used to come to men's
houses for the same purpose.' This practice, however, had been
discontinued about 1610 by the deputy Snydall, and now the
clothiers were compelled to go ' fetch their scales, some a myle,
some two myles, some three, some fowre, some seven myles
from their dwellinge houses, since the sealers gave over to come
to the said clothiers' houses to seal their cloth '. Many clothiers
had sent for Snydall to come to their loom-shops and seal their
pieces, but he had refused, and the clothiers were therefore
compelled not only to pay the extra subsidy, but also to go to
Snydall's establishment. The deputies had further begun to
insist upon the measuring of the cloths, even although the
pieces had been previously ' searched ' by the local searchers.
Since the cloths were generally dried and tentered after the

182 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

' search ', and would have to be wetted again if the deputy
wished to measure them, the clothier was now faced with the
possibility of a double ' making up ' of his pieces.

These attacks on long-established customs roused the opposi-
tion of the clothiers in the kersey-making districts, and although
many eventually submitted to the new exactions, a few of the
braver spirits put forward a sturdy resistance. Chief amongst
these was Robert Lawe, one of the more wealthy clothiers, who
had contrived to dispose of 290 unsealed cloths, and was in
consequence overwhelmed with threats of imprisonment and
other penalties. Along with him were others equally obstinate
in their attitude towards the ulnage officials, and at last, in
1612, the Attorney-General, at the request of Nixon, the deputy
ulnager, instituted proceedings against ' Robert Lawe, Richard
Lawe, John Drake, and Michael Godley, clothiers that do trade
and sell Northern Kersies '. In his Bill of Complaint, the
Attorney-General quoted the complicated series of Acts relating
to the dimensions of kerseys, and argued that as three kerseys
equalled one broad cloth they ought to pay i\d. each, or 4^ J.
for three.

' Yet so it is that Robert Lawe, Richard Lawe, John Drake,
and Michael Godley, being clothiers or persons that do trade
and sell Yorkshire kersies in great quantities, do refuse to
answer and pay to his Majesty's ulnager ... or his deputy <\d.
for subsidy and \d. for ulnage for three of the saleable Yorkshire
kersies . . . and by their examples divers of the clothiers and
sheeremen of the County do also refuse to answer and pay such
subsidy and ulnage for three of the Yorkshire saleable kersies,
and do daily put their saleable kersies for sale without paying
the said subsidy and ulnage, to the great loss and diminishing
of the King's profit and revenue, which should and ought to
grow to his Majesty by the wools and cloths of the said County
of York, and to the manifest contempt and breach of his Majesty's
laws and statutes in that behalf provided.' l

The defendants replied with the plea that they were only
upholding a traditional and long-accepted custom. Their
defence ran as follows :

'That all have used, time out of mind, in the parishes of
Bradford, Halifax, and Keighley, ever sithence subsidy and
ulnage was payable on Northern Kersies, to pay for subsidy

1 Bills and Answers, Exchequer, jas. I, York, no. 1296, 10 jas. I, Mich.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 183

and ulnagc id. and no more, until within two years last past or
thereabouts. About two years ago the deputy ulnagers asked
for five farthings, alledging that to be a proportionable rate,
and by menaces and indirect means compelled some poor men
to answer after that rate, and that sithence, they have lately
demanded iW.'

This the defendants had refused to pay, and they reiterated
the fact that for two hundred years and more only id. had been
paid, and was the proper proportionable rate ; they ' have paid
or tendered to be paid to the ulnager's deputy the accustomed
duties of id. per kersey, and nevertheless have been much vexed
and troubled, whereby the trade of clothing is in danger of
decay '. Finally, they declared that this extra \d. would mean
the exaction of an additional £200 per annum from the parishioners
concerned.

Not content with acting on the defensive, the clothiers in-
stituted a counter-action against their accusers,1 and Robert
Lawe, with four other clothiers, brought in a suit against
Vavasour, Wattes, Middleton, and their deputies Nixon and
Snydall. The burden of this complaint was that the deputies
had exacted and extorted more than they ought to claim, had
seized the wares of those who resisted their extortions, and had
been negligent in their duties by not coming to the clothiers'
houses when sent for to seal the cloths. The plaintiffs took this
opportunity of blowing their own trumpet very lustily, and their
Bill of Complaint therefore contains some admirable purple
patches of self-praise. The clothiers declared that 20,000 men,
women, and children were employed in * the trade of clothing '
in the four parishes of Halifax, Bradford, Bingley, and Keighley ;
they st.ited that in the Halifax parish alone poor relief amount-
U1si to £4° Per month was administered to 600 impotent, aged,
and poor people, and they pointed out that the inhabitants of
the parish of Halifax 'out of zeal to God's holy religion, do
freely and voluntarily, at their own Charges, maintain and give
wages to ten preachers, over and above the payment of all
tithes and oblations, . . . and by the special grace of God there
is not one Popish recusant inhabiting in the said great and

1 I lie plaintiffs in this counter-suit were Robert I. awe, John Dixon, John
Jenkinson, John Oldheld, ami Richard Smith ; they were not the same as
the defendants in the first case.

184 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

populous parish of Halifax, ... all of which benefits do arise
and growe from the said trade of making . . . Northern Kersies '.

The cases having been instituted, long series of elaborate
interrogatories were drawn up covering all the points at issue,
and witnesses were called to give evidence on these questions.1
The hearing of the trial was conducted by commissioners, who
sat at Leeds in September 1613 to receive evidence. The plea
of the clothiers was one of custom, and they therefore called
the oldest men available, in order to have testimony which
would go as far back as possible. Venerable clothiers, 75, 78,
and 80 years of age, gave evidence based on a life-long experience
of the industry, and although there were differences on minor
points, there was perfect unanimity on the central question as
to the amount of subsidy and ulnage on the kerseys. Witnesses
declared that from time ' when the memory of man is not to
the contrary ' the makers of Northern kerseys had only paid
id. They refuted the statement that three kerseys were regarded
by the Customs officials as equal to one whole broad cloth of
assize by pointing out that the three kerseys paid only 55. ^d.
at Hull, whilst the broad cloths paid 65. 8d. each ; and they
reminded their opponents that considerations of quality must
be taken into account, as well as mere dimensions and
weight. The evidence was overwhelmingly in favour of the
clothiers, and the decision of the Court showed this.

' Upon the hearing, it appeared to this Court that it hath been
heretofore used and accustomed of very long and ancient time
without any interruption, until now of late, . . . that the clothiers
inhabiting within the parishes of Halifax, Bradford, Bingley,
and Keighley have only paid the sum or rate of id. for the
subsidy and ulnage of every Kersey, and no more. And that
the same hath been during all the said time accepted as the
proper and one sum payable for the subsidy and ulnage of
a Kersey as this Court now conceiveth, and therefore, without
great and just cause to be shown to the contrary, the Court
thought it not fit to be altered. Therefore, it is thought fit and
ordered by this Court that the said clothiers . . . shall from
henceforth continue the payment of one penny only, . . . without
demand or exaction of any further sum.'

The clothiers had gained an absolute victory, and for twenty-
four years they remained in undisputed possession of the fruits
1 Exchequer Depositions, n Jas. I, Mich., nos. 9 and 11, at Leeds.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 185

of that victory. But almost immediately they were faced with
a new situation, which brought far greater misfortune upon the
industry than that which the ulnager's extortions could have
inflicted. From 1614 onwards there are constantly recurring
complaints of bad trade, and of the decay of industry and
commerce, and although these dolorous jeremiads were often
uttered by persons who had interests to advance, still there-
can be little doubt that the next half-century was marked by
frequent and surprisingly periodical fluctuations, with serious
depressions in industrial and commercial life. As to the causes
of these fluctuations the seventeenth century writers could not
agree, but one important reason seems to be that our foreign
trade in cloth was now of great importance, and that it was
being called upon to encounter many powerful influences and
tendencies, which might bring temporary or more permanent
depression. These deterrents might come from some govern-
ment action or conditions at home, or from the economic and
political movement of some foreign power with whose subjects
England carried on trade. The textile trade was therefore sub-
jected to many strong blasts of adversity during the next few
decades, and those engaged in the manufacture of cloths were
often plunged into depression and unemployment.

The first heavy blow came from the Cockayne experiment in
dyeing English cloths at home. In the sixteenth century it
had been thought desirable that fabrics should be dyed and
finished at home, instead of providing employment for the
people of other lands, as was the case when English cloth was
exported undyed and unfinished. The Reformation Parliament
of Henry VIII therefore found time, in the midst of its manifold
labours, to declare that henceforth no piece above a certain
value should be exported until it had been properly dressed
and finished.1 This Act, however, was rendered inoperative
time and time again, by granting licences allowing merchants
to export cloths contrary to the statute.2 The Merchant Adven-
turers exported large quantities of cloths of good quality in an
unfinished condition, and were said to provide employment for
50,000 persons in the Low Countries, finishing the raw cloths

1 Statute 27 Hen. VIII, c. i.?.

2 Calendar of State Papers, vols, xv-xx, frequently.

186 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

exported from England. In fact, the whole area served by the
Adventurers took scarcely any but white cloths from England,
and the English merchants seem to have made few efforts to
push the sale of coloured wares. Restrictions, and eventually
prohibitions, were raised against such a trade ; the govern-
ments of these parts attempted to ban any import of finished
cloths, and in April 1612 the Archduke Albert of Austria declared
that ' after the last contract made [with a certain merchant]
shalbe expired, he will give out no more passports for English
cloths to come into the Countie of fflaunders, but that there
shall onelie come in white clothes to Antwerpe by that river,
there to be dyed and drest as in tymes past '. The English
representative in Flanders fumed against the decree, but without
avail, and the volume of coloured cloth exported to Flanders
shrank to nothing.1

This prohibition gave a stimulus to many ideas which were
already in the air in England. Why not foster a national
industry, by compelling all cloths to be dyed and finished at
home ? Why not retaliate on Flanders by forbidding the export
of white cloths, which alone Flanders would admit ? Why not
tap another source of revenue, by granting to some person or
company the monopoly of this finishing industry ? And lastly,
why not take this opportunity of breaking down the power of
the Merchant Adventurers, who were already becoming the
object of considerable hatred ? In this manner the national
industry, the national honour, and the royal purse could all be
benefited at the same time, a tempting combination of advan-
tages. In July 1614, therefore, James issued a proclamation
forbidding the exportation of unfinished cloth, and by so doing
practically deprived the Adventurers of their occupation.'2 In
the following February a new company was set up, with Sir
William Cockayne at its head, and this company was to deal
with the cloth which before this time the Merchant Adventurers
had exported. Cockayne had a new patent method of dyeing
and finishing the pieces, and his company undertook to dye
the cloths and to export an increasing quantity of finished

1 Cotton MSS., Galba E, 1. 399. Letter dated Brussels, April 13, 1612.

J Cunningham, op. cit., ii. 294. For a detailed study of the whole episode
see Durham, ' Relations of the Crown to Trade under James I ', in Trans.
of the Royal Hist. Soc, New Series, xiii. 208-18.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 187

goods each year, thus developing a branch of industry which
the policy of the old company had certainly allowed to be
neglected. In return for the favours granted, the new company
was to pay a handsome fee to the Exchequer. It then entered
into its fair domain, to buy the white cloths from the country
clothiers, dye and finish them, and find a foreign market for
them. From the first the venture was a dismal failure in every
respect, and entirely dislocated the cloth trade. The provincial
weavers, who had formerly prepared stocks of cloth for the
Merchant Adventurers, made similar supplies for their successors,
but as the new company had no market it could not take these
cloths out of the hands of the country clothiers. Further, the
old company, though not defunct, was barred from any export
of unfinished cloths, and could therefore do nothing to relieve
the situation. Hence clothiers were thrown into great distress,
and Sir John Savill, in the House of Commons, declared that in
Leeds, Halifax, and Wakefield the clothiers were being ruined,
and at least 13,000 persons affected by this impasse.1 The
export of cloth declined considerably. From December 1613
to March 1614 (a period of three months), the export from the
port of London amounted to 37,494 whole cloths. During the
same three months of the following year, when the scheme was
in full operation, the export fell to 20,283, a decrease of 17,211. -
The new company failed entirely to secure a footing in foreign
markets. Hence, in May 1615, three and a half months after
the company had been established, a writer declared :i that

* The great project of dicing and dressingc of cloth is at a
stand, and they knowe not well how to go forward nor back-
ward, tor the clothiers do generally complain that theyre clothe
lir- mi theyre hands, and the elotheworkers and diers wearie
tin- Kinge and counsaile with petitions, wherein they eomplaine
that they are in worse case than before, . . . and indeed yt is
found that there hath not been a cloth died or dressed since
Christmass more than usual, . . . whereby the Customes do fall,
and many other inconveniences follow both at home and abroade,
whiles the new companions differ amongst themselves and draw
dyvers wayes, so that the old companie hath been dealt wit hall
to resume the trade, and set al straight again, yf yt may be.'

1 (hioti'il by .Miss Hewart, in Economic Journal (moo), p. jS. No original
reference is niven. - /;. .S". /'., /as. I, lxxx. ;S-u.

J Lett it from Chamberlain to Carleton, Mav 25, 1015 (/>. 5. /'., lxxx. ioS).

188 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

The industry was indeed almost at a standstill, especially
amongst the white cloth manufacturers. Clothiers complained
of the supplies of cloth which were left on their hands, and the
Government ordered the old company to relieve the makers by
taking the supplies which had been prepared. The new company
pleaded for permission to export white as well as coloured pieces,
thus admitting its failure to establish itself as a cloth-finishing
concern. Eventually,1 in 1617, the scheme was abandoned, and
the old company of Merchant Adventurers reinstated with
greater powers than before, in order to win back the trade
which had been lost during those unfortunate years of experi-
ment.2

The Cockayne venture was intended to foster one branch of
the textile industry. It failed dismally, and was partially
responsible for the plunging of the whole industry into many
years of depression. For the period which followed was one of
economic dejection, especially acute in 1621-3. This depression
affected every part of the country, and complaints came from
all clothing counties, from Devon to Yorkshire, from Kent to
Anglesey.3 Industry was at a standstill, and foreign trade was
reduced by more than half. The Merchant Adventurers declared
that their trade had fallen in value from £200,000 to £70,000,
and a contemporary writer stated that the export of cloth had
diminished by two-thirds.4 There seemed to be no vent for
cloth, and in March 1622 over 5,000 Yorkshire pieces lay unsold
in the ' Northern Hall ' at Blackwell Hall ; the Manchester Hall
had 850 ' frizes, Cottons, and Bayes ' unsold, ; besides that
thear is far greater quanteties of clothe of these sortes lyingc
in the Cuntrye, redie to bee sent upp if the market wear not soe
loded \5 Clothiers did their utmost to keep their workpeople
employed, but in vain, even though in some parts the justices
of the peace ordered them not to dismiss any hands.0 Through-

1 D. S. P., Jas. I, xciii. 23, August 72, 1617. Also Smith's Memoirs of Wool,
vol. i, p. 145.

2 See D. S. P., Jas. I, lxxx. 1 10-12 ; also S. R. Gardiner's History of England ,

ii. 385-9°-

:| See 1). S. P. for these years, passim ; especially jas. I, exxvii. 76.

1 I). S. I'., Jas. I, cxv. 100, and Stowe MSS., 354, it. 63-5.

5 Ibid., exxvii. 7^,-7.

'• As in Gloucester and Suffolk, I >. S. P., Jas. I , exxviii. 49. See E.M. Leonard,
English Poor Relief, p. 148.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 189

out the clothing counties money was scarce, bankruptcies were
common, unemployment was rife. In Yorkshire the effect was
keenly felt, for that county supplied large quantities of white
cloths for exportation, and the shrinkage in the foreign demand
brought great suffering on the clothing population. In addition
to this, the scarcity of corn was ' greater than ever known in
the memory of man ',* and one complaint from Yorkshire,
Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, and the other clothing counties
declared that ' the poore have assembled in troops of forty
and fifty, and gone to the houses of the rich and demanded
meat and money, which has been given them through fear '.
In places the provision markets were raided.2 The mercan-
tile centres were equally dislocated by the depression. The
corporation of Hull spoke of ' the sudden and great decay of
this Towne, happenynge as well by the generall decay of Trade
as also by the late losse of many of our shipps and men at sea,
as by the present pynchinge dearth with us '.3 Similarly the
authorities of York lamented ' the decayinge estate of this
Cittie for want of commerce and tradeinge, the Artificers therein
haveinge much Ado to get bread to susteyne them and ther
familyes, in this tymc of scarcety of corne and money, the like
wherof hath not fallen out in the memory of man '.4 The
problem was indeed acute, and all classes were affected. As the
clothiers of fourteen counties declared, ' these tymes do more
than thretten to throw us and every one of us, yea, many
thousands of poore and others yt depend uppon us, into ye
bottomles pitt of remediles destruction \a Similar depressions
occurred in 1630-1, when the ravages of plague helped to bring
the fortunes of Yorkshire to a very low ebb ; and again in 1638,
1649-50, and in the last years of the Commonwealth, when
a letter from Lord Fairfax and other leading men in Yorkshire
referred to 'the particular Decay and Ruine of the Cloathing
Trade of this County '.

These periodical depressions of trade, coming at intervals of
eight to ten years, attracted a great amount of attention from
individual writers and from the Government. Explanations

1 l>. >'. /'., Jas. I, exxxi. ~$. - Ibid., exxvii. ioj.

1 Printed in Cartwright's Clutptcrs, in the History of Yorkshire, p. 27;.

1 Ibid., p. 2-j. - Stowe MSS., -54, i. 05.

igo SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

of their causes, and suggestions as to infallible remedies, were
never lacking. In 1622 the Privy Council decided to appoint
a commission,1 consisting of a ' convenient Nombcr of Persons
of Oualitie, Understanding, Experience and Judgement ', to
whose ' Judgement, Industrie and Care [it] might commit the
further searching out and better discerning of the true Causes
of the Decaie of Trade, and the finding out of fit and convenient
Remedies to be applied to the same '. The Commission was to
receive evidence from all parts of the country, and for that
purpose the justices of the peace in each county were to call
the clothiers before them, in order to select two representatives
who should be able to place before the Commissioners the
grievances of the county from which they came.2 Armed with
a number of points of reference, the Commissioners set to work,
and after ' many conferences had with the Marchaunts Adven-
turers and the marchaunts of other Societies and Companies,
with the gentry of quality of severall Counties, with the Cloathiers
of the severall cloathynge sheires, with the officers of his Maties
Customes and the drapers and diers of London, and after manic
dayes spent in this waightie service ', presented a long report
of the ' true Groundes and Motives of the greate decaye of the
sale and vente of our English Cloth in fforaigne partes'.3

The causes enumerated in this report apply to some extent to
all the depressions of the seventeenth century, and illustrate the
difficulties with which the progress of the cloth trade was con-
fronted. They were :

1. ' The makeing of cloth ... in fforeigne partes in more
aboundance than in former times, being theareunto chiefly
enabled by the woolles and other materialls transported from
the Kingdomcs of Engkind, Scotland, and Ireland, wee con-
ceive to be the cheifest cause that lesse quanlitye ot ours are
vent ed there.'

1. ' The false and decitfull makinge, dyinge, and dressinge of
our clothe . . . and stuffes, which disgraceth it in foraigne partes.'

3. ' The hevy burthen uppon our cloth, wheareby it is made
soe deare to the buyer that those that were wont to furnish

1 Brit. Mus., 190 (g). 13 (317), quoted in Cunningham, Growth, Appendix E ;
Rymcr, Focdcra, xvii. 410.

- Sec I). S. /'., Jas. J, exxix. 81, lor report from Bishop of Chester and
justices of Lancashire concerning the election of representatives.

3 Stowe MSS., 554, f. 45.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 191

themselves therwith in fforraigne parts either by [buy] Cloth
in other countries, or cloath themselves in a cheaper manner.'

Another document explains that the dues inflicted by the
English Government, by the companies monopolizing the export
trade, and by the foreign powers through or into whose countries
the cloths went were so heavy that they made

' ye charg of our English clothe from ye hands of ye maker to
ye back of ye wererer exceede ye charg of a duche [Dutch]
clothe made and worne in Hollande by iiij11. and xiij8., and in ye
Archduke coontry by vu. xijs.' *

4. ' The present state of the times by reason of the warres in
Germany is conceived by many to be some present impediment
to the vent of our cloth, partly by the interupcion of passages,
partly for want of mony.'

5. ' The pollices of the Marchaunts Adventereours, which
bringe uppon themselves suspicion of combinacion in tradinge,
and the smallnes of their number which doe now usually buy
and vent cloth, and the like pollicies of other marchaunts who
are not able or willinge to extend themselves in this time of
extremitie to take off the cloth from the handes of the clotheirs.'

6. ' The scarcety of coyne at home and the basenes of ffor-
raigne coynes compared unto ours.' For the scarcity the East
India Company was especially blamed.

7. ' The want of meanes of retorne for our marchauntes,
especially out of the Eastland Countries, which discorage them
to carry out cloth thethcr, because they can neither sell for redy
money nor barter for vendable comodities.'

Another paper complains of the trade of the Dutch, who were
said to bring French, Eastland, and Russian commodities,
and who ' fill the Markctts here and carry no clothe or Englishe
ware [back], but only reddy monnys V2

8. 'The too little use of waringe cloth at home, and the too
muche of silkes and fforraigne stuffes, which overbalance our
trade.' :!

The first reason offered by the Commission was very true.
Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries many of
the countries of Western Europe were building up industrial
systems, and attempting to meet their own demands tor cloth.
First the Low Countries tried to regain some of their former

1 Stowe MSS., ^4, f. 6;. Report anil petition of clothiers of Yorkshire
and thirteen other counties, presented to the Privy Council.

- Ibid., 1. 05. :1 Ibid., 554, 1. 45 ; also D. S. P., Jas. I, exxxi. 55.

192 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

fame as clothmakcrs,1 and then at a later date the policy of
Colbert succeeded in establishing in France a strong textile
industry. The Dutch Government levied heavy import duties
on English cloths passing into the country, severely punished
any importation of false wares, and in 1612 forbade the entry
of any but white cloths. The Cockayne bungle resulted in a
tariff war, and enabled the Dutch to make progress as cloth-
makers. The Dutch Government gave a bounty to all who
set up looms,2 and many Englishmen, weavers of broad cloths
and serges as well as woolcombers, were soon to be found in
Holland.3 The Dutch contrived to get supplies of English wool
and English fuller's earth, and therefore manufactured bays,
serges, and other cloths, which were sold on the Continent
cheaper than the English wares, thanks to the various imposts
under which the English pieces laboured.4 The exportation of
wool to foreign parts was a perennial theme of complaint, and
though the English Government had forbidden its exportation
to Holland, the wool was smuggled there from Newcastle,5
Scotland, and Ireland, to the great disgust of English clothiers.6
Thus, assisted by English labour, receiving supplies of raw
material from England, and aided by strong protective duties,
the Dutch were able to produce large quantities of cloth, which
replaced the English pieces and so reduced the amount of our
cloth sold in Holland. The troubles before and during the Civil
War in England further assisted the progress of the Dutch, and
a writer in 1649 speaks very emphatically concerning ' the
greate number of clothe workers, weavers, dyers, cottoncrs, and
pressors repayring from England ' to Holland, as well as to
Hamburg, Altona, and other centres across the North Sea,
where Englishmen were competing against their fellow workers
in England.7

1 As early as 1527 various towns in the Low Countries were refusing
admission to English cloths (Calendar of State Papers, Henry VIII , vol. iv,
P- 3433).

- Unwin, Industrial Organization in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,
p. 192. :1 I). S. P., Chas. I, cexxiv. 44 (1632).

1 Ibid. • J). S. P., Jas. I, lxxxviii. 76 (1616).

G Add. MSS., 34324, f. 203 (1622).

7 U.S. I'., Interr., i. 34 (1649). Another writer (I). S. P., Intcrr., ix. 5,
(1650)) declares that 'great quantities of white and coloured cloths which
are made here (i.e. in Hamburg) and being endraped of Spanish and other
sorts of wool, ;ire offered at cheaper rates than we English can do ours, and are

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 193

Similar industrial developments had taken plaee in Franee,
though there was scarcely any immigration of English cloth-
workers into that country. As early as 1622 it was declared that
the French and Dutch now made so much cloth ' that they
have noe needs of our English drapery '} Large quantities of
wool and fuller's earth were carried thither in spite of all pro-
hibitions, and the French trade flourished, nourished partly by
English raw material. Even Poland turned against English
cloth, and the Eastland merchants were hit hard by the growth
of manufactures

' not only in Holland but also in Germany . . . and Brandenburg,
and Silesia, and divers places in Poland and . . . Prussia, and the
cloth can be afforded cheaper than any such like that can be
carried out of England. . . . And whereas the gentlemen in
Poland formerly used to cloath their attendants with English
cloth, they, being now impoverished by reason of the late wars,
do now cloath them with Silesia and such as is made in their
own Country, not being able as formerly to go to the price of
English cloth.' 2

In refusing admission to English fabrics, foreign Governments
generally stated that they were only protecting themselves y
against the false and deceitful wares made in England. The
legislation of Elizabeth and James I was no more effective than
previous attempts had been in preventing fraudulent making of
cloth, and the pieces exported were open to the usual complaints
ot uneven weaving, excessive stretching, and deceitful finishing.
In about 1604 3 the Hutch placed an embargo on faulty English
cloths, and thirty years later a writer from Delft declared that
'the Dutch merchants avoid the buying of [English] cloths,
finding them now worse made and yet as faulty as before,
whereby our English cloth grows more and more in disgrace,
and causeth the 1 Hitch to go on with more courage in the making
ot cloth '. In 1635 the London merchants trading with France
lamented that ' the ffrenche, (who are very prone uppon the

liner ; l>v long continuance of the clothing trade they make them very good

and substantial, whereas ours are made thin and faulty . . . (therefore) they
outsell us, thanks to this and the impositions which the States have put on
our 1 loths, i.e. us. on all white cloths of /16 and under, 40s. on all £16-24,
and £2 13*. 4'/- on all above £'24, . . . from which impositions their own cloth-
are free '. ' Add. MSS. 343-4. i- -°3-

- Coke MSS., i. 405 (1632). 3 Cotton MSS., Galba E, i. 284-6.

IsJO.12 ()

194 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

least occasion to interrupt the trade of the English and to
villifie their manufactures) . . . doe daylie complayne of the
badness of the English draperie ', especially of the Welsh and
northern cottons and other coarse northern cloths which found
their chief markets in France, but which were now being made
so ' vicious ' that the French had begun to return them to the
exporters, ' desiring a reformacion '} Two years later the
Government of Poland issued an edict prohibiting the vent of
strained cloths, and went a step further by permitting only
those pieces to be imported which were of sizes different from
those fixed by the English cloth statutes.2 In 1652 the Senate
of Hamburg sent a representative to the English Government
to complain of the ' abuses wch are in the makeing of the English
cloaths'.3 The reputation of English pieces abroad was appar-
ently bad, and may have helped considerably to bring about
these serious trade depressions.

The remedies recommended by the Commission of 1622 and
later inquiries followed the main principles of the mercantilist
theories, which were in almost general acceptance at that time.
Forbid the exportation of wool and fuller's earth, and establish
a coastal police to prevent smuggling ; take precautions ' that
no coyne be carryed out of the realme ' ; abolish some of the
export dues, and curb the power of monopolistic organizations
such as the Merchant Adventurers, so that these societies may
not levy heavy tolls on non-members, or impede the expansion
of trade. These were the usual suggestions advanced for the
improvement of economic affairs. Then, having deprived our
rivals of their supplies of raw material, reorganize and strengthen
the machinery for ensuring a high quality of workmanship ;
simplify the cloth laws and administer them more thoroughly ; 4
then, ' all theis being duelie reformed there is great hope that
clothing will flourish again, which hath mayntained more when
clothing was goode and comodities cheape than all the trades
in this kingdom besides '.5

These varied suggestions occupied the attention of Stuart

1 D. S. P., Chas. I, cexciv. 93 (1635).

2 Eastland Merchants' petition, D. S. P., Chas. I, ccclxvi. 71.

3 Order Book, Interr., i. 66, p. 511. Order of Council of State, April 6, 1652.

4 Report of Commission, 1622, Stowe MSS. 554, f. 4;.
* Add. MSS. 34324, i.213.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 195

rulers from time to time, and we shall have cause in the next
chapter to observe how some of the recommendations were
carried out. For the present, however, we must continue our
survey of some of the chief events which influenced the York-
shire cloth industry up to the Restoration. Gradually the
stagnation of 1622 gave place to greater briskness in our home
and foreign trade, and for some years the cloth industry enjoyed
a period of comparative prosperity. But in 1630 the cries of
the decay of trade were renewed, and cloth-makers once more
plunged into depression, though happily not so keen as that of
eight years before.1 These years, 1630-1, were memorable,
however, because of the terrible plague which swept over York-
shire, and which helped to bring the cloth industry to a stand-
still. We are apt to underrate the frequency and the fierceness
of the epidemics which periodically ravaged some part of Europe.
We are well acquainted with the horrors of the Black Death,
the Great Plague of London, and the outbreak of cholera in the
early thirties of last century. But really these were only the
most important in a long series of plagues which visited this
country. There was a serious outbreak in Yorkshire in 1596-7.
The death-roll was heavy in Leeds, rising from an average of
162 for 1590-5 to 271 in 1596, and to 311 in the following
year.2 This pestilence passed northward and claimed heavy
toll at Richmond, Knaresborough, and other northern towns.
In 1610 there was another outbreak, the death-roll at Leeds
being increased by 50 per cent. ; and so terrible was the
mortality at Beverley that the register of St. Mary's Church
speaks of two score victims ' vat was shuffled into graves with-
out any reading over them V! Leeds suffered from further
visitations in 16174 and 1023, a famine in t he latter year helping
to swell the death-rate. The outbreak of 1631 was national in
its scope, and even embraced most parts of Western Europe.
London, Birmingham, Leicester, and Nottingham all suffered
from ' the sickness ', and so great was the distress in Cambridge
that the mayor and the heads of the various colleges petitioned

1 See IK S. /'. for those vcars, passim.

- Figures of births, marriages, and deaths in Leeds : Thoresbv MSS.
(Thoresby Soc. Library, Leeds).

1 Cook, Hist. Xotes on Beverley (1880), p. S.
4 Death Roll : 1615, iq; ; 1617, 520.

o z

196 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

the King for leave to employ part of their moneys for the relief
of the poor. The progress of this pestilence in the clothing
district of Yorkshire is vividly depicted in a long letter written
by Wentworth, who was at that time President of the Council
of the North.1

' True itt is (that leauing our neighboures of Lancishire and
Lincolnshire miserably distressed with the pestilence), that
now w,hin thes sixe weekes the infection is cum'd to ourselues
in diuers partts of this county, and last of all into this Citty
[York]. Upon the Edge of Lancishire ther is the toune of
Heptonstall, wch hath neare forty howses infected. Mirfeild,
a little toune not farre of itt, hath lost ninescore persons, and
both thes tounes wthin four miles of Halifax, wch yett, God be
praysed, stands sownde, but much indangered, by reason of the
great number of people and lardge trade of clothing there-
aboutes. It is likwise in the tow tounes of Beeston and Holbecke
wch are wthin one mile of Leedes, and if it should please God to
visit either of thos greate townes Hallifax or Leedes, wch tow
allone trade more then all the cuntry besides, in good faithe it
would mightily distresse and impouerishe all that side of the
cuntrye.'

In similar fashion other parts of the county had been attacked,
and eventually York itself was stricken, in spite of the pre-
cautions taken by Wentworth.

Leeds escaped the pestilence of this year, but 1635 and 1637
were marked by abnormally high rates of mortality, whilst in
1640 and 1641 2 a similar outbreak seized upon the whole of
the West Riding. Leeds, Bradford, and Halifax, all were swept
by pestilence, and in January 1641 the justices of the peace in
their Quarter Sessions at Wakefield declared ' that by occasion
of the heavye visitation with \vc itt hath pleased God to visitt
the inhabitaunts of Dewesbury [several months before] the
same contagion still continueinge in some particular places
there, the trade and commerce of those inhabitaunts are soe
muche decayed and the poor soe exceedinglie encreased . . .
that about two hundreth seaventie and odd persons . . . are to
receive weekely allowance and relief '.3 The justices had already

1 D. S. P., Chas. I, cc. 14.

2 Thoresby MSS. Death-roll for parish of Leeds : 1634, 406 ; 1635, 615 ;
1636, 479 ; 1637, 516 ; 1638, 398 ; 1O40, 561.

3 Quarter Sessions Records, January 14, 1641, Wakefield ; Order Book A,
145 cf.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 197

charged the inhabitants within five miles of Dewsbury with one
contribution for the relief of the sufferers, and they now ordered
£100 to be raised throughout the Riding ; but when the collectors
attempted to obtain this money they met with sullen and
stubborn refusals, for most other districts were in similar plight,
and needed the money for their own suffering and poor.1

Meanwhile the clothiers of the kersey-making area had been
compelled to make another stand in defence of their ancient
customs. After the legal decision of 1613 peace had reigned
between the ulnager and the clothier, and during the subsequent
years, in spite of plagues and depressions, some industrial pro-
gress had been registered. The number of clothiers had increased,
especially in the Aire valley, and one witness in the 1638 lawsuit
declared that ' in the towne of Shipley, and places adjoyning
[i. e. Keighley, Bingley, and Bradford] there are now about an
hundred clothiers for one that was in these Townes ' about
thirty years before. Keighley had become famous for a certain
kind of cloth known as Keighley kerseys or ' whites ' ; the
parishes of Bradford, Bingley, and Shipley were said to contain
10,000 persons engaged in cloth-making, and the parish of Halifax
alone claimed no less than 12,000 textile workers.

Further, a change had conic over the nature of the wares
which were being produced. In 1613 large numbers of ' broad-
list kerseys ' were being made. These were cloths 14 to 17 yards
long, and less than a yard in width, with a very broad list, or
waste edge, which sometimes amounted to one-fifth or one-sixth
of the whole cloth. These pieces were of inferior quality ; they
were often excessively tentered and deceitfully finished, and
were therefore very cheap, selling at 1.9. to i.s\ (id. per yard.
Such pieces had found a market in Holland, Germany, and
Poland, being sold there by the Adventurers or the Eastland
Merchants, but between 1613 and 1 638 there was a heavy fall
in the demand for ' broad lists '. This was due- partly to a rise
in the price of wool, and to the heavv customs and other imposts,
which in proportion to value weighed most heavily on the
cheaper cloths. At the same time the defective manufacture of
t'lc pieces brought them into bad repute abroad, and thus
a witne-s declared in 1038 that ' verv few have been vented
1 Iliid., May .;, i<>|i, Pontefract ; sec a No is.pl and 107.

198 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

[abroad] these late yeares, by reason of the basenes and ill-
making thereof. This witness hath heard by the people in the
Country of Silesia that by reason of the badness of the said
kerseis which were then vented, they took upon them to make
kerseis in those countries like in length and bredth ' to the
' broad lists ' formerly imported from the West Riding.1 Further,
the merchants were beginning to find that cloths of ' nientien
and twentie yeards are more vendible and desired in forreigne
partes than those of eightiene ', and that they found a more
ready and a more profitable sale for long pieces than for short
cloths. Hence the very cheap cloth of short length, the broad
list kersey, quickly disappeared. It succumbed because of its
evil repute, because of the competition of the cheapest cloths
made abroad, and because of the enterprise of merchants in
pushing the sale of longer pieces of better quality. Some young
merchants, giving evidence in 1638, had never dealt in ' broad
lists ', so quickly and completely had the demand for this cloth
disappeared. In its place kerseys of all lengths up to 30 yards
were being manufactured. The most popular pieces were from
18 to 23 yards, though merchants occasionally gave orders for
cloths up to 30 yards. The cloths were of greater lengths ;
they were also of better quality and finer workmanship. There
seems to have been considerable improvement in this respect
since the contest of 1613, and many witnesses in 1638 agreed
that the kerseys, although now made of inferior wool, were
' both finer, better made, and of greater value and price than
the said kersies were ' a quarter of a century before.2 Thus, on
the whole, Yorkshire kerseys had increased in variety, in length,
in quality, and in value.

And yet they were only paying a penny each for subsidy
and ulnage ! This was bound, sooner or later, to bring about
another conflict between the clothiers and those interested in
the collection of the cloth fees, and the legal battle took up the
years 1637 8. At this time the control of the ulnage for the
West Riding was in the hands of Thomas Metcalfe of Leeds,

1 Evidence of Wm. Busfield of Leeds ; Exch. Dep. by Comm., 14 Chas. I,
Mich., no. 20, York.

2 In 161 3, average price for Halifax kersey is. $d. to 2s. per yard. In
1638 the cheapest valued at is. iod. ; others sold at 25. bd. to 4s. 6d. per yard.
Even Kcighley kerseys, 18 yards in length, sold at 25. to 2s. 6d. per yard.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 199

described as a gentleman of great estate, but also a merchant
who carried on foreign trade in the very wares over which the
dispute arose. Metcalfe was assisted by a number of deputies,
who lived in the various villages and towns, distributing the
seals and collecting the pence. These deputies carried on some
other occupation, and did the ulnage work as an additional
means of livelihood. Some were yeomen, and might be actually
engaged in making cloth ; others were inn-keepers or shop-
keepers, or persons of other employments who possessed a little
spare time to devote to these duties in return for the two, three,
or four pounds which Metcalfe paid them. These ' deputyes
did repayre to the clothiers' houses upon notice given, and
there seal their karseis ', though, if the clothier wished, he might
go down to the deputy's house and there purchase as many
seals as he required, paying the customary penny for each.

The relations betw'een Metcalfe and the kersey-makers were
harmonious until October 1636, but in that year the former
decided to raise the fee to i\d., since the cloths were now much
too large to be allowed to escape any longer on payment of id.
He therefore instructed his three chief assistants, Thomas
Walker, Christopher Scaife, and John Crabtree, to demand an
extra \d. per kersey from the clothiers, and these men were so
successful in their threats and cajoleries that they were said to
have wrung an additional £100 out of the clothiers of the four
parishes in a short space of time.

Four men stood out in sturdy opposition, and refused to pay
the extra toll. These men were Thomas Lister, Robert Hall,
Janus Robinson, and Nathan Drake, clothiers who lived in or
near Halifax, and who bore the brunt of the fighting. Lister,
Hall, and Drake already had several cloths sealed on the penny
basis of payment ; these were packed up ready for carriage to
London when the ulnage officials came and demanded an
additional halfpenny on each cloth. They were met by a refusal,
and the clothiers proceeded to dispatch the pieces on the backs
• it pack-horses, escorted by two carriers, to the metropolis.
The deputies decided to follow the carriers, and seize the goods
en route. They therefore made their way southwards, and
overtook the loaded train of pack-horses at Wombwell, where
the carriers were resting tor the night, at the end of the first

200 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

day's journey. Here the horses were stabled, the packs stored
away, and the carriers retired for the night. At three o'clock
in the morning (October 20) they were awakened by noises
outside, and on making investigations found the three deputies
busily engaged in tearing open the packages of cloth. The two
carriers rushed out and defended their charges with success,
but the deputies had already opened some of the packs, and had
scattered the cloths about in the yard of the inn, so that they
were ' much spoiled and made unfitt for sale '. Scaife, perceiving
that the carriers were making a strong resistance, fetched the
constable of Wombwell, and, by reason of their official status,
the deputies had the carriers arrested, taking the packs, con-
taining thirty-three kerseys, into their own possession. On
November 5, 1636, a similar raid was made on the wares of
James Robinson, another Halifax clothier. Robinson had
dispatched a pack of ten cloths to York. All these pieces bore
ulnage seals, for which Robinson had paid a penny but had
refused to pay the additional halfpenny. The deputies therefore
determined to seize the offending cloths, and just as the carrier
was bringing the load over Kirkstall Bridge, near Leeds, his
horse was seized, led to a house near by, and Robinson's goods
were confiscated.

In making these seizures, the deputies felt somewhat dubious
about the rights of their case, and they therefore reinforced their
position by pointing out that not only ought: the kerseys to pay
three-halfpence, but also that, being 20 to 21 yards in length,
they were above the legal maximum of 18 yards allowed to
kerseys by the Act of 1623. l This Act, still nominally in force,
was in actual practice a dead letter, and few Yorkshire kerseys
were less than 18 yards in length. Nevertheless, for want of
some better justification, the deputies were ready to invoke the
assistance of an obsolete law, and to declare that their seizures
were made in the interests of the majesty of law and the purity
of industrial life.

The four clothiers did not agree with these contentions. They
stated that as their goods were all properly sealed the action
of the deputies was entirely unwarranted, and they complained
that by reason of the confiscation of the goods they had 'lost

1 Statute 21 J.is. I, e. IS.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 201

the benefitt of their market, and will be putt to great charges
and expences in getting ye same againe, and their said karseis,
with opening and throwing in ye dust, are much spoiled and
made unfitt for sale '. They therefore instituted proceedings
against Metcalfe antl his subordinates, and the case was opened
in the Court of Exchequer in 1637.

In their bill of complaint,1 the Halifax men indulge in the
customary eulogy concerning the industrial activity of their
district, ' by meanes of which trade and of godly and true
religion there professed and embraced, manie thousand of his
Ma",s subjects are nourished and exercised in godly labour,
manie poore people and theire families honestly mainteyned
and vertuously brought up, a great number of impotent and
aged persons relieved, manie godly Preachers mainteyned, and
his Ma,,es Revenues much encreased '. There is boasting con-
cerning the 22,000 persons engaged in the four parishes in
cloth-making, the £40 per month distributed to the Halifax
poor, the ten additional preachers maintained, and the claim
that ' by the speciall grace of God there is not one Popish
Recusant inhabiting in the great and populous parish ' of
Halifax. The clothiers also state that the cloths exported from
the four parishes furnish the Customs officials with over £6,000
per annum, and as eleven kerseys paid about £1 for customs
dues, the export of kerseys must have been between 60,000 and
70,000 each year. All this, declare the clothiers, is effected ' by
the travel] and industry of the people dwelling there, the places
which they inhabit t being soe mountainous and rough, soe
barren and unfruitful! as it will not suffice to yield victualls
tor the third part of the inhabitants, and the poor that spin the
wooll there, though they work very harde, cannot gaine for
theire laboure fowre pence a day towards their livinge '. The
plaintiffs then complain of the illegal impositions and infamous
practices of which the deputies have been guilty, namely the
extortion of the additional halfpenny, the seizure of the cloths,
and the refusal ol the deputies to come to the clothiers' houses
when sent for; 'by means whereof yor ()rato's and other ve

1 Kxch. Rills ami Answers, Mich., 14 ('has. I, York, no. 4S5. The whole
ot the documents relating to this case have been transcribed bv Mr. | . Lister,
who kindly placed them at the writer's disposal.

202 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

Clothiers aforesaid have been much impoverished and hindred,
and the trade of clothing much decayed in theis parts and
a great sort of people undone and forced to live unproffitably
for wante of worke, to ye great hurt of ye weeale publique and
his Maties subjects in those parts, and to ye great diminucion
and impairing of his Maties customs and duties for exportacion
of Northern kersies into forraigne countries '. Finally, as if the
above pleadings are not sufficient, the plaintiffs conclude with
a grim and almost pathetic picture, which might do credit to
any modern book on poverty. They point out that the levy
of the additional halfpenny would produce £200 per annum,
and ' ye greatest waight of ye said exaccion will fall uppon very
poor people y1 are sore oppressed with ye same, who making
every week a coarse kersie, and being compelled to sell ye same
at ye week-end, and with ye money receaved for ye same to
provide both stuffe wherewith to make another ye weeke follow-
ing, and also ye victualls to susteyne themselves and their
familyes till another be made and sold, by which means ye said
poor and distressed people, making hard shifts with continual
labour to preserve themselves, their wives and children from
begging, are nevertheless constrained out of their necessities to
yeild and contribute every week one halfpenny a peece more
than is due '}

The procedure was similar to that of the suit of 1613. Com-
missioners sat at Halifax and Leeds, and here hosts of witnesses
were called to answer the long series of questions put before
them. Young men and old, clothiers from the parishes, drapers,
chapmen, merchants of Leeds, aldermen of York and Customs
House clerks from Hull, all gave their evidence. All bore
testimony to the increase in the length of cloths, but all were
equally emphatic on the recognition of the custom of paying
only one penny for subsidy and ulnage.2 Metcalfe eventually
recognized the hopelessness of his case, and therefore, ' after he
had spent a greate deale of money, did desist the suite and
accept of a penny scale \3 For the second time the ' penny
custom ' triumphed, the force of an old-standing usage out-

1 Exch. Bills and Answers, Mich., 14 Chas. I, 485.

2 Exch. Dep. by Connn., Mich., 14 ('has. T, York, 20-1.

;l I he actual verdict is missing, hut this quotation conies from the suit
of 1670 : Exch. Dep. by Comm., 28 Chas. II, Mich. 29 (York ; Lancaster).

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 203

weighing considerations of changed circumstances. But the
matter was not finally settled even then, for in 1676 the whole
dispute was raised once more. The actors were different, but
the plot was the same. The verdict was also the same as in
the two previous suits, but there was occasional trouble between
the ulnage officials and the clothiers1 until the ulnage expired,
early in the eighteenth century.

The evidence presented by the witnesses in 1638 enables us to
get many interesting side-glances at the character of industrial
life during this period. There are many varieties of people
engaged in the manufacture and sale of cloth, and though there
is no rigid stratification it is possible to classify the Stuart textile
workers into the divisions which were studied in Chapter III.
There was the small clothier making one piece weekly, and \
living from hand to mouth ; the yeoman, who combined agri-
culture and industry, either making cloth, or finishing it, or
both ; the large clothier, with his flock of spinners and weavers,
and with apprentices learning their trade under his care. These
large clothiers often bought pieces from the small men of the
first class, and sold them along with the cloths of their own
manufacture to London or Yorkshire merchants. The great
merchants of York and Hull now drew their supplies of cloth
for export, not from the looms of York or Beverley, but from
the West Riding generally, whilst Leeds merchants, chiefly
young men,'- formed a large proportion of the witnesses in the
lawsuit. The dealings in cloth were carried on in two ways :
cither in open markets and fairs, or according to orders given
by the traders to the clothiers. To the cloth markets of Leeds,
Halifax, and Wakefield the clothiers brought their goods once

1 There was a case concerning the sale of ulnage seals in 2— 3 fas. II. Hil.
(York; Lancaster). The Yorkshire suit of ih^S was followed in 1O40 by one
almost identical to it in Lancashire (l>. S. /'., C/ius. /, cccclxxv. 01). Here
the complaint was that the ulnager ' hath by manv indirect practices endeav-
oured to extract fair greater fees, and from sonic hath by threats obtayned
his desyre, and to others hath denyed the scale to make them subject to
seizure and forfevture, and instituting Kxchequer proceedings, bv which
grievance our trade of Clothynge is like to be ovcrthrowne, and our poor
people to perish for want of emplovment '.

' e.g. the following I. ceils merchants: Win. Rustield ol 1. ceils, merchant,
aged ho; Richard Lodge of Leeds, merchant, j>S vears ; [ohn Haines, of
Leeds, merchant, jh years ; Win. Svkes, Leeds, chapman, > , years ; Michael
Lister, Leeds, woollen draper. 50 years; Win. Lodge, Leeds, chapman,
.' S years.

204 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

or twice a week, or sent cargoes to Blackwell Hall and Bartholo-
mew Fair. Here the cloths were sold either directly to the
merchants, cloth dressers, and dyers, or, as was often the case,
to a middleman. This middleman, factor, or chapman, occupied
an important position in the mercantile world of this period ;
and his chief business was the purchase of cloth on commission/
for absentee merchants. To give one instance of the middle-
man's methods : a certain chapman, giving evidence, declared
that he bought Keighley kerseys, half-fixed, mingle-coloured,
and ordinary kerseys, from clothiers in Wakefield market ;
then taking these wares to York, he sold them to merchants for
exportation.1 Or secondly, cloths might be made to the order
of the merchant. If the merchant required only the standard
types of cloth he could satisfy his needs through the ordinary
open markets ; but if he desired to obtain some special quality,
or some cloth of more than ordinary length (30 yards, for in-
stance), he ordered it from some clothier. Also, in many cases,
merchants developed permanent connexions with particular
clothiers, who therefore made their goods with the intention of
selling them privately to one or two merchants.

During the years between the suits of 1613 and 1638 there
had been considerable developments in the use of credit. The
price of cloth was higher at the later date than in 1613, and
witnesses explained this partly by the improvement in the
quality, partly by the rise in the price of wool, and partly by
the expansion in the scope of credit dealings. One witness
summed up the situation when he declared that ' what he sells
dearer now, he gives far longer time for payment for them than
he did for those he sold a little cheaper of like making and
substance thirty years ago ', and another dealer stated that
' the clothiers give to the Marchaunts and the Chapman longer
tyme with payment '. In most cases a partial payment was
made, and a period of six months allowed lor the payment of
the remainder ; one man who sold kerseys for about 43s. received
on delivery all above 305., and gave ' six monthes tyme usually
for the payment of the rest '. As such a. system came into
general use, the need for the chapman became more pressing.
The small clothiers, making one kersey a week, could not afford

1 John Dickson, of Shipley (Kxch. Dep., T4 Chas. 1, Midi., 20-1 York).

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 205

to wait six months for payment. They needed to be paid on
the delivery of the piece, in order to be able to buy wool and
victuals for the forthcoming week. Hence, they must sell their
pieces to a man who was willing to trade on cash terms, a man
with some spare capital, who could afford to wait for his returns.
The chapman was the man who filled this position.

In the making of kerseys, the supply of wool was a pressing
problem for the clothiers. They had been accustomed to using
the higher qualities of northern wool, and also the fleeces of
Lincolnshire and Leicestershire. In the thirties, however,
there had been a heavy demand for the wool of these two
counties, since southern clothiers were now using larger supplies
of wool from these sources. This had been partially instru-
mental in causing an increase in the price of Lincolnshire wool.
From <S.s\ or 95. per stone in 1610 it had risen to 14s. in 1638, 1
but there had been no improvement in the quality of the material.
Yorkshire makers of cheap cloths were compelled therefore to
supplement their supplies of Lincolnshire wool by drawing upon
the cheaper grades from Ireland, Scotland, and other parts.
This would have caused the production of an inferior quality
of cloth, had not the clothiers paid attention to the improve-
ment of their methods. This raising of the standard of work
in sorting, carding, spinning, &c, had been very considerable,
and nearly all the witnesses agreed that the cloths of 1638
were better than the fabrics of 1613, because of the liner work-
manship.

The discussion on the wool supplv led many witnesses to
a comparison of the relative merits of Yorkshire cloths and
those manufactured in other clothing areas. All admitted that
the Yorkshire fabrics were inferior in quality to those of East
Anglia and the West of England, although ' the wolles of Lincoln-
shire .uid Leicestershire are ;is fyne wolles as the wolles of Kent,
Essex, Suffolke, Norfolke, Cambridgshire, and Huntingdon-
shire '. The wools of Wiltshire were no better than those of
the northern parts, and yet Wiltshire pieces sold at much higher
prices than the Yorkshire woollen goods. The greatest contrast,
however, came in comparing the cloths made in different parts

1 This increase was also partly due to the general rise in prices which was
going on throughout the period.

206 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

from the same wool. The clothiers of Suffolk and the West of
England were using large quantities of Lincoln and Leicester
wool. The cloths which they made from this raw material sold
at the rate of 125., 205., and in some cases 265. a yard, whilst
the Yorkshire fabrics made of wool from the same sources only
commanded 35. or 45. This superiority of the south was ex- ^
plained as being due to ' the Industry and Skilfulnes of the
Manufactor thereabouts. On this point some witnesses gave
greater detail. One declared that ' he conceaveth the good
sortinge of wolles in the Southern partes is the reason why the J
clothiers in the South partes doe make their cloathes fyner and
of greater values by much than the Northern kerseys and
cloathes are made of, though the wolles be alike in fynenes
from the sheepe '. Another witness stated that the contrast
was due ' to the good dying of the Southerne cloathes, the skill
of the manufactors, and the carefull sorteinge of their wolles,
but he holdeth the principall reason to be the well-sorteinge of
their wolles ', and a third witness concluded with the optimistic
assertion that ' if the clothiers in Yorkshire would as well sever-
ally and carefully sorte theire woolls as the cloathiers in Wilt-
shire doe, the same might be made as good cloathes as the
cloathes in Wiltshire are ordinarily '. Evidently the West
Country clothiers had developed their processes to a high level
of perfection, and had built up the reputation for high-class
work which they retain to this day. The reason may have been
that the industry in those parts was more capitalized than its
northern rival, and was therefore more highly organized and
carried on with a greater degree of division of labour. It may
have been that the Yorkshire clothiers were content to keep to
their lower qualities of fabrics, and did not deem it worth while
to raise their industrial methods to a high state ot efficiency.
But whatever the cause, it is evident that the Yorkshire manu-
facturing processes were still inferior to those of other counties,
and that the produce in consequence could not bid for a place
in the high-class textile markets of Europe.

In the conflict with the ulnagers, the clothiers had been
completely successful, but they were soon to be faced with
another danger, beside which all previous troubles sank into
insignificance. The relations between Charles I and his Parlia-

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 207

ment were now growing very strained, and the Civil \V;ir was
shortly to be a grim reality throughout the land. On January i,
1642, Charles attempted to arrest the five members ; on April 23
he was refused admission to Hull, and finally, after a short
sojourn at York, he set up his standard at Nottingham, on
August 22. * The political tension had begun to exert an un-
toward influence on trade months before the actual outbreak
of hostilities, and in April 1642 the clothiers of ' the Parish of
Leeds, the Vicaridge of Halifax and other partes adjoyning '
presented an account of their grievances to the King. In their
petition the clothiers complained of the various ' illega.ll pres-
sures and impositions ', and then went on to state that they had
been ' diversely vexed and grieved with Sealings, Searchings
and the like devices most rigorously executed by promoters and
other officers, ... by which means not onely considerable sommes
of money have been screwed out of your Petitioners' purses,
but also divers <>f the meaner sort have beene utterly disabled
t«> mannage theire trades, their stockes being exhausted by those
crafty inventions '. With the assembling of Parliament in 1640,
the clothiers had hoped for redress of these grievances, but with
the quarrel between King and Parliament all their ' hopes of
reliefe and justice have become over-clouded by hopeless
despaire, . . . especially because merchants, fearing what evill
event may ensue upon these distractions, do not take up . . .
Cloth as they used to doe '. Hence stocks lay dead in the hands
of the clothiers, ' and many thousands of poore people, who
onely subsist by spinning and cardinge of . . . woolles, are like
to be brought to suddaine want, for want of worke '. The
clothiers there! ore besought the King to take steps to restore
freedom and security to the merchants, such as would allow
them ' to goe on comfortably in their vocations '. Charles
replied by protesting that the political troubles were not of
his seeking, and promised to bestow upon the clothiers any
favours which they could 'in Reason or Justice ask, or lice
graunt '.'-

Such promises were as vague as they were plentiful, and the
lot ot the clothiers went from bad to worse. July came round,

' Ransome and Acland, Handbook of English Political History, p. 95.
-' Brit. Mus., E. 144 (6). Printed copy of petition.

208 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

and with it the time for the midsummer shipment of cloth from
Hull to the Continent. But Hull was in the hands of Sir John
Hotham, who had defied Charles in April, and who now refused
to allow a ship, laden with cloth, to sail, declaring that he could
not spare any men from the town.1 This prevented the York-
shire pieces from reaching the market at Hamburg, and reacted
disastrously upon merchants and makers alike.

At the outbreak of the war, Yorkshire was divided in its
allegiance. The King's party predominated in the agricultural
districts and amongst the gentry. York was a royalist strong-
hold, and the King's supporters also held the castles of Scar-
borough, Pontefract, Knaresborough, Tickhill, <&c. 2 Only in
Hull and the manufacturing areas of the West Riding was the
Parliamentary cause in favour, and here, to quote Clarendon,3
' Leeds, Halifax and Bradford, three very populous and rich
towns, depending wholly upon clothiers, naturally maligned the
gentry,' ranging themselves under the command of Lord Fairfax
and Sir Thomas, his son. When hostilities commenced, however,
Leeds and Wakefield were actually in the hands of Royalist
troops, whilst Bradford and Halifax were garrisoned in the
Parliamentary interest. Such an arrangement was fatal to any
continuance of trade, for these four towns were most intimately
connected. Wakefield was a large market for kerseys and
wool, Leeds was a finishing centre and the home of many
merchants. Further, Wakefield blocked the road to the London
markets, and could prevent cloth from going south and wool
from coming north. Leeds was on the highway between the
cloth area and York, and controlled the road along which food
supplies came into the West Riding. Some rearrangement of
forces was very necessary before any trade could be revived,
especially after the Royalist attempt to capture Bradford on
December 18, 1642. The clothiers of Bradford and Halifax
began to urge their leader, Sir Thomas Fairfax, to some decisive
action, and on January 9, 1043, Fairfax wrote to his father,
' These parts grow very impatient of our delay in beating [the
Royalists] out of Leeds and Bradford, for by them all trade

1 Hist. MSS. Comm., House of Lords Cal., v. 38. Petition of West Riding
clothiers. 2 See general histories of Yorkshire.

:J Clarendon's History of the Great Rebellion, Clarendon Press edition, vol. ii,
p. 4O4.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 209

and provisions are stopped, so that the people in these clothing
towns arc not able to subsist, and indeed so pressing are these
wants [that] some have told me if I would not stir with them,
they must rise of necessity of themselves'.1 A fortnight later,
January 23, Fairfax took the offensive, and seized Leeds, an
event which ' did strike such terror into the Earl of Newcastle's
army that the severall garrisons of Wakefield, Sherburn, and
Pontefract lied all the way presently, before any assaulted
them '.'- The clothing district was thus entirely in the hands of
the Parliamentary forces ; but the victory was short-lived, for
Fairfax had only a small army, and after the victory of New-
castle at Atherton Moor (June 30) Royalist troops captured
the clothing towns, and held them until larger Parliamentary
forces entered Yorkshire, smashed up the King's supporters at
Marston Moor (July 1044), and drove the Royalists out of the
county.

After Marston Moor the Civil War was practically at an end
so far as Yorkshire was concerned, but those twenty months of
hard lighting (December 1642 to July 1644) had brought the
most terrible sufferings upon the clothing population. Leeds
and Bradford, bombarded and captured time after time, were
damaged the most severely. At Bradford the tower of the
church was used as a centre of defence, and was fortified by
being covered with sheets and packs of wool, the property of
the clothiers. Joseph Lister describes it, in his account of the
Royalist attack after Adwalton Moor, as follows: 'We took
every precaution and again hung sheets of wool on that side
[of the tower] facing the [Royalist] battery. They presently
began to play their cannon upon us with the greatest fury and
indignation possible, so that their shot cut the cords whereon
the sheets of wool were hung, and down they fell, which the
enemy, immediately perceiving, loudly huzzaed at their fall.'3
When the Royalist troops entered the place they ransacked it,
took everything of value which they could lay hands upon,
burnt down houses, ruthlessly destroyed property, confiscated
cattle and live stock, and generally wreaked their vengeance on

1 Bell's Memorials of Civil War, i. 33, quoted in Yorks. Arch, and Topogr.
Journal, i. qi.

-' Kxti.u :t from Fairfax's letter, emoted by Miss Law, The Story of Bradford ,

p. 104. :' Ibid., p. 107.

1=520.12 p

210 SOME MILESTONES IN chap-

the little town which had made such a sturdy resistance.1 Brad-
ford paid heavily for those years of strife, not only in property
and industry, but also in lives. The entries in the parish register 2
indicate the extent of that misfortune :

Year.

Baptisms.

Marriages.

Deaths.

1639

209

183

1659

113

117

1739

182

134

The town had never been so important as Leeds, Halifax, or
Wakefield in the output of cloth, and petitions from the West
Riding cloth-makers of the early seventeenth century always
mention these three towns, but never speak of Bradford. Now,
after the sufferings of the Civil War, its trade in woollen cloths
declined and became practically negligible. Later it arose from
its ashes in the eighteenth century, not as a woollen, but as a
worsted centre. Even in 1739 the above figures seem to indicate
that the population of the town was smaller than that of a century
before.

The plight of Leeds was scarcely less pitiable. Held by the

1 When some semblance of peace had been restored, Bradford clothiers
began to petition the Commons for relief from the burdens which they had
borne for the Parliamentary cause. They speak of houses burnt down,
of woolsacks employed as defences against the enemy's cannon, of goods
plundered and spoilt, of wives and children starving, and of themselves
bankrupt and in despair. If not actually engaged in fighting, the town was
being called upon periodically to raise money for the maintenance of troops,
and to supply men. Witness the following documents coming from the pens
of Bradford men after the war : (1) To Fairfax : ' The humble petition of
the Inhabitantes of the Towne of Bradford. Whereas there is charged and
ymposed vpon our Towne, by one warrant lately from your hono1-3 for a daily
Assessc to the value of 25s. and oood. per diem, And wee have bene putt to
200 and 50 lbs. charges in Billitting of Souldiers man and horse for these
10 dayes last past. Wee humbly beseech yo1' hono'* That you would bee
pleased to take it into Consideracion, and to consider of our former Annoy-
ance, and what wee have suffered. And that yo1' Hono''' would be pleased
to release us of this daily Assesse (for God knowes) wee cannot gather itt
of our poore neighbors in regarde of their poorc and weake estate (in rcgardt
Tradeing failes) ' (Add. MSS. 36996, f. 58. See also Hist. MSS. Cmnm.,
House of Lords, Report vi. 193). (2) The Petition of Isaac Klleston of Bradford,
clothier, states that he was a supporter of the Parliamentary cause, for which
he lost the whole of his goods, value £130, when Bradford was captured by
Newcastle. His only son was slain at Bristol, ' and yo" petitioner being an
aged man of 75 ycares and in great debt and past his labour, having nothing
left to preserve his life . . . Humbly beseeches your Highnes to take his sadd
and distressed condicion into your pious and serious consideracion ' (D. S. I'.,
Interr., lxxiii. 57 (1654).

2 James, History and Topography of Bradford, p. 144.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 211

Royalists, captured by Fairfax, recaptured by Newcastle, and
again taken by the Roundhead army, its loss of life and property
was very great. At the orders of Fairfax and ' for the greater
safety of the town ' many clothiers burnt their houses to the
ground and destroyed at the same time most of the implements
of their trade ; and in 1647 these men had still received no
compensation which would enable them to return to their
calling or provide new stock-in-trade.1 The mortality in the
parish rose from 523 in 1642 to 1,104 m ID43,2 though whether
this increase was due solely to deaths by fighting or to an out-
break of pestilence one cannot say. In the Riding generally,
the poor were in dire straits, for ' all trade and business was
interrupted and laid aside \3 The supplies of foodstuffs from
the Vale of York were never sure of reaching their destination,
and the heavy assessments and billetings drained the last few
pence out of the pockets of many. Then when the Royalists
were victorious for a short space of time, they ransacked towns
and villages, confiscating all they could lay hands upon. Large
numbers of the poor inhabitants fled to the solitudes of the
Pennines or across into Lancashire, where they succeeded in
getting some slight relief so long as their homes were in the hands
of the enemy.4

As for trade, it was either impossible or was carried on under
the greatest difficulties. When Marston Moor destroyed the
Royalist power in Yorkshire the county subsided into a statu
of comparative peace, and trade via York and Hull could be
carried on, though there were still the difficulties and dangers
of the high seas to be encountered. Hut internal commerce
between the north and the capital was fraught with much
greater insecurity, for here one had to carry goods through two
hundred miles of a country divided against itself. In a few
instances this traffic was actually continued witli success, as
in the ease of Thomas Priestley, a member of the famous family
which had its home at Soyland near Halifax. This family

1 Hist. MSS. Comin., vi. i<SS (b), July iy, 1^47.

- Thoresby's figures, in MSS. in Thoresby Soc. Library, Leeds.

:) Priestley Memoirs, Surtccs Soc. vol. lxxvii, p. jo.

4 Stewart MSS.. Hist. MSS. Comm., vol. x, pt. iv, p. 07, October u, 104;.
Peputy-Lieut. of Lancashire ordered that ' Yorkshire poor exiled from the
West Hiding and now residing in this county shall have relief out of the
sequestrations of Royalist property '.

P 2

212 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

ranged itself on the Parliamentary side, and paid heavily for
its devotion to that cause. Its house was plundered, and
members of the family were forced to seek refuge in Lancashire ;
the father died a prisoner in the hands of the enemy, and
one son died of fever whilst serving in the ranks. Thomas,
however, cared for none of these things. He escaped the war
fever, and continued his business as a chapman throughout the
whole period of the war. He bought cloths in the West Riding,
and journeyed to London with eight or nine pack-horses,
travelling in company with one or two other venturesome
spirits. Sometimes the party hired a convoy of armed men to
protect them on the journey ; at other times they travelled
without any protection. And yet Priestley ' was never taken,
he or his horses or goods, all that dangerous time '. He made
regular journeys up to London, and realized about £20 clear
profit on each trip.1 Such a man was exceptionally fortunate,
and many others who ventured to continue their commercial
dealings during the period of the war met with a very different
fate.

Scarcely was the sphere of military activity removed from
the West Riding when the coping stone was added to the arch-
way of misfortune which had been built over the lives of the
cloth-making population. This took the form of a further
outbreak of pestilence, which on this occasion eclipsed by its
severity the memories of all previous visitations.2 The cause
of the plague of 1645 is doubtful. It may have been due to the
usual lack of sanitary provisions, augmented by the after-effects
of the war. Whatever the cause, the pestilence swept down
upon the district with unparalleled severity. The outbreak
began in 1644 and lasted until the last months of 1645. It was
especially severe in Leeds, where from March 1645 to the follow-
ing December 1,325 persons died. During the hottest parts of
the summer as many as 130 persons a week succumbed to the
disease, and in all it is calculated that about one-fifth of the

1 Priestley Memoirs, Surtees Soc, vol. Ixxvii, pp. 18, 23, and 27.

2 The plague attacked most of the northern counties. I). S. I'., Clias. I,
vol. 506, p. 5<> (1644—5), savs : ' The sickness is much dispersed of late into
severall parts of the country, as Auckland, Darlington, and Wakefield. . . .
May God in his mercy turn away his judgement of the sword and pestilence
and keep us from the other great judgement of famine.'

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 213

population of Leeds was destroyed by the pestilence. According
to one chronicler, ' the air was so thick and warm and so in-
fectious that dogs and cats, mice and rats died ; also several
birds in their flight over the town dropped dead '-1 Life in the
town became unbearable, and there was a general exodus.
' There is scarce a man to be seen in the streets ', reported one
writer,- and all who could possibly get away from the town did
so, living in rough-and-ready cabins built on Woodhouse Moor,
or other open spaces around Leeds. The markets were trans-
ferred to Ilunslet Moor and Chapeltown Green, where corn, wool,
cloth, &c., were to be brought, but only those who held certificates
of freedom from infection might use these markets. The justices
of the peace made stringent orders for preventing the spread
of the disease. All woollen cloths and wool-packs were to be
scalded in hot water, or put in a running stream for two
days and then dried in the open air. Appeals for relief and
financial assistance were made to other parts of the county, and
the Corporation of York appointed several persons to ' make
a colleccion through the cittie for everie one to give towards
their releife what they shall thinke fitt, and the ministers to be
moved to invite them theirunto \:J In similar vein, the justices
of the West Riding commanded the towns and villages around
Leeds to contribute to the relief of the sufferers in the borough,4
but these parts needed the money for their own sick, since the
plague was scattered throughout the whole clothing area, and
not merely confined to its chief market centre. Wakefield lost
245 inhabitants in one year, victims of the pestilence, and
Pontefract, Aberford, and other places were stricken with ' the
sickness'.0 Only when the heat of summer gave place to
November's cold and fog was there any great decrease ' of ye
sicknesse which has ... of late overspreade the whole West-
ridinge ',6 and by that time the population of many a clothing

1 Sec Whitaker, Loidis and Elmcte (1816), i. 76. The task of recording
deaths was so heavy that it was eventually abandoned, and the figure r , j? j 5
was the number of deaths reported to the Governor-General of the town.

- ' As lor Leeds it is utterly spoilt ; there is scarce a man, \c.' (Graham
MSS., Hist. MSS. Gomm., vi. ;ju, July 10, 1045).

1 York House Books, xwvi, 1. [jHa, July i<>4;. A similar step was taken
at the request of the inhabitants of Bradford (House Books, xwvi. 154 a)

' Yorks. Arch, and Topogr. Journal, \v. 4^7 el seep

"• Graham MSS.. Hist. MSS. Gomm., vi. ;ju.

" Yorks. Arch, and Topogr. Journal, \v. p^4.

214 SOME MILESTONES IN chap.

community had been terribly thinned. The years from 1640 to

1650 were a dark decade in the annals of Leeds, Bradford,' and

Halifax, and the effect is briefly summarized in the following

vital statistics for the parish of Leeds :

Year. Births. Marriages. Deaths.

1640 557 157 56i

1650 345 69 345

Decrease 38% 55-5% 38"5 %

Or, if we take triennial averages, the fall between 1639-41 and
1649-51 amounted to

Births, 37 % ; Marriages, 62 % ; Deaths, 33 %.

Thus, taking the figures of births and deaths, we arc justified
in supposing that quite one-third of the population of Leeds
had been swept away in those ten years of sword and pestilence.

During the years of the Commonwealth Yorkshire was busy
attempting to recover from the exhaustion of the previous
decade, but there was little if any progress. In 1654 the Corpora-
tion of Leeds declared that ' tradeinge at present is beginninge
a little to revive ',* but there were many obstacles to be over-
come. The war with Holland and the prevalence of piracy
rendered the North Sea very dangerous to cloth ships, unless
well convoyed. But the Government was quite unable to
provide adequate, or even inadequate, protection, so that the
export trade suffered heavily, and, as the Leeds merchants
wrote to Adam Baynes, ' the countrie in gencrall did smart by
it, and eccho'd forth dolefull complaints '. Thus, at the end of
a period of constitutional chaos and economic blight, the
country poured out its complaint to Monk in 1659, when asking
for the restoration of a free Parliament in place of the parodies
of the Interregnum. Fairfax, the staunchest of Parliamentarians,
joined with ' the rest of the Lords, Knights, Esquires, Citizens,
Ministers and Freeholders of the County and City of York '
when they declared themselves to be ' deeply sensible of the
Confusions and Distractions of the Nation, the particular Decay
and Ruine of the Clothing Trade of this County, which neces-
sarily bears an influence upon the Publick '.- Another letter

1 Baynes Correspondence, xi. 224.

J Sec Cunningham, Growth, app. E, vol. ii, pp. 021-7.

vi THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 215

from York about the same time stated that the ' Trade of
Cloathing being dead . . . makes those Parts rise in abundance
to do anything for the having of a Free Parliament, which (they
think) will procure the opening of Trade again \1 There were
many who for political and religious reasons were bitterly
opposed to the Restoration, but the great majority of the
people were willing to submit to any change which might dispel
the clouds of depression in which industry and commerce had
been enveloped. The Commonwealth had been only common
woe for many, and the nation welcomed the return of Charles II
in the hope of a better time coming. Whet her or not these hopes
were realized we shall see in a later chapter.

It has seemed desirable to dwell at some length upon these
more gloomy aspects of the industry's development. Our con-
ception of progress often needs to be modified. We look at the
position of the woollen industry in the sixteenth century, and
then turn to the state of affairs of our own times. The differ-
ence is very marked, and we are apt to explain it as being the
result of constant and steady development, such as might be
expressed in a curve that mounts higher and higher as the years
go by, without any break in the continuity of its ascent. The
events narrated in this chapter will have proved the error of
such an idea, for they will have shown that industry fluctuated
as much and as frequently in the seventeenth century as in the
nineteenth. The woollen industry in 1660 was probably some
distance ahead of its position at the accession of James I, and
progress had actually been made. But that progress had been
checked and at times more than cancelled for a time. War,
pestilence, famine, and international polities had played their
part, and if the clothier or merchant now looked forward to
a period of peace and progress, he was quite warranted in hoping
lor such recompense after the years of stress and strain through
which he had just passed.

1 Leeds, February 13, n\;o. Brit. Mus. 100. K- 13.(317), quoted by Cun-
ningham, of>. n't., ii. <)jo.

CHAPTER VII

STUART EXPERIMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL REGULA-
TION—GILDS AND COMPANIES

In an earlier chapter we have considered the various attempts
which were made to regulate the cloth industry with a view
to maintaining a high standard of commodity. The gilds had
their ordinances and searchers, and when the industry spread
over the extra-urban areas the State drew up appropriate
legislation, and ordered the appointment of searchers, whose
duty it should be to detect fraudulent work and bring offenders
to justice. The last of a long series of acts was passed in 1623, 1
and fixed the lengths, breadths, and weights of the chief kinds of
cloth which were then made in England. The statute laid down
rules concerning the extent to which cloth could be stretched
in tentering, and gave detailed instructions as to the duties of
the searchers, the amount of the fines, and the objects to which
the fines were to be devoted. But in spite of laws and searchers
the evil still remained, and complaints about faulty cloth are to
be found throughout the early seventeenth century. The
searcher was often a clothier, or the friend of clothiers, and we
have at least one instance of a searcher who was also a clothier
taking advantage of his official position to have a tenter frame
of dimensions which were illegal according to the very laws he
was employed to enforce.2 Sometimes the searcher was an ale-
house-keeper, who would naturally do nothing to offend his
customers, and so, notwithstanding the presence of the searcher,
there were still ' many false clothyers who make bad and slight
cloth '.3

The difficulties of the searchers were enhanced by the flood of
' new draperies ' which had sprung up during the latter half of
the sixteenth century. These cloths were new varieties intro-

1 21 Jas. I, c. 18.

2 John Tottie of Wakefield, Clothier : ' being appoyntcd one of the searchers
of Wakefield did alter the size of his Tenter and made Hie (base thereof
bigger than was agreed and sett downe by hym and the residew of the Searchers
of Wakefield aforesaid' {West Hiding Sessions Rolls, Wakefield, i^fjS, ed. by
Lister, p. 133. See also Quarter Sessions Order Book, A, p. 132 (1640)).

3 D. S. ]'., Chus. I, ccccviii. 15.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIKS 217

duced partly by the refugees who came to England during the
period of religious upheaval on the Continent ; they were also
the result of English attempts to imitate foreign wares. There
were Bays, ' Stamells of fflorence sorte, Searge of ffrench sorte,
Sayes of the fflaunders sorte, Mockadowes of everie sorte, Carrell
ffustayn of Naples, Blanketts called Spanysh ruggs, etc' *
Thus, as May declared in 1613, ' there are many sorts of cloths
or stuffes lately invented, which have got newe godfathers to
name them in ffantasticall fashion that they which weare them
knowe not howc to name them V2 These cloths could evade the
legal stipulations by passing under some name for which there
was no provision in the current statute. True, they had been
brought under the scope of the ulnager's impositions in 1594,
and James I had given the ulnage of both new and old draperies
into the hands of the Duke of Lennox ; but the aim of the
ulnager was the collection of revenue rather than the propagation
of industrial ethics, and hence the searcher, unaided by the
ulnager, found himself baffled by the bewildering complexity
of the cloths to which he had to attend.

The failure of the searcher to meet the needs of the situation,
and the interested vigilance of certain classes of men, brought
about the demand for some better mode of regulating industrial
life. From many sides men preached that the immorality in
industry was due to the absence of organization, and to the
individual freedom which was allowed by the State. Repre-
sentatives of existing companies and corporations were always
ready to declare that the decay in trade was due to the existence
of interlopers and others outside their particular association.
The drapers of London explained the depression of 1622 as being
largely caused by the operations of inexperienced cloth-makers,
who sold the cloth either directly to the consumer or to hawkers
who carried it to the villages and towns throughout the country/1
Therefore, to remedy such evil, let the cloth be sold by drapers
alone, and let the arm of the I )rapers' Company be strengthened
accordingly. In a similar vein, May'1 declared that ' the
dispersing ot clothiers and makers is ;i principal! cause to breede
. . . detects ' in cloth, and urged that industry should be carried

1 Originalia Rolls, ?o l-'.liz.. July M. P' • ii i - ' May, op. at., p. ji.

' D. S. /'., Jas. /, i xxx. [40. ' May, op. tit., p. 26.

218 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

on only in towns. This idea of the necessity for bringing industry
more under the control of economic organizations became very
popular during the reign of James I and Charles I, and sugges-
tions for the institution of a number of corporations were
frequent. Since the local government official had proved
a failure, let a local trade association be formed to regulate and
maintain the standard of craftsmanship in that particular
trade. Such an association would represent the best industrial
interests of the district, and so, backed by local opinion, its
officials would be able to carry out their police work with greater
hope of success. The idea found favour with the Commission
which was chosen to report on the causes of the depression in
1622. This Commission, it will be remembered, condemned the
false making of cloth as being one of the causes of that ' stand
of trade '. In its recommendations it suggested

(1) The simplification of the laws concerning cloth, for ' the
lawes now in force concerning the makinge and dressinge of
cloth arc so many and by the multitude of them are so intricate
that it is very hard to resolve what the law is '. Also the issue
of ' playne rules and easy to be observed . . . for new draperies '.

(2) ' That a Corporation in every Countie be made of the most
able and sufficient men ... to look fullie to the trewe makeing,
dyeing, and dressing of cloth and stuffs . . . and not truste to
meane men '. These corporations were to have their searchers,
and the ulnager was not to place his seal on any cloth until it
had been ' searched, tryed, and proved by such as shalbe
appoynted '-1

Some writers were in favour of a corporation in which the
clothiers and merchants should be entirely self-governing; but
in most of the schemes the suggestion was that the organization
should be dual, containing representatives of the industrial and
commercial interests on the one hand, and representatives of
the Crown, such as justices of the peace or the Lord Lieutenant
of the county, on the other. Some urged that such societies
should be established in each of the clothing counties ; others
suggested the incorporation of the chief clothing towns, and the
granting of charters which would create municipal authorities
with considerable powers of control over the industry of the
1 stowc MSS. 5?4, f. 45.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 219

community. But though varied in detail, all these numerous
suggestions agreed upon one essential point, namely that the
regulation of industry must now be placed in the hands of local
organizations, in which the leaders of local economic life were
to find a place.1

Such recommendations, which had been in the air prior to
1622 and now became insistent, were partly responsible for the
marked revival of industrial association which took place about
this time. Old companies took on larger powers,2 and new
associations were established in various parts of the country.
In the cloth trade wc have already seen some of the York
companies striving to regain control over their particular
branches of industry. The suggestions outlined above were
receiving attention, and a scheme was drawn up for the establish-
ment of corporations in thirty-two counties, for the regulation
of the manufacture of the new draperies which were becoming
important during the seventeenth century. Only one county
(Hertfordshire) actually set up such a corporation, and the life
of the institution was short.3 The Government of Charles I
was too busily engaged in foreign affairs during the early years
of the reign, and hence the scheme for the erection of these
county associations remained a scheme. Wc shall see, however,
that the idea was not abandoned, but that an organization of
this character was instituted at a later date to supervise the
broad-cloth industry of the West Riding.

Though the proposal was put aside for the time being so far
as the counties were concerned, less ambitious suggestions were
acted upon. The establishment of corporations had been urged
for cities and towns as well as for counties, and it is in this

1 Sec, e. g. ' A rcdy course propounded for thcstablishment and certaine
Settlingc of the Manufacture of all mancr of draperies, cvx.' (Add. MSS.
34324, f. 201 (1622). Also Report of Commissioners of Trade (1640), in
Portland MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm., vol. viii, pp. 2-3.

- See Inwin, Industrial Organization during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth
Centuries. Also Cunningham, op. eit., ii. 303-6.

;1 Add. MSS. 34324, f. 2or. See also D. S. /'., Chas. I, i. 24 and 62. The
whole topic of these provincial corporations still remains to be worked at in
greater detail. The idea of an association controlling the industry of a wide
rural area was very strong during the seventeenth century, and many attempts
were made to put such an idea into practice. Mr. I'nwin's work is largely
confined to London. But much light still remains to be thrown upon the
nature- of these county organizations, as well as upon the actual work and
nature ot the companies which were still to be found in the provincial towns.

220 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

connexion that we turn to the story of the incorporation of
Leeds. Leeds was one of a number of towns in which clothing
corporations were set up, Bury St. Edmunds, Ipswich, and
Colchester being other centres to which similar attention was
given ; and it was out of this need for industrial regulation ^
that the Corporation of Leeds came into being. The preamble
to the first Leeds charter emphasizes the economic aspects of
the town's life, and declares that the charter was granted for the
improvement of the industrial ' tone ' and for the fostering of
industrial honesty. Leeds historians have regarded this as
a picturesque but irrelevant preamble, bearing no actual con-
nexion with the real motives which prompted the incorporation
of the town. When, however, we regard the charter of 1626
and its successors in the light of the Stuart policy of regulating
industry by corporations, we see at once that the economic
factor was probably the predominating influence in the granting
of civic powers.

During the half century preceding its incorporation Leeds had
grown in size and industrial importance. Its population had more
than doubled between 1576 and 1626,1 and it was now established
as the centre of a district occupied in making broad cloths,
superior in size and quality to the kerseys which were made
in the Halifax area. The Leeds market was already famous,
and here the merchants of Leeds, along with traders from York
and London, purchased the pieces from the clothiers. When,
in 1616, James I established staple towns for wool in England,
Leeds immediately petitioned the Privy Council, asking to be
placed on the list of staple towns in order that the sale of wool
in the West Riding might be carried on with ease and official
sanction.2 The request was granted, and Leeds remained a staple
so long as the new arrangements were adhered to.3

During the years of depression in the early 'twenties com-
plaints came from Leeds concerning the deceitful practices of
clothiers and dyers, especially in the use of logwood for dyeing.

1 Annual average (for parish of Leeds) :

Births. Marriages. Deaths.

1576-80 . . 150 37 142

1 62 1-5 . . 349 79 352

2 Cunningham, op. cit., ii. 2q8-q n. Also D. S. P., Jas. I, cv. 147.

a D. S. P., Jas. I, xcii. 28. Also Jackson's Guide to Leeds (1889), pp. 36-7.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIKS 221

Logwood had been the subjeet of legislation in the time of
Elizabeth, and an Act of 1580 had declared that ' forasmuch

.is the eolour made with the said stuff [was] false and deeeitful ',
therefore, all existing stocks of logwood were to be seized and
openly burned by the authority of the justices of the peace, and
henceforth no logwood was to be used under pain of forfeiture
of the cloth, and imprisonment of the offender. This Act was
reinforced in 1590 by a statute which ordered that fines and
the pillory should be additional punishments. Such legislation
was enforced occasionally, as for instance in 1598, when Thomas
Cummy of llolbeck, clothier, was indicted for 'dying wooll
and Wollen cloth ' with logwood or blockwood.1 Hut in spite
of prosecutions the practice continued. The clothier who dyed his
own wool or cloth in his own dye-vat required some inexpensive
colouring material for his cheap cloths, and logwood met his
needs in that respect. Hence the grievance of those who sought
the incorporation of the town was expressed in the charter,2
namely, that the ' fame and estimation ' of Leeds was being
ruined by ' divers clothiers [who] have begun to make deceptive
cloths and to dye the same with wood called logwood, to the
damage and prejudice of [the Crown], subversion of the clothiers
of the town and the discredit of the inhabitants there if immediate
remedy for that purpose be not applied '.

The petition asking for a charter was said to be presented
by ' clothiers and inhabitants ' of Leeds, but really it was the
work of the wealthier clothiers and merchants of the parish, (
and not the demand of the whole community. Documents are
very scarce concerning this first charter, but the few manuscripts
which are extant seem to point to the fact that those who sought
to obtain the charter did so with a view to gaining control over
the industrial and political affairs of the community, and that
in this effort they were opposed by a considerable body of the
population of Leeds. The opposition probably came from the
smaller clothiers, who were scattered over the thirty-two square
miles which comprised the ancient parish of Leeds. The
charter was partisan, and those who worked to obtain it did so

1 West Riding Sessions Records, cd. by Lister, p. 174 : ' Logwood alias
Blockwood callidc ac deceptive usitavit '.

- idjd Charter ; see YYardell, Municipal History of Leeds (1848), appendix.

222 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

with the intention of establishing an oligarchical control over the
town and its multitude of small cloth-makers. This clash of rival
parties is seen in the first document which exists relating to the
incorporation of the borough. The request for a charter had been
made in 1622 or 1623, and the charter was drawn up in accor-
dance with the wishes of the petitioners. On December 21, 1624,
came a protest from the opposing party :

' The inhabitants, being many hundreds of people, desier
a stay of the Corporacion latly procured by some of the ablest
men of Leedes for their owne ends, in the name of the whole
Towne, without the Consent of the greater number, and to
their prejudice, desiers a referrence to Sir Thomas Wentworth,
Sir Henry Savill, Kts. and Barotts. . . . and to examine the con-
veniency or inconveniency of the said graunt, and to certefy
his Majesty thereof.' 1

Note the phrase ' the ablest men of Leedes for their owne ends '.
It evidently refers to the industrial and commercial magnates
who were seeking to obtain the charter, and expresses the
hostility of the poorer inhabitants. This opposition succeeded
in delaying the incorporation for a while, and the death of
James I caused still further delay. Eventually, however, opposi-
tion was swept aside, and on July 18, 1626, Charles signed the
charter which incorporated ' the Borough of Leedes in the
County of York '.

The economic significance of the charter is seen throughout,
from the preamble onwards. ' Whereas our town of Leedes . . .
is an ancient and popular town, and the inhabitants . . . for
many years past have had and skilfully exercised . . . the art or
mystery of making and working woollen cloths, commonly called
in English ' Northern Dozens ', to their perpetual praise and
great increase of the Revenue of the Crown of England for the
custom of the said cloths ' ; and whereas complaints have been
made of deceptive manufacture and dyeing of cloths, ' and divers
other enormities and inconveniences for some time have sprung
up and do still increase as well concerning the cloths aforesaid
as the town and parish aforesaid, which in no way can be reformed
without good rule by our royal authority and power established,
and whereas the former methods of government have failed to

1 Harlcian MSS. 1327, p. 9 1), December 21, 1024. See also Atkinson,
Ralph Thorcsby, his Town and Times, vol. i, p. 20.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 223

check these abuses' ; therefore Charles made the town and
parish into a borough with a proper corporation, consisting of
an alderman, nine principal burgesses, and twenty assistants,
all of whom were nominated in the charter. The powers of this
corporation were fully defined, and two paragraphs indicate the
manner in which the newly created body was to regulate in-
dustrial affairs.

1 We will and do grant that the Council shall and may have
full power and authority to enact, constitute, make, and establish
. . . such reasonable laws, statutes, and ordinances which to
them shall seem wholesome, useful, honest, and necessary, . . .
as well for the fit, good, true, and perfect working, making, and
dyeing of cloths from time to time, . . . as for the good rule and
government ' of the whole body of citizens.

Secondly, and more important, ' we do grant to the aforesaid
Alderman and burgesses . . . that for the better government of
the inhabitants, . . . especially the workers and labourers for
making woollen cloths, . . . they shall have all reasonable gilds,
and that they shall and may be able to divide themselves into
separate fraternities, Societies, and mysteries, . . . and that no
fraternity or gild . . . shall have power, authority, or jurisdiction,
of constituting, ordaining, or making of any statutes, laws etc.,
. . . to bind any burgess or inhabitant, . . . unless they shall
have authority, power, and licence to make such laws . . . from
the Alderman, and Common Council . . . under their common
seal first had and obtained.' 1

Such was the corporation of 1626, a body of men chosen to
enforce legislation, to issue by-laws for the regulation of industry,
and to grant permission for the formation of sectional economic
associations or gilds under the general supervision of the council.
The personnel of the corporation was drawn from the men who
had secured the charter. Sir John Savill, who had conducted
the campaign in London, was nominated first alderman, and the
chief burgesses and assistants were nearly all prominent clothiers
or merchants. John Harrison, the famous clothier and philan-
thropist, was chosen as deputy-alderman, and Richard Sykes,
Thomas Metcalfe, Benjamin Wade, William Busfield, Ralph
llopton, and others, men in the trout rank of local industry and
commerce, found places on the council. The corporation was
a close oligarchy. Its charter had been ' procured without

1 Sec Wardell, op. cit., appendices, lor translations of charters.

224 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

a generall consent of ye Clothiers and inhabitants ',* and the
first members were nominated by the King. When vacancies
occurred, new members were elected by the council itself,
without any appeal to the wishes of the great mass of clothiers
outside. With such a divorce between the corporation and the
industry which it was set to govern, friction was inevitable,
and an important dispute soon arose.

This conflict between the town and its rulers centred round
the provisions made in the charter for the establishment of gilds.
The clause concerning gilds was vague in one respect. Did it
mean that the formation of gilds and companies was optional,
and that the various industries could organize themselves into
associations only if they felt inclined to do so ? Or did it give
the corporation power to compel the clothiers and others to
enrol in such trade societies ? The point was disputable, and
furnished the basis for what must have been a keen conflict.
Many members of the council adopted the compulsory attitude,
and did their utmost to secure the institution of gilds, so as to
increase the power which the corporation possessed over the
various industries. On the other hand, a majority of the clothiers
was averse to such organization. The clothier enjoyed a certain
measure of individual freedom and was at liberty to develop
his industry along the lines which seemed most suitable to his
needs and circumstances. True, there was legislation touching
apprenticeship, dimensions and quality of cloth, &c, legislation
administered by the local justices. But these enactments
weighed lightly upon the clothier, and he did not conform to the
strict letter of the law except when it pleased him to do so.
Hence he was antagonistic in the first place to a corporation
which might curb his freedom by a strict enforcement of rules
which he had held in light esteem in the past. If the erection
of a corporation signified the substitution of a keen and active
urban administration for the easy-going methods of the justices
of the peace, then his sympathies were decidedly against the
innovation. Further, he was opposed to the institution of
additional restraints in the form of gild regulations. As a clothier,
he was a man of many parts, especially if his establishment was
of any size. He went to buy his own wool, he employed people
1 D. S. I'., lntcrr., exxxi. 7.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 225

to spin that wool, he dyed and wove it himself ; probably he
did part of the finishing himself, and then marketed the fabric.
Thus his activities were varied, and were marked by a large
measure of elasticity and freedom. Now, if the gilds were to
be set up, he would be subjected to a host of regulations and
ordinances such as would destroy that sense of freedom. There
would be fines and fees to pay, and if the gild system became at
all minutely scctionalizcd he would be compelled to enrol
himself as a member of several gilds, or might have the variety
of his occupation curtailed. These were the doubts which
would arise in the mind of the Leeds clothier, objections based
on the dislike of further and more thorough supervision of his
work, and fears as to the restriction of his economic liberty.
Hence, many clothiers had been opposed to the incorporation
of the borough, and were now inimical to the formation of gilds
and companies.

Soon after its institution, the municipal council began to insist
on the establishment of fraternities, and at once there was opposi-
tion from the clothiers of the town. The details of this struggle
are scanty, and are best narrated in the following petition,
dispatched from Leeds in March 1629 : l

1 The humble peticion of Robert Sympson, and Christopher
Jackson, and many thousands of poore Clothiers of the parish
of Leeds in the County of York,

' Showeth That whereas it pleased your most excellent Maty
by your lres patents dated the 12 day of July in the 2nd yeare
of your Ma'y's most happy Raigne to incorporate the said towne
and parrish for the better increase of the Trade of Cloathing,
And your highnes said lres patents did give Liberty and power
to all the said parrishioners and inhabitants to distinguish and
devide themselves into guilds and fraternityes, not giving
authority to the Aldermen and assistants there to inforce or
compell any to bee Companyes unlesse they willingly submitted
thereunto.

' Soe it is . . . that the present Alderman, (beeing an Attorney
at the Comon Lawe) and a few of the Cheife Burgesses, for the
increase of thcire ownc authority and for their owne gaine (as
the peticioners conceave) and not for the good of Cloathing,
contrary to the goodwill and liking of most and of the best of the
parrish (there beeing not the fortieth part of the Clothiers that
doe consent thereunto, as the peticioners hope to make it appeare)
1 I). S. P., Chas. I, exxxix. 24, March ji, 1029.

1 5-''- l - Q

226 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

endeavour to inforce the peticioners to bee a Company and to
submitt themselves to such Rules and constitutions as they shall
please to make, to bee fined, imprisoned, and called from theire
Labour at their wills.

' Your peticioners show that many of them dayly setting on
worke about 40 poore people in theire Trade, and that com-
pelling them to come hither [i. e. London] (dwelling 150 Miles
hence) tendeth much to theire impouerishing and overthrowe of
theire trade.'

Therefore the petitioners pray that the King will be pleased
' to referre the examinacion [of the matter] fully unto such
Lords, Knights and Gentry of the County as shall seeme best
to your Ma'y and whoe best understand the nature of Cloathing.'

The King referred the whole matter to the Council of the
North, along with Sir Henry Savill, Sir Richard Beaumont,
Sir John Ramsden, and two other prominent Yorkshire person-
ages. Of the result of the deliberations we know nothing, but
evidently the companies continued, for the next document
relevant to Leeds (1639) refers to the ' Companies that now are
in that Borrough '.*

This document is a petition from the corporation itself, asking
for parliamentary representation, and is of such interest from
the economic point of view that I venture to quote it at some
length. The petitioners strongly emphasize the industrial im-
portance of the borough ;

' wthin ye . . . Corporacion and places adiacent, great Quantities
of woollen clothes are yerelie made. . . . And in all theis Northe
partes where clothe is now made, there is no place Incorporated
but ye petrs wherby ye regulacion and true making of cloth
might bee provided for. And that this corporacion of Ledes,
nor any Clothing towne in this county, are not enabled to choose
any burgesses in parliament to have voice upon any occasions
arising touching abuses or other matters of Cloathing. Nor
none can be see apt or able to judge of as those who live amongst
theis places of Cloathing, and have use and experience of their
deceipts and of ye Conveniences and Inconveniences of ye
lawes already made or wch may be propounded touching the
same, and that yc most part of Cloathing townes in ye King-
dome have one or two Burgesses in parliament for the purposes
a foresaid.'

The petitioners, therefore, asked for a number ot important
1 D. S. P., Chas. I, ccccxxxix. 5, si, and 6.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 227

favours, the chief of which was that the town might have two
members in parliament.

The corporation pleaded its ease very powerfully, and appended
to the petition a number of reasons why the town should be
enfranchised. These statements are doubtless to some extent
exaggerations, but they contain a great deal of truth. The chief
assertions were :

' There is Cloth made in this Corporacion of the value of two
hundred thowsand pounds, and most of it is yerelie sent beyond
the seas. His Maties Customes for Cloth made in this parishe
and exported amounteth to above 10,000''. per annum, besides
the Customes of foreigne comodities for ye said Clothe into yor
Ma,ios kingdome imported. ... Ye people that make this cloth
are laborious and industrious, and this trade growne of late
Veres and much increased since the towne was incorporated.
Noe parte of the Kingdome can afford clothe soe reasonable,
by reason of Cole, wood, Mills, and house rent as this part, And
by well ordering and true making Noe doubt by God's blessing
this trade will daylie encrease. . . . All places of the Kingdom
where Clothe is made have Burgesses in parliament and by
reason thereof in former tymes Sundry Lawes were made much
to the prejudice of the clothing of theis parts, because they
never had (till the late Lo: Savyle's time) any man in parliament
experienced in the clothing of this Countrcy. By this trade the
Countrey subsists and many thousands of poore people, woomen
and children set on work, and many able men maynteyned in
labour fitt for yor Maties Service uppon any occasion. . . . The
petrs upon all occasions of publique charges and taxes for his
Mat,es service have becne willing and forward.'

In short, the men of Leeds declared their industrial greatness,
their loyalty, and their sense of the injustice of being ruled
without enjoying representation.

Leeds did not get its member of parliament, and the grant
ol a new charter with a mayor and aldermen was only made
by Charles I at Nottingham on the eve of the Civil War,1 when
the outbreak of hostilities prevented this new constitution from
materializing. At this time the town was divided in its allegi-
ance. The wealthy merchants, who comprised the municipal
government, were Royalists, but the great mass of the people
were Parliamentarians. When the town was occupied bv the
Parliamentary forces the corporation fell into abeyance, and
1 P. S. /'., Intcrr., exxxi. 7, and Chas. II, xxviii. 71.

228 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

from 1643 to 1646 the government of the town was in the hands
of Major-General Carter.1 In 1646 the corporation was restored
on the lines of the charter granted twenty years before, but all
Royalists were excluded, and their places taken by supporters
of the Parliamentary cause. The new-comers carried on the
oligarchic tradition of their predecessors, and ruled the industrial
population with a heavy hand. Hence, in 1656, a monster
petition signed by about 850 clothiers and inhabitants of the
town and parish of Leeds expressed the grievances against the
council :

' They doe rule and act illegally as may appeare by their
unjust By-Lawes, and Ordinances (whereby they oppresse ye
poore Clothiers and much preiudice that Trade), theire unlawfull
Taxes put upon the people . . * theire imprisoning men's persons,
etc., ... to ye great damage and disquiet of ye Inhabitants and
disturbance of ye publique Peace.'2

From this time onward the demand for a new charter grew in
force, and with the accession of Charles II that document was
obtained, placing the government once more in the hands of
the ' wealthiest and best affected merchants and inhabitants of
the Towne of Leedes '.3

The industrial activities of this new corporation can be
studied in some detail, since the Minute Books of the council
from 1662 onward are still available, and give a fair picture
of the manner in which the city rulers attempted to supervise
industry and commerce during the later seventeenth and early
eighteenth centuries. Before turning to the consideration of
this work, it will be best to glance for a moment at an attempt
which was made to establish an organization to regulate industry
over the whole field of the West Riding. This corporation had
a short life, and we know practically nothing of its actual work ;
but the project serves to illustrate the manner in which the idea
of supervision by local organizations was put into practice in
Yorkshire.

The powers of the Leeds corporation were circumscribed by
the boundary of the borough. Within that limit the municipal

1 List of Aldermen (MSS. volume in Thoresby Soc. Library) : ' 1643-6
in yc Wars a Vacancy '. 2 D. S. /'., Interr., exxxi. 7.

:| For this, see proceedings of Council of State, Chas. II, i. 78, p. 63. Also
I). S. P., Chas. II, xxvin. 71 ; xxx. 28 ; xl. 62.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 229

authorities administered both the laws of the nation and their
own by-laws touching the making and finishing of cloth. Outside
the boundary such work was carried on by the justices of the
peace, and the scare hers whom they appointed. Thus it might
happen that whilst the laws against excessive tentering and
deceitful manufacture were administered with exemplary
t lion Highness within the borough, clothiers outside the pale were
allowed a great amount of licence. This might be possible
because of the leniency of the justices of the Riding, the slackness
of the searchers, or by reason of the fact that the rural clothiers
were scattered over a very wide area, stretching from Wharf edale
to Derbyshire, and from Wakefield to the borders of Lancashire.
The disparity actually did exist, and hence, whilst Leeds clothiers
were subject to constant supervision in the manufacture of
broad cloths, their fellows outside the boundary were producing
similar fabrics, comparatively immune from police inspection.
During the Civil War the system of search broke down for
a while, but in 1047 the restored Corporation of Leeds deter-
mined to resume work. The alderman and burgesses therefore
approached the justices of the Riding and complained ' of the
great decay of the trade of Cloathing, and more especially of
broad (loth, commonly called " Lecdes ("loath ", occasioned by ye
great deceipt therein used, in makeing Tenters of a farr greater
chase1 than by the statute is limittcd, and other sleights and
subtiltycs by diverse of ye clothyers practised, to the great
deceipt of those countryes to w'1' ye same [is] transported, and
to ye great shame and slaundcr of all ye good clothyers in these
Northerne parts '. In consequence of this complaint, the West
Riding magistrates promised to co-operate with Leeds in
a. crusade against illegally constructed tenters ; they were to
attack the offenders in the clothing areas of the Riding, whilst
the Leeds Corporation set its own house in order. ' Whereupon
ye said Alderman and Burgesses caused ye tenters within ye . . .
Borrough to be reformed and proceeded in such other lawfull
courses as to ye regulacion of yc said trade, expectyng ye like
to be done in all parts of ye said Ryding.' The justices, however,
failed to fulfil their promise, and took no steps to administer the

1 Chase, the allowance made for the movement of the movable parts of the
tenter frame, which did the actual stretching.

230 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

cloth laws. Thus the clothiers of Leeds were ' moche grcived
and molested, they beeing onely restreyned ' whilst their rivals
outside the borough were allowed to continue their malpractices
free from interference. In January 1655 the corporation drew
the attention of the magistrates of the Riding to the injustice
under which the Leeds clothiers were labouring, and the bad
workmanship which was being permitted to continue in the
rural areas, which, ' if not reformed, when tradeinge at present
is beginninge a little to revive, will inevytabely tend to ye
absolute disgrace, if not faile of trade in these parts, and soe
consequently not onely impoverish ye clothycr, but many others
thereupon depending.' Leeds asked that the statutes concerning
tenters should be put into operation throughout the Riding,
frames either reformed or defaced, and proper seals of lead
placed upon cloths, stating their length and weight. Further,
in order to ensure the equitable and effectual administration of
these measures, the corporation suggested that ' some speciall
persons may be joyntly commissionated to acte together, as
well within as without the Borrough '.1 The justices did not
accept this last suggestion, but they ordered their searchers to
be more careful and thorough in their duties, ' and to see that
noe tenters for broad cloathes have chase or liberty for or to the
under barr above halfe of a quarter of a yard, and for narrow
cloathes above halfe of halfe of a quarter, but that they shall
presently deface the same, according to the statute upon paynes
and pcnaltycs mencioned.' 2

The suggestion of the Leeds Corporation that joint officials
should be appointed is a weak reflection of a strong policy which
some of the broad clothiers were advocating about this time.
Broad cloths were made in all the district round about Leeds,
especially at Birstall and Wakefield, and the clothiers of Leeds
were probably experiencing the keen competition of these
outsiders. They therefore wished to bring the broad clothier
who dwelt outside the city under the same control as themselves,
either by having a broad clothiers' corporation for the whole
Riding, or by extending the scope of the Leeds municipal
regulations to all broad clothiers, whether within or without
the borough. To bring about this result they enlisted the services

1 Baynes Correspondence, xi. 224, January 1055. - Ibid., xi. 148.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 231

of Adam Bayncs, the Leeds representative in the fitful parlia-
ments of the Interregnum.1 In August 1654 2 a petition of the
more affluent broad clothiers of Leeds was dispatched to Baynes,
in which the cloth magnates declared that the best way to
foster the trade of Leeds would be to carry out the following
proposals :

1. ' That the hole trade of brodc cloth makinge ... in the
Countie of Yorkc maye be incorporated into one bodic politick.'

2. ' That soe many officers maye be chosen by the holle
number of clothyers as may be thought requisit ffor the carry-
inge on the workc, with a certan number of asistants and a Comon
Counccll.'

3. ' That they [the executive] have power to chuse officers
and overseers to put the lawes in execucion provided ffor good
of trade, and to gain [extension] where they are short, if needs be.'

Such an organization would almost inevitably place the control
of the industry throughout the whole Riding into the hands of
a few wealthy Leeds clothiers, and so establish the supremacy
of Leeds and of the more important and opulent men in that
borough. The proposal was, therefore, strongly opposed by
the ' adverse partie ', which consisted of the clothiers living
outside Leeds, at Wakefield, Birstall, and in the open districts
generally.3 These men made a hard fight against the Leeds
magnates. They attempted to get Baynes's election declared
null and void, and sent several deputations up to London to
state their case before Cromwell.4 Baynes, however, pursued
his mission with eagerness, and succeeded in obtaining a com-
mission of inquiry into the whole question. The purpose of this
inquiry was

1. To study the existing statutes, see where they were defec-
tive, and suggest amendments if necessary.

2. Granted that the laws were good, to consider how they
might be put into more effective operation.

3. With regard to the second term of reference, to consider
if it would be more practicable that ' a select number of discreet
and able persons, consisting of Gentlemen, merchants, and

' Leeds, along with Manchester and Halifax, was granted parliamentary
representation in 1055, and Adam Baynes was elected to represent Leeds.
See Ingelwick, The Interregnum, p. 93. Also Atkinson, Ralph Thoresby, his
Town iuni Times, vol. 1. ■ Baynes Correspondence, xi. 210.

' Ibid., xi. 2 1 1 . * Ibid., xi. 213.

232 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

clothiers, be invested with all the power lhat the Justices of
the Peace had by former statutes, with such additional power '
as the inquirers should think desirable.1

Meanwhile, the opposition from without was making itself
felt. At a general meeting of the Leeds clothiers all present
expressed their willingness to be incorporated, provided the
whole of the West Riding clothiers were included. Whereupon
the promoters of the scheme were compelled to admit that they
' feared itt could not bee done . . . they having alwayes received
such stronge opposicion from the clothyers without '.- For the
present, therefore, the scheme fell into abeyance, and the men of
Leeds concentrated their energies upon an attempt to get the
borough charter modified.

With the Restoration came a flood of charters, reinstating old
organizations, such as the Merchant Adventurers, and erecting
a number of new corporations. At such a time the scheme of the
Leeds broad clothiers was more likely to receive favourable
consideration, and the Leeds men returned to the attack. They
were successful on this occasion, and in 1662 an Act was passed /
' for the better regulating of the Manufacture of Broad Woollen
Cloath in the West Riding of the County of Yorke '.3

This statute enacted that ' there shall be a Corporation to
continue for ever . . . consisting of all the Justices of Peace of
the West Riding, Two Masters, Ten Wardens, Twelve Assistants,
and Commonalty. All which [officers] . . . are to be of the ablest
and best experienced Clothiers within the Riding, and such as
have served and been brought up in the Trade and Mistcry of
Clothing by the space of seven yeares . . . ; one of which Masters,
Five of which Wardens, and Six of which Assistants to be chosen
the first Monday after Pentecost annually at some public place
by the Free Clothiers . . . inhabiting within the Parish of Leeds '.
The other half of the executive was to be elected in like manner
by the clothiers residing in the rest of the Riding. Such a society
was to be ' one Body Politick and Corporate . . . and ... a per-
petuall Succession, and to be called by the name of the Super-
visors, Masters, Wardens, Assistants, and Commonalty of the
Trade or Mistery of Clothiers for the well making of Broad

1 Baynes Correspondence, xi. 147. 2 Ibid., xi. 218.

3 Statute 14 Chas. II, c. 32.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 233

Woollen Cloath within the West Riding'. The executive
was to mcrt on the first Saturday in each month at the Sessions
I louse in Leeds, and at any other time and place if the members
should think fit. Here by-laws, rules, and ordinances were to be
drawn up for the better spinning, working, making, fulling, and
milling of woollen cloth, and these regulations, after having been
endorsed by the justices of assize, were to be published at least
four times a year. Any clothier breaking such rules could be
fined up to twenty shillings, half the levy being retained by the
corporation, the remaining portion being handed over to the
relief of the poor of the parish in which the offender lived.

Searchers were to be appointed to enforce the observance of
all ordinances, and to bring offenders to justice. They were to
examine all broad cloths, and affix a seal on which was stated
the length and weight of the piece. The searcher was given right
of entry into houses, shops, and warehouses where cloths were
made or stored. These provisions were not intended to replace
the ulnager, who still collected his pence and supplied his seals.
The searcher of the new corporation replaced the searcher
formerly appointed by the justices, and enforced not only the
laws of the realm but also the decrees of the local trade associa-
tion.

In order further to guarantee the best possible workmanship
the statute made a pronouncement concerning apprenticeship.
No person was to make broad cloths unless he had served an
apprenticeship of at least seven years to that trade, under
penalty of £5 for each month he engaged in the occupation ;
the penalty was a heavy one, especially as the Act of 1503
inflicted a fine of only £2 per month. A proviso, however, stated
that any one might make broad cloths ' for the use of themselves,
their Children and families, but not to sell them ', without
having served the requisite period.

One last clause was intended to safeguard the interests of the
employees. It ran as follows :

Provided alwaies that neither the Supervisors, Masters,
Wardens, and Assistants, nor any of them, nor any other persons
free of the Corporation of Broad Woollen Clothiers shall by any
Authority derived from this act . . . set or impose any other or
lesser Rates or Wages upon any inferiour Workmen, Servants,

234 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

or Labourers to bee imployed by them ... in the said Manu-
facture than such as shall bee from time to time allowed and
approved of by the Justices of the Peace in their Quarter
Sessions.'

This clause was based on the assumption that the minimum
wage clauses of the statute of 1603 were being enforced. As
we have seen (Chapter III) the justices were actually fixing
maximum rates for weavers as for other workers, and no minima
were ever laid down.

The men of Leeds had gained their point, and the Corporation
of Broad Clothiers was established in accordance with the terms
of the statute. Of its actual work we know nothing. It con-
tinued until 1680, x and was then given another five years of
life by a renewal of the Act. In 1685 a further renewal was
mooted, but not actually effected.2 In 1692 3 came a vigorous
attempt to reinstate the corporation, when a number of gentry,
clothiers, and cloth-workers petitioned the Commons for a
revival of the provisions of the Act of 1662. In the petition these
men spoke of the divers abuses which had arisen since the demise
of the corporation, and asked for its resuscitation. Their
request was not granted, and the Corporation of Broad
Clothiers passed permanently into the shades, along with
many other associations and institutions which were by that
time either defunct or in a state of advanced senility. The
corporation had been an interesting experiment, an attempt
to regulate an industry which was carried on by a widely
scattered population, working under domestic conditions.
Effective supervision under such circumstances was naturally
very difficult, and hence the corporation failed to establish itself
as an efficient instrument of industrial regulation. When next
the State stepped in to provide machinery for supervising the
trade, it had abandoned all idea of a trade association, and
reverted to the old sixteenth-century method", by which the justices
of the peace and their nominees were to carry on the work.

Meanwhile, the revised corporation of the borough of Leeds,
established by the charter of November 1661, had commenced
operations, and was making provisions for the control of industry

1 House of Lords Calendar, Hist. MSS. Comm., vol. xi, pt. ii, p. 163.
- House of Commons' Journals, lx. 729. a Ibid., x. 741.

vii GILDS AND COM PAN IKS 235

and commerce within the town.1 Additional powers had been
given, and the newly organized body could do much more than
its predecessor. In the first place, the borough could hold its
own petty and quarter sessions, at which all necessary steps
were to be taken to enforce the observance of the cloth laws
of the realm. At such sessions the dignity of the national
decrees would be upheld, and offenders punished by the municipal
magistrates. Secondly, the corporation had power to issue
special by-laws for the regulation of the cloth trade in the
borough. On this the charter was very explicit, and outlined
the modus operandi in making such ordinances :

' When the mayor of the borough . . . shall judge it just or
necessary to make . . . any new laws, ordinances, or statutes,
for or touching the making, dyeing, or sale of woollen cloth,
or the art or mystery thereof, . . . then the mayor, aldermen
and assistants . . . shall cause to be summoned forty of the
more honest and sufficient clothworkers, craftsmen . . . in-
habitants within the borough . . . to meet on a certain day and
place, which assembly shall be called the common assembly,
and then and there may be proposed . . . such laws, statutes
and ordinances as the mayor or common council shall think fit
and just to be established, and they shall ask advice thereupon
of the said common assembly. . . . Such laws, . . . which shall be
approved by the greater part of those present, shall become
laws and ordinances, and thence after shall be of good force
and effect, and be inviolably observed by all clothworkers,
artificers, and merchants, under pains and penalties in the said
laws contained.'

In addition to these specific powers, the corporation was granted
all such general rights as were necessary for the full and thorough
control of the industrial life of the town.

During the sixty or seventy years which followed the granting
ot the Restoration charter the municipal authorities attempted,
with doubtful success, to carry out the policy which their powers
enabled them to formulate. They administered the various
statutes relating to cloth, and appointed searchers to see that
the laws were respected.'- Eighteen searchers were elected

1 Sec Wardcll, Munit ipul History of Lads, ;ipp. xiii.

- Leeds was divided into fourteen distorts, for each of which searchers
were clci ted. Sonic districts onlv claimed one searcher, others (Farnley ami
Wortley) claimed two. whilst Hunslet had three. Sec Leeds Sessions Books,
vol. u, pp. 147, w>4, JS4. ilvc.

236 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

annually, and took solemn oaths to discharge their duties
faithfully ; those who neglected their office, or refused to serve
as searcher when appointed, were severely punished, and many
such cases actually occurred.1 On the whole, these men did their
work thoroughly, and many offenders were brought to court.
Witness two typical instances :

July 17, 1717, a man indicted for attempting to sell a piece
of white Birstall cloth, declaring it to be well spun, good and
' merchantable ', when really it was badly spun, very deceptive,
and unmerchantable, as an evil and pernicious example for other
men to do in like manner.2

January 13, 1735. ' Sam Lumley of Stanningley, possessed of
one end or half cloth of broad woollen cloth, which had been
very greasy, full of holes, mill bracks, and not merchantable.'
These holes had been artfully, cunningly, and with a fraudulent
design sewed up, and the cloth sold to John Berkenhout,
a prominent Leeds merchant.3

Many other instances might be given of the manner in which
clothiers and cloth-workers were fined for making cloths of
deficient length or weight, or for having infringed some clause
of one of the Acts passed during the two preceding centuries.4

The corporation also made an attempt to regulate and enforce
the laws concerning apprenticeship, and to compel all appren-
tices in the borough to become registered in the town's Appren-
tice Roll. In 1703 the court of the corporation therefore declared0
that ' It is ordered that every Artificer, Shopkeeper, and Trader
whatsoever, being a freeman or Burgess of this Burrough, that
shall take any Apprentice or Apprentices, shall enter the names
of every such Apprentice with the Town Clerk ... in a book to
be kept for that purpose, and pay Sixpence for the entry thereof '.
The apprentice then served his allotted period, at the end of which
he was able to set up as a clothier, if he possessed the neces-
sary capital, or become a journeyman. In the former case, the

1 e.g. August 1703, for instance of cloth searcher who ' execntionem officii
contemptuose et totaliter refusavit et neglexit ' (Sessions Books, ii. 164).

2 Leeds Sessions Books, iii. 28 : the above is one out of twenty-six indict-
ments made at that court.

1 Ibid., vol. iv, 13th January, 8 Geo. IT.

4 In one instance an Act of the reign of Philip and .Mary was cited, and
a kersey maker indicted of having violated it.
'• Leeds Corporation Records, i. 408 (1703).

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 237

corporation made a further claim upon him ; ' at the end and
expiracion of his Terme, [the master must] bring such Appren-
tice to a courte of Mayor, Aldermen and Assistants, to take
his Frecdome, which apprentice shall pay for registring sueh
freedom the sum of three shillings and fourpence.' To what
extent these rules were enforced it is impossible to state, but
it seems that the corporation occasionally awoke to the fact that
large numbers of apprentices had completed their terms of
service, and were setting up as masters without having sought
enrolment as freemen of the borough. On such occasions the
corporation issued a sweeping command ' that the severall
persons be respectively sumoned to appear at the next Court of
the Mayor, &c. ... to be held for this Burrough (whereof they
shall have notice), to take their freedomes and be registred as
the case shall require'.1 In September 1706 and May 1707 2
numbers of apprentices were summoned to take up their
freedom ; the list included weavers, cloth-drawers, and card-
makers, as well as barbers, joiners, drapers, and other tradesmen.
It is very doubtful whether these men obeyed the summons,
tor there is no mention of their appearance at the subsequent
assemblies of the corporation. In its relations with strangers
who came to reside in Leeds the corporation seems to have been
more fortunate. It would be easier to obtain obedience (and
money) from a stranger setting up his home and business in the
town than from those who had grown up there, and whose
familiarity with its governors might breed contempt for their
demands. The corporation kept a sharp look-out for strangers,
and occasionally ordered its constables to submit lists of all
men practising any trade within their divisions who had not
taken the freedom of the borough.3 Men from all parts of the
county and from all quarters of England were thus constrained
to take up the burdens and privileges of citizenship : a stationer
from Manchester, a merchant from Hull, a saddler and joiner
from Wakefield, clothiers from the surrounding districts, a mercer
from Bradford, a haberdasher from York, a linen draper and
a brazier from London, a barber from Oxford, with goldsmiths,

1 Il>iil ., ii. jo.

- Ibid., ii. zS-i). In 1700 nineteen persons were summoned ; in 1707 forty-
six. ' Ibid., ii. 235, and ii. 170.

238 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

apothecaries, and dyers from other parts. These men came before
the Court of the Corporation, took the oath of allegiance to
the King and that of a freeman of the borough, paid their
entrance fees, and were then admitted to the citizenship.1

Finally, the corporation attempted to foster gild organization
amongst the various industries of the town. Unlike its pre-
decessor, the charter of 1661 made no provision concerning the
establishment of gilds and fraternities. The early societies
established during the reign of Charles I were probably now
defunct, and the new charter gave no orders for their renewal.
But this omission was either an oversight or was due to the
supposition that a municipal charter carried with it such power
and that any town authority had the right to set up as many
gilds as it pleased. At any rate, the new corporation took that
view of its powers, and one of its first ordinances dealt with this
subject. On November 4, 1661, the court declared that

' fforasmuch as all or most of the traders within this Burrough
are much decreased, and the poore thereof much increased,
occasioned by the undue takeinge of apprentices, setting on
worke fforeners and strangers, and by fraudes and abuses
therein used, ffor Remedy whereof and in pursuance of the
Powers and Authority given in His Malies Letters Patent, This
Court thinks fitt and soe orders that all and any persons useing
and exerciseing the trade of a Clothworker shalbe a Guild or
ffraternity, and are by this Court constituted a Guild or ffrater-
nity, . . . themselves, their servants, and apprentices, to be
guided and governed by and under such Lawes, Ordinances,
and Constitutions, as John Dawson, Esq., Major, [and ten

1 The amount of the entrance fee varied according to the new freeman's
occupation, and to the estimated benefit which he would be likely to receive
by pursuing his vocation in Leeds. Thus in 1703 it was declared that ' if any
stranger for the future shall be desirous to purchase his freedome of the
Burrough, it shall be upon such termes as the Court of Mayor, Aldermen, and
Assistants . . . shall agree upon, having respect to the trade that he shall
exercise within the said Corporation, and the benefit and advantage that he
maybe presumed to reap thereby' (Corp. Mins., i. 414 (1703)). This considera-
tion made the fine vary to a great degree, and whilst a small trader or cloth-
worker paid only about £2, a strange merchant, seeking his freedom, was
charged as much as £50 (ibid., ii. 155, and ii. 165). If the newcomer happened
to be one of the many foreign merchants who were settling in Leeds in the
early eighteenth century, he was called upon to pay a. much larger line. The
English merchant paid ^50, but the alien was ordered ' to pay nines which
shall not exceed ffive hundred pounds, nor be less than one hundred pounds
for any ffreedom to be taken by such fforeign merchant, who shall be natura-
lized before such ffreedom is taken ' (ibid., ii. 165).

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 239

Assistants or Aldermen], or the major part of them shall approve
and allow.'

The Company of Cloth-workers, thus established, was not the
only one to be instituted, for at the same time the other occupa-
tions of the town were brought under similar organized control.
The size or nature of some occupations was such that they needed
a 'guild or ffraternitie ' of their own, but in other instances kindred
trades were grouped into one company, so that in all there were
six such companies established by the municipal authorities.1

These companies had proper constitutions, with executives and
officials, ordinances and by-laws for the control of their members.
The Cloth-workers' Company strove for a time to further the
interests of its members by attempting to prevent any person
from working at the art unless he was a member of the fraternity,
by protesting against any obstacles which might hinder the sale
of Leeds cloth at home or abroad, and by seeking favourable
legislation. Thus in 1664 2 the company joined the municipal
corporation in a petition to the King, protesting against the
increased charges which the Blackwell Hall authorities had
placed upon Yorkshire cloths going to that market. Similarly,
in 1690 the company was busy attempting to prevent cloth
from leaving the West Riding before it had been dyed and
dressed/' Hut in all such activities the companies were under
the control of the corporation. Their ordinances carried no
weight until they had been sanctioned and engrossed by the local
authorities ; if any dispute arose amongst the members, the
word of the corporation overrode the decision of the company,
and if any neglect occurred either in the control of finances
or in the election of the executive, the mayor and his fellows
had the power to settle the affair as seemed best to them.'1

1 Leeds Corp. Mins., i. 2j. Dawson was the first deputy-mayor, and the
second to till the mayoral chair. The remaining companies, in addition to
that of the cloth-workers, were :

1. ' Milnewrights, Carpenters. Joyners, Plaisterers, Coopers, and Brick-
layers,' i. e. the building trades.

j. ' Mercers, Grocers, Sailers, and Drapers,' i. e. a company of shopkeepers.

3. Cordwainers.

4. Tailors.

5 . Ironmongers, smiths, glaziers, cutlers, pewtercrs, i.e. a hardware company.
- /). N. /'., March 23, 10C4, vol. 440, f. 14.

■' Stowe MSS. 746, ft. no, 128, 130, 138.

1 See sections on tailors' ordinances, i. 50 and 55.

240 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

In short the gilds were the creation of the corporation, and were
entirely under the control of the parent body.1

The absence of any detailed records prevents us from approach-
ing nearer to these Leeds fraternities, and it is therefore dangerous
to be dogmatic as to their success or failure between the years
1660 and 1710.2 During this time the Corporation Minute Books
furnish occasional references which seem to indicate that gild
activity was not very important. In 1691 it was suggested that
statutory power should be obtained to fuse the six gilds into one
company, but the idea did not materialize.3 From 1700 onwards
the corporation made frequent demands for the enfranchisement
of traders and craftsmen, and during this time the Tailors'
Company was very active. The Cloth-workers' fraternity,
however, was gradually drifting into desuetude. This continued
until 1720, when the corporation, suddenly awakening, made
frantic efforts to whip the clauses of the charter and their own
powers of industrial regulation into some semblance of life and
reality. The demands for a general enrolment of freemen were
peremptory, and the slumbers of the cloth-workers' organization
rudely disturbed. Witness the minutes of the court held on
May 7, 1720 :

1 Whereas by a long disuse and failure in the Company of
Clothworkcrs in this Corporacion to put in force their Orders,
by-Laws and Ordinances which have been made for the good
Government of the said Company and the Artificers belonging
to the same, and for the well making, dying and manufacturing
of woolen cloth made and sold within the Burrough aforesaid ;
and touching the sale thereof great abuses and deceits have
crept in, to the great Disparagement and debaseing of the said
Manufacture and to the great loss and hindrance of the fair
and honest Traders therein. And whereas the aforesaid Laws
were not sufficient to prevent the inconveniences and abuses
aforesaid, for remedy whereof It is thought fitt and Ordered that
the aforesaid By-Laws and Ordinances be carefully inspected
and revised, and that such alteracions and amendments be made
therein, or additions thereto as by Councel Learned in the Law
shall be advised, and that they be prepared and ready to be
proposed at the next Court . . . or at a Comon Assembly for the
Burrough aforesaid, which shall be called for that purpose,
And that the persons following [forty names given], being forty

1 The companies all met in a place known as the Gildhall (Mins., i. 88).

2 Mins., i. 418 (1704) ; ibid., ii. 32-3 (1707). 3 Ibid., i. 313.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 241

of the more sufficient and honest Clothiers and Clothworkers
Inhabiting within the Burrough ... be Sumoned to appeare at
the Same time and place, to the end their approbacion may be
had to the said By-Laws, Orders and Ordinances as shall then
be proposed by the Mayor and Comon Councell . . . for the
purpose aforesaid.' l

How this conference ended we do not know. It was the last
effort of the corporation to reinvigorate the gild organization,
and it seems to have failed most completely. From this time
onward there is an entire absence of any records throwing light
on the subsequent history of the companies, and it seems that
the fraternities died a slow death and perished from starvation
and disuse. Even if they had served a useful purpose at the time
of their institution (which is doubtful), they had by this time
become much too small to be adequate for the proper control
ot the industries which were advancing so rapidly during the
eighteenth century. The woollen industry in particular had
entered upon its period of adolescence, and just as a suit of
clothes rapidly becomes too small for a youth who is growing
.it a great rate, so the organization of the Restoration period
was eminently unfitted for the nature and extent of the trade
which w.is carried on within the Leeds boundary during the
eighteenth century. Thus the corporation ceased to attempt
to order and control the cloth-workers, as well as the other
branches of economic activity. In 1725 the supervision of the
broad cloth industry was handed over by legislation to the
justices of the peace and their searchers,2 and the Leeds Cloth-
workers' Company, after existing a little longer as a convivial
society, quietly disappeared from view.3

The final years ot the seventeenth century and the early
decades ot the eighteenth witnessed the decline in economic
importance ot many other institutions which had played
.1 prominent part in the activities oi Tudor and Stuart times.
This period, in tact, was an era ot transition, in which the older
forms of organization were breaking down, and the ground was
being prepared to some extent tor the flood ot individualism

1 Leeds Corp. Min., ii. 1 59-60, May 5, 1720.

- Statute 1 1 Geo. I, c. J4.

' WCbli, llist.irv of Local Government (The Manor and the thorough), ii. 41S.
'the ten pages devoted to the history of the Leeds Corporation by the Webbs
contain much valuable information on tin- work of the corporation.

15:20.1.: K

242 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

and the great changes which were to create modern commercial
society. The Leeds gilds disappeared, the West Riding Broad'
Cloth Corporation had already made its departure. These were
comparatively mushroom growths, but they were accompanied
in their demise by such old-established institutions as the
ulnage, the companies which had developed out of the mediaeval;
fraternities, and the big trading companies of the Eastlandi:
Merchants and the Merchant Adventurers.

The ulnage had continued to be collected, though it was some-
what neglected during the Interregnum.1 In 1664 the grant of
its farm had been renewed to the Duke of Lennox for a further
period of sixty years, and, on the death of the Duke in 1672,
the farm was transferred to his widow.*- The ulnage was now
purely a revenue machine, and its officials did nothing to
administer the cloth laws relating to dimensions, weight, or
quality. In the West Riding it had become customary for the
clothiers to buy a large number of seals from the local representa-
tive of the ulnager, and affix them to the cloths which they had
woven. In one case, for instance, a witness in a lawsuit of 1676
declared that he was accustomed to fetching one hundred seals
at a time from the ulnager, then fixing them to the cloth without
any representative of the ulnage being present. This practice
was forbidden in a similar suit during the reign of James II
(1687), 3 and clothiers were expected to have their cloths examined
and weighed before the ulnager's seal was affixed. The old
practice continued, however, so long as the ulnage was levied.4

1 D. S. P., Chas. II, xvi. 87 (1660) : ' Since the late war, divers clothiers
and others, taking liberty to themselves by the dysorder of the late tymes,
have and still doe putt sett and send to sell divers cloathes . . . without
payment of the said subsidye '.

2 Treasury Books, 1672-3, February 19 ; Calendar, p. 67. Lennox paid
/900 for the old draperies, and ^98 for the new.

3 Exch. Deposition by Comm., 2—3 Jas. II, Hil., York and Lanes., 14.

4 Witness the following letter written by Joseph Holroyd, a cloth-factor
of Halifax, who acted as ulnager's representative for the West Riding during
the early years of the next century :

ffarmrs of Aulnage

Srs Hallifax ye 25th 9b1- 1706.

... I desire y v to Send by first Carriers 4 a 5000 1 \ Scales. It y" please may
make itt up 1 horrse pa: wth 2 a 3,000 id and 1,000 £'' the rest 3d Scales.

I am

Yo", J. H(olroyd).
{Letter Bonks of Joseph Holroyd and Sam Hill, ed. Heaton (Bankiield Museum
Notes). See nos. 81, 94, 100.)

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 243

By the end of the reign of James II there had grown up
a considerable amount of opposition to the ulnage fee ; many
were demanding that the office should be abolished, and the loss
to the Crown compensated by increased custom's dues on exported
cloth. The Yorkshire clothiers were amongst the strongest
supporters of this suggestion, and in 1693 they petitioned the
House of Commons, declaring that the office ' is now useless and
no-ways answers the end of its first constitution, but is become
very burdensome to the subject, and a great hindrance to the
woollen trade'.1 The farmers of the ulnage naturally opposed
the destruction of their office and means of revenue ; they
pointed out that the patent granted in 1664 had still thirty
years to run, and they did not intend to renounce such a profit-
able investment. Hence, though many bills were introduced
to bring the institution to an end, all failed, and the ulnage did
not finally expire until the termination of the Lennox licence in
the reign of George I.2

The two great cloth-exporting companies were also rapidly
falling from their former high estate, and were losing the
monopoly they had enjoyed during the early years of the
seventeenth century. The Civil War had affected adversely
the trade of both Eastlanders and Adventurers, and when
the Commonwealth was established the opponents of the com-
panies prevailed. The charters of the organizations were not
annulled, but suspended, the companies were deprived of their
monopolistic powers, and ' interlopers ' were granted liberty in
foreign trade. With the Restoration, this ' anti-company '
policy was reversed, and by confirmation of their charters in
i(>oi the two companies were restored to their old position. But
the day of great things was now past, and from the Restoration
onwards both bodies declined from their former strength.
The entrance fees were being reduced very substantially, and
admission had thus become comparatively cheap and easy.3
Once begun, the process of pulling down the walls of .privilege
could not long be staved, and in the first year of the reign of

1 House of Commons Journals, xi. i6. Also Utilise of Lords MSS., Hist.
MSS. Comin., xiii, pp. 22j;-(^.

2 See also House of Lords MSS., Hist. MSS. Cornm., xiv, pt. vi, p. 4J.

3 For this later history of the Adventurers, see Lingelbach, Introduction ;
also Newcastle Merchant Adventurers, 1'reface to volume ii.

R 2

244 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

William and Mary there was much agitation in favour of
' a general liberty to all persons to export [woollen goods] to
Hamburgh ', the very centre of the Adventurers' activity. This
campaign ended successfully, and in the same year an Act was
passed allowing freedom to all who wished to trade in what
had formerly been the preserves of the Merchant Adventurers.1
Such a statute would materially affect the merchants of Hull,
York, and Leeds, whose control over the export trade in York-
shire cloths would thus be destroyed. They therefore made
many attempts to obtain a revision of the above Act, and pleaded
for the re-establishment of the power of the Hamburg Company
under ' such regulations or other provision . . . for carrying on
the trade in a regulated way ' as the Commons should think-
best.2 In 1693 the Merchant Adventurers declared that they
were willing to allow any Englishman who was not a handi-
craftsman to be ' admitted into the freedom of the . . . Company
for forty shillings, to trade within all their limits, except the
Rivers of Elbe, Weser, and Eyder '. In other words, would-be
merchants were allowed to enter the company at a very much
reduced fee, and then trade over a large part of the Merchant
Adventurers' territory. This arrangement pleased neither the
Yorkshire Adventurers nor the House of Commons, for the former
thought it opened a way to infinite debasement and fraud,
whilst the latter refused to make any alteration in the statute
of i6S8.:i

In similar fashion the power of the Eastland Merchants was
being undermined. The records of the Eastlanders of York
end in 1696. The last thirty years had been spent in an acrimoni-
ous correspondence with Hull, and in violent quarrels with the
Eastland Merchants at head-quarters ; and now at the last
meeting, with only six members present, there was no indication
(except in the smallness of the attendance) that the branch
had come to its ' extreme day V1 The quantity of cloth exported
by the whole company throughout the realm had fallen very
heavily during the middle years of the century. In 1640 the
export was said to be 120,000 cloths annually, whilst in 1670

1 Statute 1 William and Mary, c. 32.

2 House of Commons Journals, x. 759. :l Ibid., xi. 80-1.

4 Ordinances of the Eastland Merchants, ed. by Miss M. Sellers, p. 139, and
Preface.

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 245

the number was stated to be only n.ooo.1 These figures are
probably far from accurate, but they express an exaggeration
of an actual fact, namely, that the old monopoly was breaking
down, and that the outsider was engrossing more and more of
the foreign trade. This decline continued during the rest of the
century, and although the York branch probably did not actually
expire after that last recorded meeting of January 27, 1696, it
gradually ceased to control any appreciable proportion of the
Baltic cloth trade.2 The York Merchant Adventurers were more
numerous ; their influence was stronger ; and so they continued
throughout the eighteenth century as a trading society, though
deprived of the monopoly which had formerly been theirs. They
pursued a rather conservative policy, clinging to the old tradi-
tions and customs in an age which was needing more and more
individualism and progressive thought. Hence they were left
behind in the great developments of the eighteenth century, and
the major portion of the foreign trade in cloth passed into the
hands of others. Still the organization survived, and exists
even to this day. A flood of new life has been infused into it by
tin- historical labours of Dr. Maud Sellers, which have done much
to remind the citizens of York of the former greatness of what
was once the driving force in the foreign trade of that ancient
city.3

This decline had two important consequences. In the first
place, it gave Englishmen freedom to engage in foreign trade
unhampered by the restrictions and regulations of the trading
monopolies. Secondly, it allowed foreign merchants to trade
with greater ease between this country and their own shores.
This second possibility affected considerably the trade in York-
shire cloths, and many foreign merchants settled in Leeds and
other parts of the West Riding during the eighteenth century
In the discussions which followed the establishment of free
trade to Hamburg, Leeds merchants continually expressed their
opinion that the new conditions would certainly flood Yorkshire

1 I\ngiand's Improvement, 1>\ Koi*er Coke, p. .'i quoted in Ordinances o]
llimtland Merchants, Preface, |>. li.

- Kastland Merchants were existing in Macpherson's dav (Annul-* oj Com-
>u, 1, , ( 1.S05), iv. roo).

1 I In- Adventurers meet in Trinity I kill arrayed in proper robes, have
a sermon preached ; also sjo to service everv 2~lh ol January.

246 STUART EXPERIMENTS chap.

with foreign merchants, who would take the trade out of the
hands of the Englishman. This contention availed nothing, and
the risk of such a foreign invasion was braved. The influx of
foreign merchants actually did take place, in the person of such
aliens as John Berkenhout,1 a native of Hamburg, who played
an important part in the economic life of Leeds as a trader in
cloth. These foreigners were looked upon with great disgust by
the native clothiers and merchants, and the whole attitude of
the Yorkshiremen is seen admirably in a petition sent by them
to the House of Commons upon the subject, drawn up some time
during the reign of Anne.2
The petition

' Sheweth that the Incouraging the Exportation of Manu-
factures by her Majesty's natural born Subjects directly to
Germany in a Regulated way of trade, exclusive of fforaigners
would, as your Petitioners humbly conceive, With due Sub-
mission to the great Judgement of this honble House, be for the
generall benefitt of the Nation. That since Forreigners have
been suffered to export the said Manufactures they have occa-
tioned them to be debased, and not to be so truly made as
formerly, wherby the esteem thereof abroad hath been lessened
and Forreign Manufactures Incouraged, and a long Credit hath
been introduced and many losses hath happened to ye Clothiers
of their debts to a considerable value ; the Members of the
Company of Merchant Adventurers, who whilest they were
supported were generous traders, exported great Quantitys and
paid well, have been discouraged and doc not send out near
such Ouantitys as formerly, and severall of them have wholly
left off ye said trade, which it is feared will in a little time come
wholly into the hands of Forreigners, and Occation an irre-
parable damadge to the Nation ; that the supporting of the
said Company in their . . . trade to Germany would as ye Peti-
tioners conceive be a means to prevent and put a stop to those
evils provided ye said Company were obliged to admit all her
Majesty's subjects into ye freedom of there Society upon easy
terms.'

In spite of such protests, the old barriers to freedom of inter-
change were swept away, and we are in the throes of the
eighteenth century. That century is of the greatest interest,

1 Sec Thoresby Soc. publications, vol. iv, p. 22O. Berkenhout died in 1759.

2 This is the petition of ' divers Clothbuyers, Clothiers and Clothworkers
and others concern'd in ye Woollen Manufacture in Hotherheld and places
adjacent ' (Cookson MSS. in Thoresby Soc. Library).

vii GILDS AND COMPANIES 247

because it is such a wonderful mixture of the old and the new. In
it we have the decease of so many ideas and institutions which
either had their origin in mercantilist theories, or which even
pushed their roots down into the soil of the Middle Ages. And
at the same time the new movements which are to dominate the
modern economic world are already groping through to the
. light. The century which lay between 1750 and 1850 was one
of stupendous development in industry, commerce, and in the
relations between these branches of national life and the State.
But this progress would not have been so easy or so rapid had it
not been for the manner in which the systems and organizations
of a former age were passing away during the first half of the
eighteenth century. A new order was knocking at the door
seeking admittance. When it did gain entrance it found the
room more or less swept and garnished. There were still many
survivals of the former system, but the great landmarks which
had so strongly characterized the Tudor and Stuart regimes
were gone, and their places were waiting to be filled by the ideas
and institutions of a new world.

CHAPTER VIII

FROM THE RESTORATION TO THE INDUSTRIAL
REVOLUTION— THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS

The years which lie between the accession of Charles II and
the coming of the Industrial Revolution constituted a well-
defined epoch in the development of the Yorkshire textile
industry, and on the whole comprised a period of progress.
The progress, however, was far from unbroken or constant.
The reign of Charles II was marked by depressions quite as
acute as those of the Commonwealth, and similar spasms of
bad trade occurred during the subsequent century. But in
spite of the black outlook at the commencement, and the
periodical blasts of misfortune, the epoch is one during which
the cloth-makers of Yorkshire prospered, and built up a powerful
industry, before steam and machinery came along to point the
way to still greater progress.

When Charles II came to the throne economic society was
smarting under the effects of twenty years of civil strife and
political disorder. The complaints of bad trade which came
from all parts of the country in 1659 were quite justified, for
industry and commerce were alike under a cloud. Nor did these
depressing circumstances vanish at the appearance of the restored
monarchy. Throughout Charles's reign the complaints con-
tinued ; in 1663 a committee was appointed to inquire into
' the reasons for the generall Decaye of Trade ',* and a similar
commission was chosen in 1669 to consider the ' causes and
grounds of the fall and decay of trade Y2 At later stages stagna-
tion was general, and there were many periods of temporary
or more lasting languor.

The causes of these depressions are easily discovered. In the
first place it took time to recover from the exhaustion ot
the previous thirty years. Secondly, the intense commercial
enmity of the I )utch expressed itself in naval warfare, and during
these wars (1665-7 ;m'' 1672-4) the Dutch harried the English

1 l). S. P., Chits. II, xcv. 53. - Hist. MSS. Comm., viii. 135-4.

THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 249

coast, hung about the river mouths, and pounced upon such
coal and cloth fleets as dared to venture on the North Sea.
Further, even if no actual war was in progress, the Dutch did
their utmost to exclude finished English cloths from their
country, and to take from England only raw materials or semi-
manufactured cloths. They were still superior to the English
as dyers and finishers, and thousands of Dutchmen still found
employment by dressing the cloths which were imported, white
and undressed, from England. This arrangement had been
fostered by the Merchant Adventurers, who still exported
annually large quantities of such pieces to the Low Countries.
As the monopoly of the Adventurers broke down, private factors
and middlemen carried on the trade. Joseph Holroyd, of Soy-
land, near Halifax, of whom more will be said later, was such
a man. His letter books show him, during the years 1706-7,
to be engaged in making large purchases of white kerseys on
behalf of Dutch finishers and merchants. Also, especially after
the Restoration, Dutch agents settled in the manufacturing
areas, where they bought and shipped new and old draperies,
unfinished, to their native land. Such men were to be found
in Leeds and the West Riding, and one man, Kyte by name,
a Dutchman living in Halifax, was in 1665 dispatching via
Hull and Newcastle thirty or forty packs of white kerseys
each week.1 Many of these cloths were then exported from
Holland by Dutch merchants to Turkey and elsewhere in
competition with the wares of English merchants.2

The third and greatest cause of this halting progress lay in the
very keen competition to which English traders were subjected
in foreign markets. The mercantilist policy which was being
pursued by most European countries aimed at building up strong
industries, and the attainment of self-sufficiency in the supply
of cloth as in most other branches (it economic life. France and
Holland did not want English cloths; they intended to make
their own. But to do so they must have wool and fuller's earth.
Of these raw materials they had only a scanty native supply,
and were therefore compelled to seek for such commodities in
other lands. England was especially fortunate in possessing

1 l>. s. /'., Cfuis. II, cxi. '*,() ( 1005).

-' Keport of Turkey Merchants, I). S. I'.. Chas. II. xcviii. 3; (1664).

250 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

large supplies of those necessaries of the textile trade, and
English writers often boasted that, in their opinion, England
held the world's supply of these precious substances. ' Wool
is the flower and strength, the revenue and blood of England . . .
and in the supply of wool and Fuller's Earth this nation is by
God peculiarized in these blessings. ... It is possible and probable
that other parts of the World may produce Fuller's Earth, but
neither in such fineness nor abundance as this in England ' ; *
so declared the author of The Golden Fleece. France and Holland
were fully aware of the high quality of the English raw materials,
and made great efforts, openly or surreptitiously, to obtain
supplies. Wool was a popular commodity for smuggling to
these countries, and, having obtained the desired supplies and
placed heavy impositions upon English cloths, the French and
Dutch were able to ' suck the sweetness of the Sinews of our
Trade ',2 and develop their own textile industries. This growth
of rivals, fed partly on English materials, caused constant
controversy, much thought, and frequent legislation, and the
Government spared no pains to prevent the growth of the industry
in other countries at our expense. Further, when a continental
country such as Prussia or Russia set out to initiate and build
up a textile industry, it attempted to induce Englishmen to go
over and instruct the natives in the art of cloth making. We hear
repeatedly of ' divers Workmen transported . . . together with
ye said comodities [i. e. wool, &c], to the end and intent to sett
up the Manufacture of Clothing in other countries '.:i In 1738
a writer instances the case of a Mr. John Hudson of Yorkshire,
who went out to Altona and began to make cloth there in
1732, ' and now [1738] there is at that place above 100 looms,
and those that arc gone over lately are to set up the making
of stuffs and stockings and narrow goods, and have carried their
engines and other utensils along with them, . . . and severall broad
looms to make calimancoes, camblets and divers other stuffs.'4
Tin- protectionist policy of Colbert dealt a hard blow at the
North Country, for the cheap northern cloths had found one of

1 The Golden Fleece, by \V. S., Gentleman (1656), pp. 60-4.

2 England's Glory, by a true lover of his Country (1669).

3 D. S. /'., (has. II, xcv. 20 (1663).

4 Pamphlet, Observations on British Wooll and the Manufacture of it, by
a Northamptonshire manufacturer (1738), pp. 10-11.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 251

their best markets in France. The French, however, had
quickly acquired the art of making cheap wares, and in 1670
a writer from Lille declared that 4 the French are now got into
a way of making a Low-price-sort of Cloath called " Searge de
Berry " which comes as cheap as Northern Cloaths and of much
better wool ... in which they have cloathed a great number of
their souldiers \x Four years later another writer gives the
following lamentable picture of the decline in the demand for
northern fabrics :

' There have, about 12 or 14 yeares agoe, come from Kendal
to this towne [London], 6 or 8,000 peeces a yeare, and not now
300 peeces ; of Kearseys from the West of Yorkshire 10,000
peeces a yeare, not nowe 500 to be shipped for franco ; from
Lancashire severall thousand peeces of bayes formerly, and
nowe scarce one ; and all, from the excessive customes, dis-
couraged and disabled to send to France.'2

Thus, from the Restoration to about the end of the century,
the woollen industry experienced a period of stagnation, due to
the expansion of the textile industries in those countries where
English cloths had formerly found a substantial market. ' In
divers foreign countries, France, Holland, Flanders, Spain,
Portugal, Sweden, Silesia, Lunebcrg, and other parts of Germany,
new manufactures have been set up, which we take to be another
reason why our trade in woollen has not been further enlarged.'
In these words a commission reported to the House of Lords
in 1702. Men (if Yorkshire were of the same opinion ; in 1703
the merchants and clothiers around Leeds declared that ' the
Woollen Manufacture doth sensibly decline in severall branches,
particularly in the vending thereof into lforaigne count revs ',
and the men of Halifax, with their usual personal frankness,
asserted that ' upon the Woollen Manufactures and Trade
depends in a great Measure the Wealth of your Majstys King-
dome, the Imployment of the poor, and the Incouragment of
Navigation, which Trade is greatly Decayed of Late in these
Northerne partes V

This unsatisfactory condition ol the industry attracted much

1 England's Interest by Trade Asserted, by W. Cuter (1671), who quotes
the ,1 hi >ve extract .

'■ D. S. /'., (lias. II, vol. .V'l, p. 171 (Julv 27, 1074).

' Treasury Papers, lxxxiv, no. 1^ (1703). A simil.tr petition came from
Wakefield.

252 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

attention from the Government, and persistent and varied
attempts were made to infuse the cloth trade with vigour and
new life. The first attempt was by means of a series of statutes
which aimed at increasing the demand for woollen goods. The
idea dated back to at least the reign of Henry III, when the
Oxford Parliament decreed that every one ' should use woollen
cloth made within the country '.* During the depressions of
the reign of James I many people complained that the wearing
of silks and foreign fabrics was displacing the good old English
woollens, and clamoured for legislation to compel the wearing
of English woollen cloths in preference to these fancy and foreign
materials.2 Others made a different suggestion which was now
embodied in the statute of 1666. This act, ' for the encourage-
ment of the Woollen Manufacture of the Kingdom ', demanded
that ' noe person . . . shall be buryed in any Shirt ... or Sheete,
made of or mingled with Flax, Hemp, Silk, Haire, Gold or Silver,
or other than what shall be made of Wooll onely ... or be putt
into any Coffin lined or faced with anything made or mingled
with Flax, Hemp, &c, upon paine of the forfeiture of the
Summe of Five pounds, to be imployed to the use of the Poore
of the Parish where such person shall be buryed \3 This order
neither produced the desired boom in trade nor materially
enriched the poor of the parishes, for it seems to have been
generally disregarded. In 1678, therefore, it was replaced by
a much more formidable decree, which directed that a register
should be kept in every parish by the incumbent or his substitute,
in which some one must certify that everything about the corpse
was made of sheep's wool only.4 This information was to be
supplied in an affidavit made by the relations of the deceased,
and lodged with the incumbent within eight days of the inter-
ment, under penalty of five pounds. The Act, reinforced in
1680, 5 remained on the Statute Book until the nineteenth century.
Entries in accordance with its clauses and instances of its
infringement are occasionally encountered in the local parish
registers, and generally run as follows :

1724. ' Mary Higgins, of Allerton, makes oath that May
Mitchell, of the same place, was not wrapt ... in any sheet . . .

1 Ashley, Economic History, I. n. 194.

2 I). S. P., Jas. I, exxxi. 55. :! Statute 18-19 Chas. II, c. 4.
♦ Statute 30 Chas. II, c. 3. ; Statute 32 Chas. II, c. 1.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 253

or shroud but that was made of sheep's wool only as by Act of
Parliament decreed.' 1

Richmond Quarter Sessions, 1679. ' Fine of five pounds levied
on the goods of Thomas Norton, late deceased and buried in
the Bedale Parish Church, no certificate having been made to
the Rector of Bedale within eight days of the buriall that the
said Thomas was buried in wool according to the Statute.' 2

These statutes were far from being dead letters, but it seems
probable that here, as in all legislation which relied for its
effectiveness on the vigilance of local administrators, there was
every degree of laxity and rigour, according to the character
and the temper of the local clergy. Again, the poorer classes,
to whom woollens were the everyday cloths at hand, would have
little inclination to brave the law by using linen and cotton
fabrics ; the wealthier neighbour was willing to take the ri.sk,
as was Thoresby in the ease of his father, who died in October
1070. :1 Hence Macpherson, writing at the end of the eighteenth
century, complains that ' such is the vanity of the rich and great
that they continue to pay the penalty rather than not adorn
the deceased with fine linen, lace, &c, though this is so con-
trary to our true and national interest '.4

Legislation with a similar aim strove to forbid the growth of
the manufacture of calico,5 cotton, and similar upstart fabrics,
under the belief that any development of such new industries
could be made only at the expense of the older manufacture.

'The second method adopted to foster the woollen industry
comprised new determined efforts to improve the quality of the |
wares. Hut, as we have seen already, the corporations and com-
panies which were instituted for this purpose by the Stuarts
tailed dismally, and in the eighteenth century therefore the
State was compelled to fall back on direct legislation, administered
through the justices of the peace and their officials. With
these somewhat elaborate efforts we shall deal in a subsequent
chapter.

1 Thornton Register, June 17-4.

- Xorth Riding Quarter Sessions Records, vii, uS.

•' Atkinson, Ralph Thoresby, his Town and Times, vol. i, p. 72. Also Leeds
Parish Church Register, November 1. 1679.

1 Macpherson, tip. fit., ii. 50-- In the registers mention is made as follows :
' affidavit and certificate given '.

1 Calico Acts, 7 Geo. I, c. 7 ; and o Geo. II, c. 4

254 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

The third method was an attempt to prevent France and Holland ]
from obtaining their supplies of raw materials from this country. j
The exportation of wool and fuller's earth was stringently for-
bidden, and repeated attempts were made to suppress the illicit •
traffic, which, however, continued in spite of legislative efforts.
The story of these fruitless exertions is of considerable importance
in its bearing on the Yorkshire wool supply, and so a fuller
consideration of the topic must be postponed until we deal
with the manner in which the eighteenth-century clothiers
obtained their raw material. But we must note here, in passing,
that the State also attempted to forbid the exportation of
technical skill. In 1718 a statute was passed denouncing
the compacts which were being made between foreigners and
Englishmen, and laying down penalties against those who
enticed workmen, and those workmen who consented, to go
abroad to set up English industries in the land of the enemy.1
This Act failed to check the emigration of artisans, though
occasionally the law did seize upon some suspected person, as
for instance in October 1727. At the Leeds General Sessions of
that year John Windsor and William Simpson, cloth-dressers,
were accused of having 'promised and contracted to leave the
realm of Great Britain and go to Spain, there to exercise their
art and to teach the mystery of cloth-dressing to the subjects of
the King of Spain '. The prosecution, however, broke down,
and the men were acquitted.

Thus over the broad field of English economic life the outlook
was often gloomy, and it might even seem possible that in the
struggle between the great commercial empires England would
come out defeated. Why should not France or Holland secure
the mastery of the industrial and commercial world, and become
the workshop and the carrying agent for mankind ? Nay more,
would England ever emerge from the cloud under which she lay
in those later decades of the Stuart period ?

The answer to these questions is to be found largely in the
general history of the next century, and also in the development
of certain factors which had begun to exert their influence before

1 Statute 5 Ceo. I, c. 27 ; renewed and strengthened, 23 Ceo. II, c. 13
(1750). The penalties inflicted by these Acts were very severe. For the first
offence /500 and twelve months' imprisonment, for the second £ 1,000 and
two years in prison.

viii THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 255

the Revolution of 1688. First amongst these was the building
up of our commercial and colonial empire, the foundations of
which had been well and truly laid during the seventeenth
century. India, North America, and other territorial acquisi-
tions opened up new sources of niw material or provided new
markets, and a brisk trade in cloth soon developed between
Yorkshire and the North American colonies.1 At the same time
the European market was extended by the Methuen Treaty
of 1703, which opened Portugal still further to English cloth
dealers, and by the relations of William of Orange and the
1 lanoverian kings with the Continent. As the English navy
gained greater mastery oxer the sea the complaints of piracy
and of the dangers of the ocean highways became less frequent,
and merchants could make their journeys in peace and security.

Secondly, the whole standard of economic activity was raised
bv the various steps which were taken during the last decade \
of the seventeenth century. The founding of the Bank of
England, the institution of the National Debt, the restoration
of the currency, and the developments in credit, paper money,
and marine insurance, all helped British commerce to feel its
way towards a state of greater efficiency and more complex
organization. The commercial class was growing in wealth and
importance, and although the old pioneer companies had lost
their former influence, newer associations, such as the East
India Company, had acquired great power, political and
economic, over the regions in which they traded. The mercantile,
and financial magnates found their way into parliament,- took
on an air of respectability, and even attained the greatest social
heights by marriages with the nobility of the realm. Defoe
marvels at that new product, the gentleman merchant, and
declares that "Trade is so far from being inconsistent with
a gentleman that in England trade makes a gentleman, tor alter
a generation or two, the tradesman's children come to be as
good gentlemen, statesmen, parliament-men, judges, bishops
and noblemen as those of the highest birth and most ancient
families '.3 The nobility as yet showed little general interest

1 I). S. !'., Chas. II, vol. ,V>2, p. 47.

- (ice, Trade and Navigation of England considered ( 1739), p. 239.

■' I )efoe, Complete Tradesman, p. 246. See also Ciibbins, Industry in England,
PP- 3--S-

256 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

in commerce, probably because the ' youth of liberal education,
never reading anything of manufacture, &c, in Homer or Virgil,
or their college notes, . . . are either generally silent in this
matter, or speak of it with contempt ; . . . thus they are accurate
in Logic and Philosophy, which do not add twopence per year
to the riches of the nation, . . . whilst the notions of trade arc
turned into ridicule, or much out of fashion '} A more probable
explanation was that the more spirited landed proprietors
devoted their enthusiasm and energy to agricultural pursuits,
and were in the van of agricultural improvement. Arthur Young
is full of praise for the splendid work done by the landed gentry ;
Townshend left politics for turnips ; Walpole was intended by
his father to be the first grazier in the country, but preferred the
political field.2 In the north the nobility were giving much
assistance, pecuniary and otherwise, to commercial enterprises
and to the improvement of the means of communication. The
Earl of Thanet, on April 16, 1692, ' spent in a journey to Yorke,
to discourse with Mr. Thompson about the linen manufacture . . .
o. 13. 10.', and Viscount Irwin provided the Cloth Hall at
Halifax, and gave assistance in the erection of the first White
Cloth Hall in Leeds in 171 1. The turnpike and canal ventures
were generally sure of the favour of the neighbouring gentry and
nobility, and greater facilities for the purchase of land for roads
and canals were extended by them than the smaller holders.

The mention of the means of communication brings us to the
.third important influence in the economic progress of the
eighteenth century. Capital began to be called into greater
use, though not to any great extent for purposes of production.
Vast sums of money were, however, laid out in the very necessary
task of improving the means of transit throughout the country.
The few spare pounds of the clothier and yeoman farmer, or the
larger sums of the landed gentry, were pooled together to make
a turnpike road, to render a river navigable, or to construct:
a canal. For this work the geographical features ol the country
were very favourable. There were no outstanding difficulties
to be overcome in the form of vast deserts, lofty mountain
ranges, or great distances. The carrying of a canal over the

1 Britannia Linguens, or A Discourse of Trade (1680), in Smith's Memoirs
of Wool, vol. i. - Morley, Walpole, p. 2.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 257

Pennine Chain was about the only great obstacle to be faced,
and thus the improvement in the means of communication was
carried out with comparative case. By the end of the eighteenth
century the network of roads and waterways, though far from
complete, enabled transport to be carried on with infinitely
greater celerity than had been the case in the days when
Thoresby recorded his travelling experiences during the early
part of the century. When one remembers that the wool had
to travel many miles in going through the various processes of
manufacture, and considers the extremely unkempt state of the
highroads prior to the revolution in the means of transit, it is
surprising that an industry so widely scattered as the woollen
manufacture should make any progress whatever. Certainly
few improvements could be more welcome to the clothier than
a reformation of the highways. From the time when he travelled
into the wool-producing areas to the time when he deposited
his cloth on the stall in the market he was constantly on the
road, and hence the making of good highways was to him a verit-
able blessing.

Finally, the closing years of the seventeenth century and the ,
whole of the eighteenth century were marked by the rapid growth
of two new branches of the textile industry in the north. Lan-
cashire had formerly resembled Yorkshire in its textile activity,
and had been famous for the production of various types of
cheap cloths, ' frizes ', ' cottons ', fustians, &c. Now in the
eighteenth century this manufacture of woollens was partially •
replaced by the production of cotton goods. Cotton was im-
ported from the American colonies, and, thanks to the suitable
climate, Lancashire made rapid progress in the manufacture
of cotton fabrics, especially when released from legal disabilities.
Thus by the end of the eighteenth century cottons had displaced
woollens in Lancashire, although the manufacture of certain
kinds of woollen cloth lingered on in the Pennine districts and
round about Rochdale. Whilst Lancashire was transforming its
industry, the woollen area of Yorkshire received new vigour
by the institution of the worsted industry, which quickly found
a congenial home in the West Riding, and therefore allowed
Yorkshire to develop along dual lines, as a woollen and also as
a worsted manufacturing county.
1 S^6.i 2 s

258 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

These and other forces combined to make the eighteenth
century one of progress and general prosperity. The peace of
Walpole's regime, the internal order and security from invasion
which this country enjoyed even in times of commercial warfare,
were factors which allowed the new commercial and industrial
developments to make headway. Old industries found fresh
worlds to conquer, and new industries quickly assumed consider-
able dimensions. The home market expanded with the growth
of population, whilst the figures of our foreign trade gradually
mounted higher and higher. In 1662 the exports reached
£2,022,812, a figure which was less than that of the year of
depression 1622. 1 During the next ten years there was little
improvement, but the following figures indicate the subsequent
expansion :

Total Exports.

Exports of Worsted and Woollen Cloth.2

1688

£
4,310,000

i
2,600,000 (circa)

1700
1720

1730
1750

1760

7.621,053

6,910,899

8,548,982

12,699,081

• H.694.970

3,128,366

2,960,000 (average 1718-24)
3.669,734 (1 74 1)
4,206,762 (1751)
4,344,078 (1761)

The second column gives the values of woollen and worsted
exports. In the reign of Charles II these exports constituted
two-thirds of the total exports in value, but during the following
century, although there was an actual increase in the value
of such exports, the increase was not proportionate to that of
general exports. Woollen goods lost some of that predominance
which they had held for so long.

When we turn from a consideration of the national field to that
of Yorkshire, we find that progress here was very marked. True,
the national woollen and worsted industry was not expanding
at a very great pace, and the increase in the value: of its exports
between 1700 and 1760 was only about 30 per cent. But such
a figure fails to express the growth which was taking place in
Yorkshire, for in reality the West Riding was appropriating to
itself a greater and greater share of the national industry, and was
attracting the trade from other parts of the country. The worsted

1 House <>f Lords MSS., New Scries, vol. v, pp. 69-70.

2 Figures for 1700 from House of Lords MSS., New Series, v. 69-70. Others
from Macpherson, op. cit., vols, ii and iii.

viii THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 259

industry which grew up around Bradford was not a new national
asset ; it was an expansion made largely by outrivalling the
East Anglian worsted manufacturer. Similarly, the increase in the
output of ordinary woollen goods in Yorkshire was made at the
expense of the woollen areas of Lancashire,- the Midlands, East
Anglia, and the West of England. Thus, though there might
be no extraordinary increase in the national production of cloth,
Yorkshire was developing very rapidly by appropriating to
herself a larger proportion of the cloth manufacture of the
nation, and was preparing for the still greater progress which
the Industrial Revolution was to bring. For this assumption
of supremacy the West Riding was peculiarly equipped, both
before and after the advent of steam. The facilities which
existed for the use of water had been of great value from the
earliest times in influencing the settlement and progress of the
industry in the valleys of West Yorkshire. The legion of
fulling mills could never have existed but for the abundant
supply of water. Now, in the eighteenth century, when water
power was being utilized for grinding logwood and working
machines of various kinds, even the most insignificant little
mountain brook was of service, and the ubiquity of water was
a valuable natural asset to the industry. Then, when the
Industrial Revolution came along, a giant of iron and coal, all
the materials for the new machinery and for the power to drive
that machinery were found near the existing seat of the industry.
The West Riding had water power at hand so long as water power
was needed ; but when steam came to be the motive force,
and iron the material of which machines were made, iron and
coal were at the very door. Hence there was no necessity
for an extensive migration, and the industry remained in its
former place, though of course more concentrated in certain
centres.

As already indicated, the outstanding feature of Yorkshire's
textile development during the eighteenth century was the
growth of the worsted manufacture. It is necessary, therefore,
to turn our attention to this aspect of the story, and trace the
rise of this new branch of the trade. First, however, let us make
quite clear the general difference between worsteds and woollens,
and note briefly the technical distinctions between the two types

s 2

260 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

of cloth. The following description is quite inapplicable to
modern conditions, for the developments in textile knowledge,
machinery, and procedure have entirely transformed the
technique of the two industries, and effected a revolution in the
possible uses to which the various kinds of wool can be put.
Whatever, therefore, is said here must be regarded as referring
only to the old hand days.

The wool fibre differs from hair and some other fibres
in two respects. Firstly, it is waved and curly, and tends to
twist round anything with which it comes in contact. Secondly,
under the microscope, wool shows its edges to be covered with
scales or serrations, somewhat like the edge of a saw, or like
a fir-cone, if one could imagine such a cone with parallel edges.
These serrations all point the same way, and hence whilst the
wool is on the sheep's back, and the fibres all lie the same way,
they have no opportunity of interlocking. But if the various
fibres are placed across each other, or in any way thrown out
of a parallel arrangement, interlocking takes place. Not
merely do the wavy fibres curl round each other, but under
pressure the serrations of one fibre hook on to those of neigh-
bouring strands. This process is known as felting ; by it the
various threads lose their identity, and become mixed and
entangled in a homogeneous mass of wool, the strength of which
depends not merely upon that of each separate fibre, but also
on the grip which the threads have taken upon each other in
the matted texture. The process of felting is always accompanied
by a shrinkage in the volume of the wool, popularly known as
' running up '-1

Thanks to this felting property, wool can be made into cloth

the strength of which comes not from the firmness of its warp

and weft, but rather from the completeness with which the fibres

comprising warp and weft become interlocked and entangled

when submitted to the necessary treatment. As the felting is

accompanied by shrinkage in dimensions, the resultant fabric

is thicker, firmer, and stronger than when woven. It is no

1 The details such as are here given can be obtained from any technological
work on the textile industry. See especially McLaren, Spinning Woollen and
Worsted (1884) ; E. Baines, paper on 'Woollen Manufactures of England ',
read before the British Association at Leeds, 1858 ; Clapham, Woollen and
Worsted Industries (1907) ; Bean, On the Wool Track (1913).

vui THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 261

longer possible to distinguish the separate threads of warp and
weft amidst the maze of interwoven fibres, and hence the cloth
does not unravel at the edge or end. This type of cloth is known
as woollen ; it is comparatively rough in texture ; little ends
of fine fibres protrude from the surface, and can be seized and
pulled out with one's fingers or a pair of pincers.

On the other hand, cloth can be made which largely neglects
the strength given by felting, but relies almost entirely on the
strength of weft and warp. For certain kinds of cloth a smooth
surface is required, approaching that obtained on silk and cotton
goods. In order to achieve this effect, the cloth must be made of
yarn which is firm, even, and smooth. Such yarn would by
reason of its smoothness have no protruding fibres, and be
unsuited for felting. It must therefore be strong enough to
give the cloth firmness and durability without seeking the aid
of felting. In short, if the yarn must be smooth, the cloth loses
a great part of that strength which comes from interlocked
serrations, and this strength must be supplied by using a stronger
yarn. Such cloth is known as worsted, and the navy blue serge
so extensively used for men's suitings to-day is an excellent type
of the whole class. Smooth, firm, and even in texture, it has
almost a glossy appearance in a bright light, and the gloss
becomes more pronounced with wear. A piece of worsted
unravels at the end, and the thread which comes out is seen to
be quite firm and strong.

The essential difference between woollens and worsteds lies
therefore in the character of the yarn used. For the woollen,
the wavy and serrated properties of the fibres must be utilized
to the utmost in making the fibres into yarn and in fitting the
yarn for interlacing with neighbouring threads. For the worsted,
the fibres must be made into a strong thread, whose felting
proclivities are ignored or actually repressed. Before the
Industrial Revolution, differences in the character of the yarn
depended partly upon the character of the wool used and partly
upon the processes through which the wool passed prior to spin-
ning. Short-fibred wool was used for woollen yarn, long-fibred
for worsted ; the former was carded, the latter combed. Short-
fibred wools were more curly than long, and therefore were
more easily entangled. This cohesive faculty was accentuated

262 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

by carding, in which the fibres were converted into a maze by
being worked between two boards covered with wire spikes.
The fibres were crossed and doubled over each other in every
possible direction, and the handful of wool was thus held
together by the interlocking of the serrations and the curling
of one fibre round another. When the carded wool was spun,
the twist given increased the cohesiveness of the tangled material,
whilst the loose ends of fibres which protruded offered further
facilities for the rough yarn to interlace itself with adjacent
weft and warp.

Whilst the aim of carding was to arrange the fibres in as con-
fused a manner as possible, combing was intended to lay all the
threads in the same direction. The long-fibred wool could more
easily be kept straight than the short, and combing increased
this straightness. Combing achieved two things. It extracted
from amongst the long fibres any short ones which might be
present, the latter by reason of their greater curl twisting round
the teeth of the comb : at the same time it gave all the long
fibres a similar parallel direction. There were now no crossed
fibres, no fibres running contrary ways, and therefore scarcely
any interlocking. The combed wool when spun therefore
depended for its strength upon the natural firmness of the fibres,
plus that given by twisting them altogether.

Perhaps the accompanying diagrams (see p. 263) will help to
make the foregoing explanation more clear.

The difference in treatment of the material continued after
weaving. With one or two exceptions, all woollen cloths were
fulled, in which process the fibres of warp and weft, under
pressure and moisture, interlocked still more thoroughly, giving
a compact piece of material. Worsteds needed no such treat-
ment.

The establishment of a worsted industry in Yorkshire there-
fore meant the introduction of one new process in the existing
woollen industry, i. c. combing. From the account of the law-
suit of 1638 it appears that the long wools of Lincolnshire and

1 Modern conditions in the woollen and worsted industries are very different
from those described above. To-day, short wool can be combed, long wool is
sometimes carded, and much worsted wool is carded before it is combed.
Further, some worsteds are now milled in order to obtain greater firmness,
whilst some woollens are not nulled. See McLaren, op. < it-, chap. iv.

VIII

THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS

263

Leicestershire were being used for the manufacture of kerseys,
and were presumably carded. All that was required was to
replace carders of that wool by combers — by no means an easy
task. Combing required a considerable measure of skill, and the
necessary body of skilled wool-combers could only be obtained
gradually. Further, Yorkshire worsted cloths would have to
bear the competition of similar fabrics from the traditional
centres of the industry. How the West Riding confronted these
two difficulties we must now see.

(a) (b)

(d)

(a) Merino fibre, showing serrations.

(/<) Lincoln fibre, showing serrations.

(<) Carded wool, showing entangled arrangement of fibres.

(it) Combed wool, showing fibres lying parallel.

(i) Worsted yarn, showing, in exaggerated form, the smoothness of surface.

The Rise of the Worsted Industry in the West Riding

The manufacture of worsteds in England dates back to at least
the middle of the thirteenth century. Worsted cloths were
exported from Boston in 1302, ' and in 1315 formed a sufficiently
important article of commerce to be placed on a list of com-
modities on which Hartlepool was allowed to claim port tolls.2
By 1329 the manufacture of ' cloths of Worstede ' was large
enough to need regulations for the prevention of fraudulent
workmanship.3 The industry developed most rapidly in East

1 See Lipson, i>p. (//..chapter on the woollen industry, for early evidences ;
also Salzmann, op. cit., p. 139.

- Hcgi&trum Valatintim Dunelm, (Rolls Series), iv. 124.
■' Ashley, Economic History, I. ii. 200.

264 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

Anglia, and from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century
Norfolk and the eastern counties were easily foremost in the
worsted trade. Norwich was one of the largest, most wealthy,
and handsome towns in the kingdom ; ' an ancient, rich and
populous city ', said Defoe,1 and Arthur Young described it
as follows : ' In Norfolk we see a face of diligence spread over
the whole country. The vast manufactures carried on chiefly
by the Norwich weavers employ all the country around in
spinning yarn for them, besides many thousand packs of yarn
which they receive from other countries, even so far as York-
shire and Westmorland.' 2 Norwich was, in the seventeenth
and early eighteenth centuries, the ' Worstedopolis ' which
Bradford has since become. Its prosperity continued until
about the sixties of the eighteenth century, when the competi-
tion of the north and the general adoption of new and lighter
fashions began to bring about its decline.

Other centres and localities had risen into prominence during
the centuries, and in 1700 Exeter was famous for its serges,3
Canterbury and Colchester made good ' says ', Coventry was
doing a large trade in ' tammies ', and many smaller places
were centres of some branch of the manufacture, thriving and
populous.

When did the industry settle in the northern parts, and find
a home in the WTest Riding ? Briefly, the answer is that the
making of worsteds was taken up in Yorkshire almost as soon J
as in East Anglia, but was apparently forsaken during the
sixteenth century in favour of the staple kerseys and dozens.
During the Stuart regime fitful attempts were made to re-
establish the manufacture, but it was not until nearly 1700 that
West Riding manufacturers seriously turned their attention to
shalloons, says, and tammies. From that time onwards the
industry progressed, though at first only slowly, and by 1770
was large enough to be a most formidable rival of East Anglia.

The coverlets or ' chalons ' mentioned so frequently in the
first chapter were worsted cloths. As we saw, their manufacture

1 Defoe.'o/). cit., 1763 edition, i. 59—64.

- Arthur Young, Eastern Tour, \yj\, ii- 76.

3 Smith's Memoirs of Wool, i. 204. Defoe, Tour, 1727 edition, i. 323,
points out that the serge market at Exeter was, next to the heeds market, the
largest cloth market in England.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 265

was carried on in many parts of the county during the fourteenth
century, and York had its gild of coverlet weavers by about
1400. But this branch of cloth-making never attracted any-
great amount of attention : possibly the difficulty of getting
supplies of long-fibred wool impeded its progress. Hence, whilst
woollens flourished, worsteds languished. The coverlet weavers
of York in 1543 made their famous protest against the com-
petition of the country weavers, and had their monopoly over
the industry confirmed. But their own production was very
' small, whilst that of the country chaloners was probably reduced
considerably by the Act of 1543. Thus we find from a docu-
ment dated 1595 that at the end of the century the manufacture
of coverlets or any other kind of worsted goods in the county
was very small indeed. During the sixteenth century the
varieties of worsteds, which came under the heading of ' New
1 )niperies ', had been increasing rapidly, especially after the
influx of refugees into East Anglia during the Reformation
period. These new draperies were not brought under the control
of the ulnager until 1594, when the ulnage of new draperies was
farmed out to Sir George Delves and William Fitzwilliam for
twenty-one years.1 The farmers at once set out to investigate
the probable yield of their investment, and requested a certain
Peck to draw up an account of the extent to which new draperies
were being made in Yorkshire. Peck's report, or rather as it is
endorsed, 'My Brother Peck's Certificate of New Draperies in
the Countie of Yorke ', is a most interesting and illuminating
document.2 It shows that only a very small quantity of such
draperies was being produced in the county, and the figures
which it contains indicate that the farmers of the ulnage could
not expect to reap a fortune from the manufacturers of the
West Riding. The chief articles of manufacture which came
under the scope of Peck's inquiry were ' cushions ', of which
Bradford and Halifax together made less than 3,400 yearly,
coverlets and carpets, of which York made a few, and knitted
stockings, which were made in large quantities at Doncaster,
Richmond, and throughout the North Riding. Of worsted
cloths proper there is no mention, apart from the few coverlets,

1 Oriijinalia Rolls, 36 Kliz., part iii, Julv 13.

2 I). S. I'., Eliz., colli, j.

266 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

and thus by 1600 that industry had almost disappeared from
the West Riding. According to the Yorkshire wills of the
sixteenth century, worsted fabrics were occasionally used for
garments, but whether the cloth was made in the county or
not there is no indication. The inventory of John Pawson, the
Leeds clothier, dated 1576 (quoted in Chapter III), notes the
possession of ' vij paire of woll combes ', but all the cloths on
his premises were woollens, not worsteds. During the subse-
quent years visitors to Bradford are equally silent concerning
the existence of any worsted trade in the town or neighbourhood.
A traveller in 1639 declared that Bradford was ' a towne that
makes great store of Turkey cushions and carpetts ',* articles
which were ' new draperies ', but which can scarcely be regarded
as forerunners of the great industry which was subsequently
to develop there. Thus, up to the end of the Commonwealth,
the clothiers of the West Riding were still engaged almost
solely in making the old staple cloths, kerseys, pennistones,
broad cloths, and northern dozens.

Meanwhile the worsted industry was receiving the attention
of certain other inhabitants of the county. We have already
noticed the attempts made by the municipal authorities of York
to establish the manufacture of ' Norwich stuffes ', in order to
find employment for their poor people. This seems to have been
a popular idea with many Yorkshire Poor Law authorities, who
hoped by the introduction of a new industry to solve the problem
of pauperism. In 1652 the North Riding justices of the peace
drew up a similar scheme for the House of Correction at Picker-
ing.2 The details of this scheme are interesting in the light
which they threw on the position of the worsted industry in
Yorkshire at that time. The plan was drawn up ' for setting
persons to work on spinning and knitting woolen drapery in the
House of Correction . . . and instructing them in the art of
weaving such searges as are the most usual manufacture of the
weavers of the Eastern counties '. The pupils were to be drawn
from those who had been incarcerated in the House for wander-
ing or idle loitering, and also such other persons as were able

1 Journal of John Aston, 1639, Surtees Soc, vol. cxviii, p. 30. See also
Life of Marmaduke Rawdon, Camden Soc. publications, vol. Ixxxv, p. 121.

2 Order Book of the J.P.'s of the North Riding, April 1652, printed in Hist.
MSS. Comm., ix. 331—2.

viii THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 267

and willing to work, provided they came between the ages of
seven and sixty, and were ' not decrepitt '. The inmates were
to be employed at the occupation for which the North Riding
was noted, namely ' knittinge and spinninge both wollen and
Jersey, and all woollen drapery, makin stockins of wollen and
Jersey'. Hut at the same time, the House was to enlist the
services of ' a sufficient able woolcomber, who shall likewise
instruct others in the same faculty '. Further, whilst the comber
initiated his disciples into one branch of the worsted manufacture,
the master of the House was at the same time to ' setle and
employe one lowme sufficiently and well wrought by a worsted
weaver for Searges of the best sorts . . . such as are most usually
manufactured in Norwig, Norfolke and SufTolke '. The home
ot punishment was to become also the training college for a new
industry. The project achieved no lasting success, nor did the
North Riding become the centre of a nourishing worsted manu-
facture. East Anglia still retained its virtual monopoly of the
industry, and the most that Yorkshire could do was to prepare
and spin yarn, which was then carried south to feed the looms
11I Norwich and the surrounding counties.

During the last four decades of the seventeenth century
a gradual change came over the scene, as the industry once
more began to find a home in the West Riding. How exactly
this transformation took place one cannot say. James * suggests
that the industry may have been imported direct from East
Anglia by the settlement of southern merchants and manu-
facturers in a county where land and labour were cheaper, where
there was freedom from regulations and restrictions such as
existed in the Norwich area, as well as from the labour troubles
which frequently harassed East Anglian masters. Or it may
have been that sonic enterprising inhabitants of the West Riding,
finding the trade in woollens at a standstill, turned their atten-
tion from kerseys and broad cloths to serges and shalloons, and
either forsook woollens entirely, or ran both manufactures
together in double harness. Probably both these courses were
adopted. Norfolk merchants and manufacturers had been
putting out wool to be spun in Yorkshire, and had then taken
the yarn back to East Anglia for further treatment. Why not

1 James, n/>. rit., p. Jim.

268 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

transplant the whole of their industry to Yorkshire and have all
the processes of combing, spinning, and weaving carried out by
north country labour ? At the same time, Yorkshire clothiers,
yeomen farmers, and merchants began to turn their attention
to the possibility of improving their outlook by a change in
policy. The districts around Bradford and Halifax had suffered
severely during the Civil War, and their trade in cheap cloth
had been seriously injured by the various depressive influences
which we have already noted. The foreign nations had begun
to make their own cheap cloths, and were ceasing to purchase
the wares of Yorkshire. There seemed little prospect of much
future development in the manufacture of kerseys and other
such low-priced fabrics. Very well ; why not abandon the
manufacture of such commodities, and turn to other branches
of the trade in which other countries were still unoccupied ; in
short, why not manufacture worsted cloths, as did the men of
Norwich ?

This change occurred during the latter years of the seven-
teenth century and the first two or three decades of the eighteenth.
All the earliest evidence concerning worsted workers clusters
round this period. The first step seems to have been to make
bays, cloths which were half wool, half worsted — the warp being
of combed wool, the weft of carded. In 1688 the output of bays
in Yorkshire was sufficiently great to justify the inclusion of
this fabric in a short list of cloths on which subsidy and ulnage
were paid.1 Eighteen years later we find Joseph Holroyd,2
a cloth factor who lived near Halifax, engaged in a large trade
in bays. Holroyd made big purchases for London and foreign
merchants, and his letters for the years 1706-7 show him to be
buying heavily in all varieties of bays both for London and the
Low Countries. Consignments of 40 pieces are quite common,
and one invoice mentions the purchase of 250 such cloths for
a big customer in Rotterdam. There is no evidence in the
letters as to the manufacture of full worsteds, but from other
sources we know that serges and shalloons were now being
made in many parts. Watson, in his History of Halifax (1775)
states that ' The Shalloon trade was introduced here about the

1 House of Lords MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm., xiv, pt. vi, p. 42.

2 Letter Books of J. Holroyd and S. Hill (Halifax, 1914), Intro., and letter 34.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 269

beginning of the century'.1 From an indenture of apprentice-
ship dated March 1, 1715, we learn that a certain James Haggas
was hound apprentice with John Jackson of Halifax,2 to learn
the art of weaving shalloons, the type of worsted for which the
Halifax district eventually became famous. Obviously, there-
fore, by 1715 there were men in the Halifax area busy at work
as fully fledged masters of the craft. Similar evidence from
other parts is abundant. A ' Searge Weaver ' who resided in
Marsh Lane, Leeds, was brought before the Leeds justices in
I7°5 >' :l wool-combers were numerous in the same town about
1710, and in 1721 Mr. Thomas Jackman, worsted comber, paid
his five guineas and was admitted to the freedom of the Corpora-
tion of Leeds.4 In the Skipton parish register, wool-combers
arc mentioned in 1717, and the Keighley register records the
death of a shalloon maker in 1724, and a woolcomb maker in
1725.5 Denholme and Haworth were now flourishing worsted
centres ; Keighley was regularly sending pieces of shalloon to
London before 1725, and when Defoe came north, about the
same year, he found the manufacture established in many parts,
but especially around Halifax, where at every house he saw
a ' tenter and on almost every tenter a piece of cloth, kersie or
shalloon, which are the three articles of this countrie's labour '.G
From this time onwards the growth was rapid, though in some
cases fitful and subject to strong opposition and keen discourage-
ment. That at least was the experience of Sam Hill, a clothier
in the Halifax district, who in 1737-8 turned his attention from
kerseys to shalloons. A fragment of Hill's letter-book, covering
only three weeks, is extant, and gives a vivid idea of the diffi-
culties to be overcome. Hill apparently decided to develop
a trade in shalloons, Bocking Bays and Exeter Long Ells, and
so began to solicit the buyers of his kerseys to take a few worsteds
as well. The response was far from satisfactory, and at first those
who took Hill's shalloons and bays found it difficult to get rid
of them. At times Hill grew weary at the non-success which

1 ()(■>. , it., pp. 67-9.

- Sec Dawson, /. > <s Leaves of Craven History, p. -'<».

' Leeds Sessions Records, ii. 203.

' Leeds Corp. Records, ii. 17O. Sec also Sessions Order.--, ii. 501 and 627.

■ Ivi-lilcy and Holmes, Keighley Past and Present, p. 105.

" Defoe's Tour ( 1 7 -• 7 edition), 111. 134-5.

270 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

attended his efforts. ' Am perfectly sick of the little or no
hopes of the Shalloon Bussiness ',* he writes to one customer,
and to another he declares, ' Am much concerned to hear you
have not any Trade for Shalloons pray you as soon as possible
revive me with the Contrary '.2 Hill struggled hard to gain
greater skill and experience ; he experimented with different
varieties, wrote eager requests to his customers for information
and advice, sent samples, and strove hard to imitate in quality
and appearance the worsteds of Norwich and Exeter. Amid all
his worries, Hill was buoyed up by his immense confidence —
one almost wrote conceit. Witness the following extracts from
his letters : ' I am studying to outdo all England with the sort
Sam Hill [shalloons] if quality and price will do it . . . but must
earnestly beg of you to lett them go for a small profit however
till they be known.' 3 ' I like to make [Shalloons and Long Ells]
and fancy I shall in time doe It well.' 4 ' I will send you the
6 pieces Shaloon which shall be such as never was sent to Leeds
at that price.' 5 ' The narrow Shaloons . . . are I think such
goods as I may say are not to be out done in England by any
Man, let Him be who He will (I don't value).' 6 So Hill plodded
on : the competition from the older fields of industry was
terribly keen, but he was not daunted. In the darkest hour,
when reports from his customers were very bad, he boldly
declared, ' I think it now evident these Manufactories [Bocking
Bays and Exeter Serges] will come in spite of fate into these
northern Countrys '.7 A true prophecy, for within fifty years
Yorkshire had usurped the position of supremacy and become
the stronghold of the industry.

By 1750 the industry was widespread throughout the Riding,
and shalloons, calimancoes, tammies, camlets, &c, were made
so far east as Leeds and Wakefield. Of the industrial centres,
Halifax8 was the most important in the output of worsteds.
The greatness of the town was twofold ; it was alike a worsted
and woollen centre. The demands for cloth for the troops in
the various wars of the eighteenth century were met by the

1 Letters Books, Holroyd and Hill, no. 102.

2 Ibid., no. 135 3 Ibid., no. 112. 4 Ibid., no. 116.
5 Ibid., no. 130. d Ibid., no. 133. ? Ibid.

" Halifax population, 1738, 5,500 ; 1775, 7,500.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 271

supply of Halifax kerseys, i.e. woollens. The North Sea trade
in these cloths grew to sueh an extent that Defoe noted a I [alifax
factor who traded by commission to the extent of £60,000 per
annum in kerseys alone.1 On the other hand the worsted trade-
was very considerable, and Defoe estimated that the parish of
1 [alifax was producing 100,000 pieces of shalloons yearly.2
Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the Levant were markets for Halifax
wares, and a trade with Guinea was being developed in ' Says '
of a strong blue shade. ' These last were packed in pieces of
12.J yards in length, wrapped in an oilcloth painted with negroes y
and elephants to captivate the natives.' 3 To the busy market,
or to the Cloth Hall erected by Viscount Irwin, was brought
the produce of the parish itself, Keighley, Haworth, and Colne,
and merchants from Leeds, or their factors, came and bought
great quantities of white undressed cloths, which they exported
to Holland and Hamburg.4 The position of Halifax was there-
fore that of a powerful centre for a widely scattered district,
and it seemed quite possible that Halifax would forge ahead as
the metropolis of the worsted industry. That it lost that supre-
macy to Bradford is a matter the causes of which we cannot stay
to consider. It is one of the strange incidents in the history of the
West Riding that a town which had been supreme in the woollen
industry, and then in the worsted, should fall from that position
as Halifax did with the coming of the Industrial Revolution.

Wakefield, which was the second most important worsted
centre, enjoyed a period of great prosperity during the eighteenth
century. It had long been engaged in the woollen industry, and
now took to itself the manufacture of ' tammies ', a thin worsted
fabric, a glazed variety of which was used lor window-blinds
and curtains, with a considerable sale both at home and abroad.0
The opening of the Aire and ("alder navigation in ibo^" and the
following years brought enormous wealth and trade to the town,
tor the long wool of Lincolnshire and Leicestershire, the very
heart's desire of the worsted maker, was now brought by bo.it

1 Defoe, ,>/>. tit., 17OJ edition, iii. 139. Also Dodsley's Road Book, 1 7 5 ' > .

- I >efoe, np. cit., iii. 1 30,.

:1 Pennant, Tour in Scotland, 1770 (1776 edition), iii. y>2.

I Halifax and its Gibbet Law, by Wm. Hentlcy, 170S, p. 27.

■ lirit. Ass. 'i . Handbook, Leeds, 1S90, p. 144 n. Also James, op. cit., p. 205.

II See Chapter XI, section on communications.

272 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

up the Calder, to be sold in the busy market at Wakefield.
Wool growers and dealers forwarded wool from all parts of
England to the factors at Wakefield, who had then little difficulty
in disposing of it over the vast industrial field situated to the
west and north of that town. Wakefield therefore figured largely
as an emporium for raw materials. In addition to this, it was
also a growing market for cloths, and in the production of
tammies it gradually stole from Coventry its monopoly of that
fabric. In the Tammy Hall,1 built in 1766, these worsted pieces
changed hands, and the Hall became one of the most important
centres of trade in the county. Further, WTakefield was becoming
important as a ' dressing ' and ' finishing ' town 2 ; undyed
and unfinished goods were sent there for further treatment,
before their final dispatch to London and the Continent. And,
whilst an important textile centre, Wakefield had become a great
corn market. Large supplies of corn were brought up the
Calder, and many people declared that Wakefield was the
' greatest corn market in the North of England '. Such a town
was naturally the abode of wool-factors, wool-staplers, merchants,
dyers, corn-dealers, &c, in addition to the official class, which
was already there in considerable numbers. Here were many
warehouses for cloth, corn, and wool, and so far had the mammon
of unrighteousness invaded the place that even the little chantry
chapel on the bridge had succumbed, and ' had been converted
into a warehouse which was let to an old cloath's man, who used
it as a warehouse for goods'.3 The general appearance of the
town seems to have been very pleasing to the various travellers
who have left on record their impressions. ' A town exceedingly
populous, upon account of the great number of hands it employs
in the woollen manufacture'4; 'an opulent and handsome
town ' u ; ' one of the most wealthy and genteel of the clothing
towns of Yorkshire' 6; ' the handsomest of the trading towns
in the West Riding ' 7 — such were the verdicts of four tourists,
and the fame of this town, with its clean but narrow streets, its

1 James, History of the Worsted Manufacture, p. 265.

- Arthur Young, Northern Tour, i. 151.

:1 I )cfoe, op. at., iii. 1 12.

4 Oxford's Journey, Portland MSS., vi. 142.

5 Honsman, Topographical Description . . . of the West Riding (1800), p. 183.
G Edmund Daves, Works (1805 edition), p. 35.

' England Described, by Aikin (1818), p. 61.

vni THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 273

elegant houses, its pleasant buildings, cheap food, and abun-
dance of social life, still kept for it the title of ' Merrie Wake-
field '.!

Of Bradford it is difficult to gather much. We have already
noted its depopulation and the decay of the small woollen
trade which had flourished there, and there can be no doubt
that the fortunes of Bradford had sunk to a very low ebb.
Whenever petitions were forwarded to Parliament concerning
the woollen trade, Halifax, Wakefield, Leeds, and Huddersfield
made their voices heard, but never Bradford. Only very
slowly did the worsted manufacture establish itself there ;
hence Defoe, who knew Yorkshire very well, treated the town
in a most cursory manner, declaring that it had become a market,
but was ' of no other note than having been the birthplace of
Dr. Sharp, the good Archbishop of York \2 In 1752 it began
the construction of the canal which joined it to the Leeds and
Liverpool Canal ; in 1773 it obtained a Piece Hall, and in the
nineties one or two mills were erected there. Its expansion
had been considerable between 1740 and the end of the century,
but it was still only a small town, with a population in 1780 of
about 4,200.:$ Even in 1818 Dr. Aikin, in his England Described,
devoted only seven lines to Bradford as against thirty to Halifax.
Its reputation was bad, if we can gather anything from the
frequent legislation against frauds committed by workers in
worsted, or from the following somewhat damaging verse in an
eighteenth-century Methodist hymn : 4

On Bradford likewise look Thou down
Where Satan keeps his seat.

This insignificance of Bradford is partly to be accounted for
by the fact that the industry grew up scattered over the whole
of the district round about, and was not concentrated in the
town itself. Again, Leeds and Wakefield were of considerable
size, either because they were the abodes of merchants, middle-

1 In .1 letter printed in Old Yorkshire, i. 13, and dated 1766, it is stated that
the ('alder was so clear at Wakefield that salmon were to he seen leaping the
dam stakes at Kirkgatc.

1 Defoe, o/>. (it., \jG2 edition, iii. 14;. Also 1748 edition, iii. 147.

;l This figure is quoted and accepted by all Bradford local historians, e.g.
J. \V. turner, firadford Atitiquarv (1884), i. 135.

Wise 38 of a hymn with ["4 verses, ' The progress of the Gospel in York-
shire and other parts ', 175 1, by Wm. Darney.

1526.12 T

274 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

men, &c, or because they were finishing centres. Thus their
population was either largely concerned with marketing transac-
tions, inns, and offices, or consisted of men engaged in the
dyeing, dressing, shearing, and other finishing processes. Now
Bradford was, until the latter part of the century, only a small
market, and not a finishing centre. The goods were bought
there ' in the white ' x by Leeds merchants, and then taken
down to Leeds to be finished before export.2 It was not until
the last years of the eighteenth century, and the advent of
steam power and machinery, that Bradford really began to
make rapid progress. In the adoption and improvement of
machinery, and in the manufacture of new types of wares, men
of Bradford showed great enterprise, and enabled the town to
outstrip Halifax. Further, the linking up of Bradford with the
Leeds and Liverpool Canal gave to the town greatly improved
means of communication. This ease of access was further
developed to Bradford's advantage when the railway, especially
the Midland Railway, brought Bradford almost on to the main
line, whilst Halifax remained more or less isolated. Halifax
was then left wide of the main arteries of traffic, its importance
diminished, and Bradford rapidly assumed the position of
metropolis of the new industry.3

Even Leeds, stalwart heart of the woollen body, was partly
captured by worsteds. Arthur Young in 1770 4 noted that in
addition to broad cloths there were ' some shalloons and many
other stuffs, particularly Scotch camblets, grograms, and cali-
mancoes, etc.', manufactured in and around Leeds. The ' cam-
blet ' was the chief of these, and consisted of a rough, thick,
worsted material, which was considered especially valuable for
resisting rain, and was therefore used to a great extent in the
making of cloaks and wraps for those who were travelling by
coach ; it also formed the customary dress material of the poorer
classes of women.5 The substitution of lighter cloths, the adop-

1 i.e. undyed and unfinished.

2 This was the case until well into the nineteenth century. About 1840
Bradford goods began to be finished on the spot.

3 Population of Bradford (town) : 1780,4,200; 1801,6,393; '831,23,233;
185 1 , 52,501 .

4 Arthur Young, op. cit., i. 152.

5 Reminiscences of an Octogenarian, by Henry Hall, of the firm of Clapham
and Hall ; printed in James, op. cit., p. 311.

vni THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 275

tion of the macintosh, and the growth of the railroad rendered
the camlet unfashionable, and Leeds remained true to its first
love, the woollen.

With these and other towns as its strongholds, the worsted
industry grew steadily throughout the century. It had its years
of bad trade and of good,1 it lost old markets and gained new
ones.2 It gradually won from the more southerly manufacturers
the monopoly or predominance which they had formerly enjoyed.
The tammies of Wakefield replaced those of Coventry, the
serges of Exeter fought in vain against the growing popularity
of Halifax and Bradford wares, and East Anglia, far from
claiming the yarn of Yorkshire spinners for its looms, was soon
content to send north some of the yarn spun in its own homes.3
From Arthur Young 4 and from the Report of a Parliamentary
Committee in 1774 5 we can gather the relative position of cast
and north about 1770. Eighteenth century statistics can seldom
be taken as accurate ; they are often little more than estimates
based on a few facts and a host of suppositions. Still if we do
not treat them as being perfectly accurate, the general position
can be ascertained.
Output of Worsteds for West Riding in 1772=^1,404,000

(committee's figures).
Output of Worsteds for Norwich area in iyyo=£i, 200,000

(Arthur Young).

Thus the West Riding produce at least equalled that of
Norwich by 1770. Again, James and others estimated that about
So, 000 persons were employed in the industry of the West Riding.
Young gives the corresponding figure for Norwich as 72, 000, 6
and thus in terms of employees, as well as in quantity of output,
Yorkshire had won a high position even before the great changes
came to accelerate its progress.

1 1704-80 had many years of had trade. Agitations, disorders, charitable
doles, &c, figure in the records of the times. See Newspapers, Mayhall's
Annals, vol. i, and Arthur Young. 1783—93 comprised the hey-day of York-
shire's industrial prosperity in the eighteenth century.

- The Napoleonic Wars made trade with Western Kurope unsafe. Still in
170; Halifax was exporting thousands of pieces of shalloons to the Levant
and Turkey {Brit. Dir., 1793, iii. 320).

:1 James, >>/>. n't., p. 307. Also Arthur Young, Eastern Tour, ii. 70. Young
says that the great day of Norwich was 1749—60.

1 Arthur Young, Eastern Tour, ii. 70 et scq.

•"• This report is printed in both James, pp. 2S0-4, and BischofT, Wool,
Woollens, and Sheep, i. 186-90. " Arthur Young, Eastern Tour, ii. 76.

T 2

276 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

There was considerable intercourse between the northern
worsted area and that of East Anglia during the century. Partner-
ships were occasionally formed between Yorkshiremen and
inhabitants of Norfolk, as for instance, ' the co-partnership
between Mr. John Hodgson of Leeds, woolstapler, and Messrs.
Joseph Ames and John Roe of Norwich ', which was dissolved
iii -j.757.1 Also in matters of general interest to the trade the
two districts worked in unison, joining in petitions to Parlia-
ment whenever their prospects were in danger, and after the
formation of the Worsted Committees in Yorkshire and East
Anglia these two committees kept in constant correspondence
until the demise of the Norfolk industry.

Progress of the Woollen Industry during the Eighteenth Century

Meanwhile the woollen industry had been pursuing a similar
career, though its progress was perhaps more slow and fitful.
The home demand was proportionately reduced by the adoption
of worsteds and cottons, and Sam Hill in 1737 declared that
' the encrease of the Bocking Baysc makcing I doe rcaly believe
causes one third fewer kerseys to be made V2 The foreign
market was subject to all the vicissitudes of eighteenth century
wars and enmities. The series of commercial wars, chiefly with
France, placed foreign trade in a position of unstable equilibrium.
First one section and then another of the foreign market was
closed to English wares, whilst the growth of textile industries
abroad and the smuggling of wool helped to cause acute depres-
sions at various stages in the century. In 1742, for instance,
the Leeds Corporation was bewailing the fact that ' trade and
manufactures are every day declining ', and attributed it to the
illicit exportation of wool.3 Nine years later, the merchants
and clothiers of Leeds asked Parliament to approach the Austrian
Government with a view to removing the recent heavy duties,
which were said to have closed the Low Countries to Yorkshire
cloths.4 In 1756 the same petitioners complained of the recent
decrees of the Regent of Hanover that all Hanoverian troops,
who had formerly been clad in Yorkshire cloth, should hereafter

1 Leedes Intelligencer, August 9, 1757.

2 Letter Books, no. 124.

:| Wardell, Municipal History of Leeds, p. 74.
1 Add. MSS., 15873, f. 70, November 19, 175 1.

vin THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 277

wear Hanoverian fabrics only.1 The growth of clothmaking in
the German States was a constant source of uneasiness to
English dealers, who were afraid that one of their best markets
would slip from their grasp.2 The Yorkshire cloths were especially
suited for military garments, and had enjoyed the favour of
many European Governments until the rise of the native indus-
tries dispensed with the need for the imported article. The
policy of Peter the Great had definitely aimed at the cultivation
of a textile industry in Russia,3 in order to supply the require-
ments of his armies. Hence the Yorkshire clothiers had to fight
hard to maintain a hold on the European markets, and their
trade with the Continent was subject to all manner of vicissi-
tudes.

Yorkshire had also built up a considerable trade with North
America, and hence the war with the colonies brought about
a temporary slump in the sale of woollens. The years 1771-3
had been gloomy, with bad harvests, dear food, and depression
in trade. Then came the American War, which closed a valuable
market against the clothiers and merchants. The extent of the
consequent depression is seen in an interesting letter written by
John Wesley, dated August 23, 1775 :

' I aver that in every part of England where I have been (and
I have been east, west, north, and south within these two years)
trade in general is exceedingly decayed, and thousands of people
are quite unemployed. Some I know to have perished for want
of bread ; others I have seen walking up and down like shadows.
I have seen three or four manufacturing towns which have
suffered less than others. Even where I was last, in the West
Riding of Yorkshire, a tenant of Lord Dartmouth was telling me
" Sir, our tradesmen are breaking all around me, so that I know
not what the end will be." Even in Leeds I had appointed to
dine at a merchant's, but before I came the bailiffs were in

possession of the house. L'pon my saying " I thought Mr

had been in good circumstances ", I was answered " He was so,
but the American War has ruined him." ' 4

1 Add. MSS. 32863, ft'. 250-60, March 1756.

- Home Office Papers, November 16, 1764.

1 Clive Day, A History of Commerce, chaps. 27 and 44. Also 1806 Report,
iii. 373.

4 Dartmouth MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm., Report 15, app. i, vol. iii, p. 220.
Also Pari. Rep., 1806, iii. 163, speaks of depression in hitter years of American
War. In 1774 a Parliamentary Committee made inquiry into the depression
in the county. It found trade depressed, wages down, and the Poor Paw

278 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

Foreign trade in the eighteenth century was no easy highway
to success ; and yet in spite of all these obstacles the Yorkshire
woollen trade made magnificent headway, progress which seems
almost incredible in the light of the difficulties outlined above,
but as to the reality of which there can be no possible doubt.
The proof is of a reliable official character. In 1725 x Parliament
ordered the examination and registration of all the broad cloths
manufactured in the West Riding. In 1738 2 the same regula-
tion was extended to narrow cloths, whilst after 1768 the length
of each piece was also noted, as the cloths were being made of
various lengths. The registers were added up annually, a report
was presented to the Quarter Sessions at Pontefract, and then
made public. The figures were common property, and were well
known to all writers of the period. Arthur Young quotes them
to 1770, 3 and the local directories of Leeds bring them up to
1800 and even beyond. The statistics present ' an Account of
the Number of [Broad or Narrow] Cloths Milled at the several
Fulling Mills in the West Riding of the County of York '.

Broc

d Cloths.

Narrow

Cloths.

So. of Pieces.

Yards.

Year.

No. of 1'ieces.

Yards.

28,990

1727

31,5791

1730

31,7441

1735

4I.44I

1740

58,620

50.453

1745

63,42 3

60,477*

1750

78,115

57.125

1755

76,295

49,362 J

1760

69,573

54,660

1765

77,419

93,075

2,717

105

1770

85,376

2,255,625

95,878

2,841

213

1775

96,794

2,441 ,007

1 10,942

3,427

[50

i/"70

93.143

2,659,659

157,275

4,844

85 5

1785

1 10,036

3,409,278

172,588

5,i5i

677

1790

140,407

4,582,122

250,993

7,759,9()7

1705

155,087

5,172,511

285,851

9,263,966

1800

160,262

0,014,420

This table is for woollens only ; it takes no account whatever

of worsteds, and it does not even include all kinds of woollens.

bill mounting rapidly. Extensive charity attempted to cope with the distress,
but the general unrest and suffering expressed itself in numerous riots, outrages,
and violent robberies. For this, see Report in James, op. cit., 280-4, and
Bischoff, op. cit., i. 186-90. Also Mayhall, Annals of Yorkshire, i. 153 and 180.

1 1 1 Geo. I, c. 24. 2 1 1 Geo. II, c. 28.

J See Arthur Young, Farmer's Tour, i. 404. Also Bischoff, op. cit., app. iv.
A complete copy of the table from 1726 to 1819 is in the possession of the
present writer.

vni THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS 279

Certain woollen cloths such as ' bearskins, toilonets, swans-
downs, and kerseymeres ' are not included in the above figures.1
Hence the statistics are not quite exhaustive even for the
woollen industry, but they embrace the great staple kinds of
cloth, and furnish a reliable indication as to the progress of the
industry. From them we trace a growth both in the number
of pieces and in the length of cloth produced. The output of
broad cloths in 1770 is nearly three and a half times that of 1727.
In 1785 it is almost six times the 1727 production. Similarly,
the number of narrow cloths milled in 1785 is more than double
that of 1740, whilst in both broad and narrow cloths the output
in 1800 is about three times that of 1770. The importation of
foreign wool had begun some time prior to 1770 ; wool-staplers
scoured the southern countries to find supplies, and brought
large quantities into Yorkshire. The improvements in the
breeding of sheep helped to swell the supply of raw material,
and Adam Smith declared that ' the wool of the Southern
Counties of Scotland [was], a great part of it, after a long land
passage through very bad roads, manufactured in Yorkshire '.2
The cloths of Leeds were supplanting the wares of the South
and West of England, and various travellers and observers
writing between 1790 and 1818 remark on the effects of northern
competition on the southern textile areas. Dr. Aikin, writing
in 1809, states that the textile industry in Gloucestershire is
' somewhat on the decline. Its cloth has been successfully
rivalled in Yorkshire'3; that of Somerset is 'somewhat
declined on account of the rivalship of Yorkshire and other
places '.4 The manufacture of superfine cloths in Wiltshire is
' less affected by the rivalry of Yorkshire than the other branches
of the woollen manufactory V In Dorsetshire ' on the whole,
the clothing manufacturers have greatly declined from their
former importance, and have for the most part, migrated into
other counties '.G Turning to East Anglia, the trade of Norwich
has declined somewhat by reason of the competition of the
cotton industry"; that of Bocking8and other adjacent towns

1 Leeds Guide (1806), p. no, or A U'alft thro, Leeds (1806), p. 17.
- Adam Smith, Wealth of Sat inns, ii, chap, v, pp. 281-2 (Routledge ed.,
ion). 3 Aikin, England Delineated (i8oq), p. 144. 4 Ibid., p. 277.

5 Ibid., p. 254. 6 Ibid., p. 2; y ' Ibid., p. iSS.

H Ibid. (1S1S edition), p. 252. The 1S18 edition is called England Described.

280 RESTORATION TO THE REVOLUTION chap.

'has much decreased within these sixty or seventy years', and
that of Suffolk has ' for many years been on the decline '.*
Thus with one or two exceptions the whole of the eastern and
south-western clothing centres were by 1809 feeling keenly the
' rivalship ' of Lancashire and Yorkshire, and as machinery and
steam were more widely adopted the supremacy of the north
became absolute. Across the English Channel, the weavers of
France were experiencing the same effects of keen competition
from the West Riding. Arthur Young in his Travels in France
pointed out that the fabrics of Elboeuf and Vire were unable
to hold their place against the cloths of Leeds called ' Bristols \2
Leeds was expanding rapidly ; if we take vital statistics as
a general guide, the population doubled between 1666 and 1731,3
and again doubled between 1760 and 1801.4 As a finishing
centre, and as a market for cloth, its prosperity advanced by
leaps and bounds. There was an abundance of money avail-
able for building cloth halls, chapels, a theatre, a library, &c.,5
and the increase in population called for so many new houses
that in 1876 400 dwellings were in course of erection. The
conclusion of the American War reopened the American market,
and the merchants of Leeds poured their goods into the new
republic. When the struggle with France began, Yorkshire
was flooded with orders from every part of Europe for fabrics
for the clothing of troops ; a Wakefield master in 1825 declared
that he had been employing 400 hands for the last twenty years
making broad cloths for the army,6 and in 1797 Mr. Sheep-
shanks of Leeds was supplying scarlet and white cloth for the
militia to the extent of £1,400 a year."

The latter half of the eighteenth century was indeed a period
of phenomenal progress. If we take our stand in 1770, we see
the sister industries thriving to an extent which augured well

1 Aikin, op. cit. (1818 edition), p. 237.

2 Extracts from pamphlet, ' Observations sur le traite de commerce entre
la France et l'Angleterre' (1786), quoted in Arthur Young, Travels in France,
1794 edition, i. 525. 3 Whitaker, History of Leeds, i. 25.

4 Leeds Guide, 1806, p. 121.

5 Brit. Dir., 1790, iii. 533. From 1765 to 1800 Leeds revelled in the erection
of chapels, churches, &c. The General Infirmary was opened, 177 1 . A theatre
in Hunslet Lane, 1771 ; a Methodist Chapel in St. Peter's Square, 1771 ;
a Quakers' Meeting House, 1788 ; Salem Chapel, 1791 ; and many others
about the same time.

6 Reports, 1825, iv. 631. 7 Add. MSS. 35670, f. 146 et seq.

VIII

THE PERIOD OF PROGRESS

281

for their future prosperity. The estimates df the committee of
1774 throw much light on the extent of the industries, their
relative size, and their national importance. The following
figures are given for the Yorkshire industry :

Annual amount of manufacture of woollens
,, ,, worsteds

Total .

Of this, exports of woollens .
worsted

i
1,869,700

1, 404,( MM)

1,248,740
1,123,200

2,371,940

Total exports

Thus the worsteds almost equalled in value the output of
woollens. Further, the total textile exports (including cottons,
silks, &c.) for the whole country amounted to £4,436,783 in
1772 ; of this the above figures enable us to claim that at least
£2,300,000 came from Yorkshire, or, in other words, more than
half the entire export trade in fabrics.

In conclusion, therefore, the West Riding had reached a
position of pre-eminence even before the great inventions came
into operation. The supply of wool, the possibilities of water
power, the possession of a population which could not produce
by tillage of the bleak slopes all that was necessary for susten-
ance, and which, by the inherited skill of generations, was
especially suited for industrial work, these were the chief forces
which carried the county along the highway of progress, and
prepared the road for the gigantic developments which lay before
her when the wits of men revealed new sources of power, and
discovered untold mineral wealth at her very door.

No more the rugged North with tyrant might
Shall shivering poverty evade to fight.

So wrote Maude in 1782. 1 He saw clearly the future of wealth
before the ' rugged North ', but little did he perceive that
1 shivering poverty ' would still retain its stronghold a century
and a quarter after his words were penned.

1 Maude, Verbeia or Wharfedale, p. 22 (York, 1782).

CHAPTER IX

THE DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF THE
CLOTH INDUSTRY DURING THE EIGHTEENTH
CENTURY

The remaining chapters of this book will be devoted to
a survey of industrial life in the textile area of Yorkshire just
prior to the Industrial Revolution. They will endeavour to
indicate the geographical distribution of the industry, the main
features of its organization, and the general processes by which
cloth was made. The methods of marketing will be discussed,
and finally we shall study the efforts which were made during
the eighteenth century to regulate industrial activity and to
inculcate honesty and morality in the economic sphere. In
these chapters we shall stop short at the Industrial Revolution,
and make no attempt to follow the fortunes of the cloth trade
through the great transformation which produced modern
economic society.

Such a limitation of the subject demands some explanation
as to what one means by the Industrial Revolution, and some
statement of the approximate date at which the survey is to
conclude. The term ' Industrial Revolution ' is here used in
the narrowest sense of the words ; it is not meant to imply the
great expansion of trade or the wast increase in population : it
does not embrace the growth of capitalism, the freeing of
industry and commerce from customary or legal restraints, or
the attempt to formulate and apply exact economic science.1
It is used to imply solely the invention of machinery, and the
application of steam, for it was these two factors which con-
stituted the real revolution, and were the cause of many of the
other developments. The inventions of Arkwright, Hargreaves,
Cartwright, and the rest comprised the first step ; the ' dis-
covery ' (if so one might call it) of iron, coal, and steam-power
was the second. As the possibilities of these two revelations
were more clearly realized, and the inventions brought nearer
1 See J. II. Clapham on ' Economic Change', Cambridge Modern History,

ORGANIZATION OF THE CLOTH INDUSTRY 283

to perfection, machinery and steam-power were adopted, and
the inevitable outcome was the congregation of labour in the
factory system. Thus in these chapters we are concerned with
the state of the cloth industry before the adoption of steam-
driven machinery.

Can one fix a date for the Industrial Revolution as here
defined ? It is dangerous to attempt to assign definite dates to
any social or economic change, and the Industrial Revolution
is no exception in this respect. Since the inventions, the applica-
tion of steam, and the tremendous expansion in the use of coal
are the outstanding causes of the change, it might be argued
that the dates on which these discoveries were made should be
regarded as marking the inauguration of the new era, and the
invention of the power-loom by Cartwright in 1785 should be
reckoned as the commencement of the Industrial Revolution.
Such a course would be attended by many possible misconcep-
tions ; one must keep in mind the imperfections of the machines
themselves, and the need for improvements before they could
be generally adopted ; also, there was the difficulty of getting
the new methods known and adopted, as well as the violent
opposition of the workpeople. Therefore the adoption of
factory organization and the introduction of machinery came
very slowly. There were scarcely twenty factories in Yorkshire
in 1800; the power-loom was not introduced into Bradford till
iNj(); when it was the cause of fierce strife and riots x ; combing
was done by hand until well into the forties,2 and many technical
difficulties rendered it undesirable to use the power-loom in the
woollen industry until about 1850. Writers in the middle of
last century speak of the widespread existence of the cottage
system,3 and the memories of people still alive reach back to
the days when the hand-loom was to be found in almost every
cottage. Thus we come to the conclusion that the Industrial
Revolution had little more than its beginnings in the eighteenth
century. The great change came first in the cotton industry,

1 James, History of the Worsted Manufacture, p. 350" n.

2 Burnley, History of Wool and Wool-combing, p. 195.

' Korbes, Lecture at 1851 FCxhibition, ii. 3 10-17, estimated that 50 per cent,
of the textile workers were still outside the factory. Jackson, in his History
of harnslcv (185S), p. n>8, states of the linen industry that 4,000 hand-
looms were still in use as against 1,000 power-looms.

284 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

then in the manufacture of worsteds, and lastly in the making
of woollen cloths. In the Yorkshire branches of the textile
industry, the revolution did not actually take place until the
nineteenth century ; the face of Yorkshire had been little altered
by 1800, and half a century had still to elapse before it could
be claimed that the factory and the power-driven machinery
had displaced the old hand methods. Our survey, therefore,
will broadly consider the whole of the eighteenth century.

(a) The Distribution of the Industry
In the eighteenth century the manufacture of cloths was
carried on in the same regions as in 1470, though concentrated
even more than at that date in the three areas of East Anglia,
the West of England, and Yorkshire. A famous agitation in
1752, concerning the false winding of yarn, brought petitions
from such widely scattered districts as Leeds, Halifax, Norwich,
Frome, Colchester, London, Wiltshire, Devonshire, Saffron
Walden, Andovcr, Taunton, Nottingham, Grantham, Lanca-
shire, Stourbridge, Kidderminster, Kendal, Coventry, &C.,1 thus
indicating the widespread national character of the industry.
As in the country so in Yorkshire. The industry was carried on
in most parts of the county, but still there were certain tracts
which could definitely be labelled textile, or non-textile, and,
further, could be marked out according to the predominant type
of cloth produced, whether worsted or woollen, white or mixed.
Descending to a further subdivision, one could point to the
specialization of Wakefield on ' tammies ', Leeds on broad cloths
and camlets, Halifax on shalloons and kerseys, and so forth.

As a rough generalization, one might say that Leeds was the
north-eastern limit of the clothing area. A line drawn along
the watershed between Airedale and Wharfedale would mark
the northern boundary, whilst another line, passing from Leeds
south to Wakefield, and then turning south-west towards
Huddersfield, would denote the eastern limit. ' Not a single
manufacturer is to be found more than one mile east or two
miles north of Leeds ',2 declare many writers and directories of
the century. Chapel Allerton, now part of Leeds, was entirely

1 House of Commons Journals, xxvi. 320.

2 This ([notation is found in all the histories, guides, &c, of Leeds, 1707
onwards, e.g. Lads Guide (1806), pp. 100-1.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 285

outside the clothing district, and there was ' scarcely a single
manufacturer of cloth to be found in the whole village '-1 As
for Barwick-in-Elmct and neighbouring villages, they were as
entirely without the clothing area as was the quietest little
village in the Vale of York, being solely agricultural.2

Before elaborating the above statements, one must make the
necessary modifications. With an industry as yet free from
absolute dependence upon coal and iron supplies, it was an easy
matter to carry on some branch of the manufacture wherever
wool could be obtained and labour was available. Thus through-
out almost the whole of the North and East Ridings there were
to be found persons occupied in one or other of the many pro-
cesses involved in the manufacture of the finished cloth. Around
Ripon and Middleham there was a considerable ' manufactory '
of woollen goods and preparation of yarn.3 Even so late as 1810
the drawback on soap for Masham amounted to £89 gs., and
the total for the North Riding reached £204 155. yd} Some of
the yarn prepared in these northern dales was sent to be woven
in the West Riding area, but a considerable quantity was
utilized at home, being made into woollens at Masham ° and
Middleham,6 into carpets at Ripon,7 or into knitted goods in the
recesses of Wensleydale and Swaledale. This latter occupation
was an extension of the old Westmorland knitting industry.
The women of the East Riding were preparing linen yarn, and
they of Cleveland were ' spinning of worsted ', or knitting.8
Defoe found at Richmond ' a manufactory of knit-yarn stockings
for servants and ordinary people. Every family is employed in
this way, both great and small. Here you may buy the smallest

1 The same applies to this extract. It is a stock sentence, in all the local
publications of the period. - Leeds Guide, p. 104.

3 See advertisements in Leeds newspaper, e.^r. Leeds Mercury, October 12,
]77$ '■ ' Wanted, 4 or ('■> hands to card and spin . . . Can be either a family
or individuals.' This was for Middleham.

1 Sec table in James, p. 309. This drawback was a rebate paid to clothiers
and preparers of yarn out of the duty paid on soap. The rebate was allowed
on all soap used lor industrial purposes. See section on Worsted Committee.
In 1S10, the drawback for Leeds, t'353 l7s- ' 1(t- '• Wakefield, £111 135. 3d.

'• British Directory, v. 131. " Dodsley's Road Book, 1756.

7 Numerous advertisements of Ripon Carpet Manufactory, in Leeds Mercury,
c.l;. I7'>o and 1775.

- Young, Northern Tour, ii. 1S0. The 'worsted' was not the thin fibre
used for weaving, but the thicker thread such as is used in knitting, and is
to-day referred to indifferently as ' wool ' or ' worsted '.

286 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

sized pairs for children at is. 6d. the dozen pairs, sometimes
less.' * Another line was the making of ' knit wool caps for
seamen '.2 These goods, evidently of a common order, were
either worn by the producers, sold at the small fairs and markets
of Dent, Bedale, &c, or taken by the more hardy over the
moors to Kirkby Stephen and Kendal, whence they went to
supply the needs of ' servants and ordinary people ' of other
counties.3 A similar industry was carried on at Doncaster, on
a somewhat more ambitious scale. In the sixteenth century
Doncaster was famous for the knitting of stockings, waistcoats,
gloves, and other articles of attire,4 the industry being almost
entirely in the hands of women. The manufacture continued
through the seventeenth century, and was flourishing at the
time of Defoe's tour (1723-4), and even much later. This
industry employed large numbers of spinners and combers, who
also spent part of their time preparing yarn for the weavers of
the West Riding. Thus over the whole of the North and West
Riding, and in part of the eastern area, some form of working
in wool was being carried on. But in scarcely any centre,
except Ripon, was it considerable, and this diffused manufacture
was insignificant when compared with the activity of the Leeds,
Halifax, and Wakefield regions.

The cloth area, stretching from Leeds and Wakefield to beyond
the border,5 can be roughly divided as follows : (1) The worsted
field, i. e. the country stretching from Bradford to 15 miles
west and north-west of Halifax, comprising the upper valleys
of the Aire and Calder, and including Halifax, Keighley, I laworth,
and Colne. To this list must be added Wakefield and Leeds,
which were of secondary importance as centres of the worsted
industry. (2) The woollen distriet, lying within a pentagon of

1 Defoe, op. cit. iii. 148.

- Dodsley's Road Book, r/56, under ' Richmond '. In 1505 Peck stated
thai there were above 1,000 knitters in and about Richmond, engaged in
knitting stockings (I). S. P., Eli::., eclii. 2).

3 Defoe, op. cit., iii. 140, and Bigland, op. cit., p. 730.

1 Peck stated in 1595 that there were 120 persons knitting stockings in
Doncaster. See also Life of Marmadukc Kawdon (Camden Soc), p. no
(1664). Also Baskerville's Tour, in Portland .1/55., Hist. .1/55. Comm., ii.
310—12. Also Defoe, op. cit., iii. 107.

5 Rochdale, Bury, and even Manchester, with a large slice of east Lancashire,
were engaged to a considerable extent in the manufacture ot woollens. Hot h-
dale and Bury are noted by Defoe as being ' very considerable for a sort of
coarse goods called half-thicks and kersies ' {Tour, iii. 133).

DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

287

which the corners were, roughly, Wakefield, Huddersfield,
Halifax, Bradford, and Leeds, with its great market at the
latter town. In this district a further important subdivision is
possible, according to the nature of the product : (a) the district
containing the following places manufactured mixed cloths, in
which the wool had been dyed before it was woven : Leeds
parish, Morley, Gildcrsome, Adwalton, Drighlington, Pudsey,
Farsley, Calverley, Eccleshill, Idle, Baildon, Yeadon, Guiseley,

:ighley

oOakworth

Bingley \

Otley
Jaildon ^oYeadon

3Bramhope

°Arthington

net °

oHaworth

Saltaire
Shipley!

oRawdori

alverfeyi

oWilsden
oOxenhope u Eccll^hil

r _ , , Heaton
oDennolme o

o Thornton

iRodley-

*HoTSf6fl

3iFarslev ^S^jy^ 0:

jSranningley ArmleVfct _,
rlSifti- : ^Trli Girder some Beesto

. . JiHifiiibi ■ .■

WykeiC ii Birkertshaw 1*»~ SCY,— ,^=

^Hunsv/ortriO ■ ' j|p|S!»s. Morley: ,
H.pperholme\ CkWsalo /^rStiTV 6WA,d,ley

Halifax ClerkhcatorP' Batleyfi ,'^f
XiaiUdX lLivers^dgeD 0 \ iHar&njfet
(KERSEYS) BrighouseV He^trtondwke Mpilgffli
°Soyland >^ S^ ^^NjRavensthorpe*^^

Elian JC-^ XV^i!, 3rr

MrjjHd^X/ EarIshea£on m

^S/\ Thornhiil

{>/ IpKirkheaton

Chapel Allerton

teTadingley
^fooanouse

Leeds

E AfdsW

Coloured cloth area |
White. »

^Huddersfield

oAlmondbury

Clarendon Tress, Oxford

Rawdon, and Horsforth (i.e. chiefly in the Aire valley); also

Batlcy, Dewsbury, Ossett, Horbury, and the Calder Vale

generally, making smaller quantities; (b) the white cloth came

(nun the district occupied by the following places : Alverthorpe,

Ossett, Kirkheaton, Dewsbury, Batley, Ilopton, Mirfield, Cleck-

heaton, Littletown x (i. e. chiefly in the ('aider valley), Bowling,

Shipley, Morley, Idle, and a little from Bradford.

'■ i.e. what we now know as the heavy woollen and shoddy districts ; this
division ol the clothing area is drawn from the directories, iYc, of Leeds,
e.g. I.tiils Clinic, [806, pj). 100-1, and the documents connected with the
Leeds Cloth Halls.

288 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

Thus the white cloth area was a tract of country forming an
oblique belt across the hills separating the Aire and the Calder,
beginning about one mile west of Wakefield, leaving Halifax and
Huddersfield a little to the left, terminating at Shipley, and
nowhere coming within six miles of Leeds on the eastern edge.
The two districts, as will be seen from the map, are generally
distinct, but intermingle a little, especially at their south-eastern
and north-western extremities.1

Throughout the whole of the county west of Leeds, scattered
in isolated farm-houses in the western reaches, but gathered
into villages in the valleys to the east,2 the industry was carried
on. The growth of villages as centres of industry during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was one of the great
features of the period. Such villages as Woodhouse, Beeston,
Armley, Hunslet,3 Haworth, Holbeck, Churwell, and Morley
had grown steadily as cloth-making centres, and this growth
was probably in part at the expense of the larger towns. Thus
Leeds, Wakefield, and Halifax were quite correct when they
declared, in 1627, that ' there is not that quantitie of cloth
made in these three towns and their precincts as is made in the
severall and dispersed towns and villages about us . . . and the
most of the inhabitants in these places that are of anie abilitie
are not clothiers, but gentlemen, yeomen, ffarmers, and men of
other trades and professions '.4 This statement applied with
greater force to the eighteenth century, when the commercial
progress of the towns caused a large increase in rents, and
drove many clothiers out to the suburbs or even farther afield.
The demand for land in and around Leeds was very great
during the last half of the century, because of ' the encrease of
opulence and population in the town and neighbourhood of
Leeds '.5 One witness before the Parliamentary Committee of
1806 declared that ' since my remembrance there were many
hundred clothiers in the township of Leeds, and I believe there
are but five now ; . . . they have been driven out and found
habitation where the rents were cheaper '. Another Yorkshire-

1 Leeds Guide, 1806, p. 101. 2 Defoe, op. cit., p. 144.

:i Hunslet \v;is by 1650 a thriving place with 200 families, and demanding
that its chapel should be made into a church (Thoresby, Ducatus, p. 177).
1 I). S. 1'., Chas. I , lxi, 82 and 84. Petition concerning ship money.
0 Report on the Woollen Manufacture, 1806, iii. 158.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 289

man spoke of the ' decrease of master manufacturers in the
immediate neighbourhood of large towns, especially in two or
three populous hamlets adjoining to Leeds, whence they hud
migrated to a greater distance in the country, where they might
enjoy a little land and other conveniences and comforts \1 The
towns were not the centres of manufacture, but were chiefly
engaged in the finishing processes, in the marketing of raw
material, cloth, and food-stuffs, and in providing accommoda-
tion for merchants, clothiers, and travellers ; or they were the
homes of merchants, clergy, officials, and professional men.
Leeds, for instance, in 1797 was the home of over 1,400 mer-»
chants and traders,2 whose genteel residences lined Hunslet Lane,
Boar Lane, Meadow7 Lane, and Albion Street. For the accom-
modation of travellers and villagers coming to market there
were no less than 103 inns. Thus on the eve of the Industrial
Revolution the distribution of the manufacture might be
summed up as follows : Spinning and weaving in the villages
and farms scattered over the whole of the Riding ; fulling along
the banks of the streams ; dyeing, dressing, finishing, and
marketing in the towns. This resulted in a fairly uniform dis-
tribution of population throughout the Riding. Most of the
towns had less than 10,000 inhabitants, and the total number
of urban dwellers as late as 1811 3 amounted to only about
a quarter of the population of the whole Riding.

(b) The Homes of the Workers
When Lei and passed through Yorkshire in the sixteenth
century lie noticed wooden houses in many parts of the county.
By 1700, however, brick and stone were general throughout the
whole clothing area, and the wooden structures had almost, if
not entirely, disappeared. Stone was largely used wherever
available, and the houses of the Pennine slopes and the western
districts were entirely of stone,1 giving the landscape that grey
cold appearance which still survives, mellowed by a century's
deposit of soot and smoke. Bradford was largely built of stone,
but in Leeds ° and Wakefield brick buildings preponderated.

1 lu ports, [806, iii. 1 1. Also lulcn, The State of the Poor (1797), iii. 847.

J Leeds Directory, 1797, List <>t Merchants, iVx.

J Sec Aikin, /•.'»;'/</ >;</ Dest rihed (18 18), pp. <>S-t) ; and Census Returns, 1841 .

4 Defoe, op. eit., iii, passim. s Description of Leeds, by Dodsley, 17(14.

290 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

The houses were of all shapes and sizes ; the larger possessed
two storeys, but the greater number of dwellings enjoyed only
one. In the smaller dwellings the work was carried on in the
living-room or the sleeping-chamber, but to many houses a low
shed was appended, with a long ' weaver's window ', in front
of which the loom was erected. As the type of house grew
larger, other rooms and outhouses were added, and the
dwelling of the average well-to-do yeoman or clothier could
boast living-rooms, pantry, attic, loom-shop, stable, farm-
buildings,1 and a yard. The upper storey of many houses was
approached by an external staircase, instances of which are still
to be seen. Casement windows with pebble glasses let in the
light, and there was often some simple attempt at decoration
of the exterior by training ivy and creepers over the walls.

Few cottages were without a piece of land. The West Riding
was one of the strongholds of the small freeholders, who possessed
holdings ranging from half a dozen acres to 15 or 20. The
sides of the hills around Halifax were ' spread with enclosures
from two acres to six or seven each, seldom more, and every
three or four pieces of land had a house belonging to them \2
All parts of the Riding exhibited the same feature. Where
there was not a definite freehold, many Yorkshire proprietors
had attempted with success to foster the joint occupation of
farming and weaving. Sir Walter Calverley in the early part
of the century induced many clothiers to come and reside on
his estate by providing fulling mills, and by making it possible
for the farmer to be a clothier, and the clothier to work as
a farmer.3 In the last decade of the same century many land-
lords took advantage of the exodus which was taking place

1 Note the following typical advertisements of houses : ' To be lett.
A house, stable, and croft, adjoining on the upper side of VVoodhouse Moor,
very convenient for a clothier' (Leeds Mercury, April 11, 1738). 'To be
left. One good fashionable new built house, six rooms on a iloor, one large
shop with a chamber over it, a handsome court planted with wall fruit,
a garden and orchard, and all other convenient outhouses ... fit for a gentle-
man or any substantial tradesman dealing in the woollen manufacture . . . also
four closes of land adjoining the same, about sixteen days work ' (Leeds
Mercury, August 27, 1737). ' To be Lett. A very Commodious Dwelling
House, with Stables, Dye-House, Tenters, and all other conveniences proper
for a Cloth Maker ; together with nearly seven Acres of land adjoyning.
There is also a Cottage House contiguous thereto very convenient for a Journey-
man Cloth Maker (Leedes Intelligencer, February 27 , 1750).

3 Defoe, op. cit., iii. 135. 3 Laurence's Duty of a Steward (1727), p. 36.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 291

from Leeds to induce clothiers to come and live on what had
formerly been farming centres. Mr. J. Graham, in his evidence
before the Committee in 1806, dwelt upon this aspect, and
indicated the nature of the movement. He himself had an
estate which had been let out in agricultural leaseholds. The
leases terminated in 1796, whereupon Graham divided the farms
into small allotments for clothiers. He visited the clothiers'
houses in the neighbourhood, in order to discover the most suit-
able type of building, and then erected about fourteen houses,
to each of which he attached five to ten acres.1 These holdings
were immediately occupied by clothiers, and the venture was
so successful that other landowners followed in Graham's foot-
steps. Farmers became clothiers, and small villages grew rapidly
into flourishing, though scattered, communities. Thus Leeds
was surrounded by a great body of clothiers, living dispersed y
over the countryside, in houses to which holdings of land were
attached.

But these small holdings in land were not intended to make
farming a serious rival to the textile industry. They were
a subsidiary source of livelihood, and might provide facilities
for farming as a by-occupation, or might be utilized largely for
textile purposes. On these pieces of land the tenter frames and
wool hedges were erected, and tenter frames were as familiar
features of the landscape as advertisement hoardings are to-
day. The clothier might erect these frames on his own parcel
of ground, or on some piece of waste land on which the clothiers
of the district obtained permission to set up wool hedges and
tenter frames, paying a small sum annually for the privilege.2
If not used in this manner, the land was devoted to the growth
of hardy crops which required little attention, or was turned
into a pasture, for the rearing of live stock. Defoe found the
land round Halifax employed in sustaining horses and cows
(which were owned by all except the very poorest), ' by which
means the small pieces of land about each house are occupied.
As for corn, they scarcely sow enough to feed their poultry.' 3

1 Reports, 1806, iii. 444.

1 See maps of Leeds in Thoresby Soc. publications, e.g. ix, p. 204. Also
extracts from Leeds Manor Court Rolls (vol. ix), for reference to wool hedges
and tenter frames on Woodhouse Moor.

3 Defoe, op. cit., iii. 135.

U 2

292 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

Around Leeds a similar state of affairs existed ; the land was
used generally ' not in corn, but in grass, in keeping cows and
keeping a galloway (horse or pony), or something of that kind,
and in tenters '-1 Crops received little attention, even in the most
fertile districts. Graham remarked that some of his new tenants
had expressed a desire to have a little ploughed land, but he had
found that whenever a manufacturer engaged in working arable
land he was sure to waste all the money he was earning by
making cloth.2 In some parts oats were grown in order to
supply meal, whilst potatoes were cultivated in all parts of the
Riding. But these products were of secondary importance, and
hence the husbandry was of a perfunctory character, and the
tillage backward and uhprogressive. Traditional methods held
undisputed sway, and the clothiers were so busy advancing
their textile businesses that they had little time to devote to
improving their methods of agriculture. Custom therefore
reigned supreme : ' Such is the force of prejudice ', declared
a writer, about 1800, with reference to the weavers of Pudsey,
' that if any one does not follow the old course of husbandry,
he is laughed at as a visionary and innovator. The chief reason
which they advance in defence of this old and antiquated pro-
cedure is that their forefathers have practised it.' 3 The majority
of the clothiers' lands were therefore generally under-utilized,
but, provided the horse did not die of starvation, the cow cease
to yield milk, or the hens refuse to lay, there was no call for
a revision of the accepted order, and no need for a reformation
of the agricultural and pastoral economy which was the heritage
of centuries.

Such were the homes in which the industry of the eighteenth
century was carried on. The alliance of land and loom was
a great benefit to the clothing population, especially to the
weavers, who often were compelled to lay aside the shuttle
because of scarcity of yarn, but who were able to fill up this
time by working in their garden, or by performing some neces-
sary piece of work on the land attached to their house. Life in
these cottages and farms was far from luxurious ; the hours

: Rcp'irts, 1806, iii. 14.

2 Ibid., p. 144. Sonic of Graham's tenants, with large families, kept two
or three cows, and in such cases held land up to 15 acres, all pasture.

3 Annals of Agriculture, xl. 135, quoted by Cunningham, ii. 564.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 293

of labour were long, the tasks arduous, and the fruits of hard
toil far from being rieh or plentiful. In fact, as all the early
Leeds directories boasted, the domestic worker, whether master
or man, was ' for the most part blessed with the comforts
without the superfluities of life ' 1 — a statement which was
quite true, provided we place the standard of ' comforts '
sufficiently low.

In considering the structure of the Yorkshire industry it
is necessary to remember now the existence of two branches,
namely, the worsted and the woollen. The organization of the
two manufactures was different in many respects, so we must ^
distinguish therefore between the two, and study each separately.

The woollen industry was still largely in the hands of the
small independent clothiers. These were the men who occupied
the small freeholds throughout the Riding, and were cloth-
makers on a small scale with a little farming as a by-occupation.
They possessed their own spinning and weaving machinery, and j
carried through most of the processes themselves. The father
went to the market and purchased his wool, his wife and children
carded and spun it, and if they were unable to provide him
with an adequate supply of yarn some of the wool would be
put out to be spun in neighbouring cottages. With the help
of a sun, apprentice, or journeyman, the clothier dyed his
wool, wove the piece, took it to the fulling mill, and thence, in
its rough and unfinished condition, to his stall in the market or
his stand in the cloth hall. Out of his receipts he had to pay
for raw materials, a fee for fulling, and wages for any external
assistance ; then the remainder was entirely his own, the profit
on his venture, and the price of the labour of himself and family.
Such a man would never produce more than two pieces per
week,- and many would get only one cloth to the weekly market.
I he profits, therefore, would not be large, atid a livelihood could
be obtained only by dint of hard work and frugal habits/' The
majority of these men had their three to fifteen acres of land,

1 this extract will be found in every directory or guide published between
1700— I.S10.

•' Defoe, op. , ■//., 111. 1 17.

1 Committee on Woollen Manufacture, Reports, rSof>, iii, passim. See abo
Aikin, op. , it., p. ;/•, tor remarks concerning ' frugality and industry '.

294 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

on which the family cow, pigs, and poultry were fed. They
also had a horse or ass on which to carry their wares to and
from the market; but many of the poorer clothiers could not
afford this luxury, and the sight of a man carrying his piece of
cloth on head or shoulders was very common. Mayhall instances
a man, Richard Wilson, of Ossett, who had two pieces of broad
cloth ready for sale.1 Not possessing a beast of burden, he carried
one cloth on his head to Leeds, a distance of about seven miles,
and there sold it. His customer also offered to buy the other
piece ; Wilson thereupon walked back to Ossett to fetch it,
delivered the cloth at the merchant's warehouse, completed the
transaction, and then returned home. The day's business had
included a 28 miles walk, for half of which the clothier had been
carrying a somewhat heavy load.

The existence of this class was rendered possible by the fact
that only a small amount of capital was required for setting up
as a clothier on such a scale. According to the London Trades-
man (1757), £100 to £500 was the sum required in order to set
up as a master weaver in London,2 and as rents, &c, were
probably lower in a Yorkshire village than in the capital, £100-
£150 would be more than ample for the purpose in the West
Riding industry. The initial expenses were comparatively
light, and it was generally easy for a man with a clean reputation
to get credit to the extent of a week's supply of wool. Thus
the apprentice, at the end of his period of training, could look
forward with some degree of confidence to the day when he
would have acquired a sufficient amount of capital and be able
to set up as his own master. He might borrow the money at
once, or work as a journeyman until he had saved the requisite
sum ; then he acquired his house, ground, and loom, and set
to work as an independent manufacturer. Added to this con-
sideration is the fact that the system of open marketing placed
the small producer on almost equal terms with his larger rival.
The street markets and cloth halls made it possible for the
small clothier to dispose of his wares easily, and long after the
big men had adopted other methods of sale the cottagers clung
to their old form of market.

1 Mayhall, Annals of Yorkshire, i. 122, under date 1734.

2 The London Tradesman, by R. Campbell, 1757 ; see pp. 201 and 340.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 295

But although entry was so easy, and although the class of
small clothiers was very numerous in Yorkshire, the small
man did not hold the whole of the woollen field. During the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there had been a steady /
increase in the number of big clothiers,1 and although this class
probably never attained the status or the extent of the West of
England clothiers, it did comprise the upper stratum of the
Yorkshire cloth-makers, and was a powerful body during the
later years of the eighteenth century.

The wealthy clothier was generally a development from the
lower grade which we have just described, and only differed
from the meaner master in the number of outside hands he
employed, and in the amount of trade which he transacted.
Thus there were clothiers of every gradation, from the smallest
independent master, employing only his own family, to the
wealthy clothier, employing a large number of people in his
house and loom-shop, as well as others who worked for him in
their own homes. The big man went to the wool markets, or into
the wool-producing counties, to purchase his supplies of raw
material. These he brought home, and then set his apprentices
and journeymen, his own family, and the children of his employees
to work converting the raw wool into yarn, and then into cloth.
I le often took a hand at the loom (especially if he was engaged
in training an apprentice), he generally dyed the wool or the
piece himself, and when the cloth was finished he took it to the
merchant's warehouse or to the cloth-market. Let us take one
or two instances to illustrate the nature of such businesses.
These cases are drawn from the report* of 1800, and they there-
fore represent the state of industrial organization just before the
factory had begun to assert its influence. Elijah Brooke, of Morley,
had served his period of apprenticeship, and then, after work-
ing for some time as a journeyman, in 1780 he set up as a clothier,
making mixed broad cloths in Morley." I lis own house accommo-
dated only one loom, and this was worked by himself, his son,
or an apprentice, his own daughter spending her whole time

1 A witness in iSofi, Reports, iii. 160, stated: 'Fifty years ago he was
thought a great clothier that made two pieces in a week, and now if he makes
six, or eight, or ten, he is not the largest by far. Some make two in a week
ami some make twenty.'

- Reports, 1 Moo, iii. 120-3S.

296 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

spinning wool for this loom. He employed twelve journeymen,
who were all engaged either spinning or weaving in their own
homes, and who were paid by piece rate. Similarly, J. Ellis, of
Armley,1 was a maker of superfine broad cloths ; he had a
spinning jenny and three looms, all of which were in his own
workrooms. His wife did not take part in the affairs of the
business, but he, his apprentice, and a journeyman each worked
a loom. Another man and his wife spun yarn for him in the
master's shop, two or three children sorted his wool, and another
woman was engaged in spinning in her own house. These two
clothiers belonged to what one might call the middle class, and
there were many such men, employing eight to twelve persons,
either in the rooms of the master or the homes of the workpeople
themselves.

Higher still in the industrial scale came the really big clothiers
who were to be found in many parts, especially around Leeds,
during the latter half of the eighteenth century. These men
were large employers, and, in the congregation of workpeople
in their shops, they established miniature factories many years ,/
before the perfection of the power loom or the application of
steam. For instance, James Walker of Wortley employed
twenty-one looms, of which eleven were in his own loom-shop,
and the remainder erected in the houses of his weavers.2
L. Atkinson, of Huddersfield, had seventeen looms in one room,
and also employed weavers who worked in their own abodes.3
These looms were all worked by hand, and in addition to the
men engaged in weaving there were many women and children
busy preparing yarn. Thus we see that there was no standard
size of master clothier. He might be of any status, from the
small man, employing his own family and one or two outsiders,
to the wealthy clothier, with his two-score looms and his half
a hundred workpeople.

Turning to the organization of the worsted industry, con-
ditions were somewhat different. Here was an industry intro-
duced comparatively late, and superimposed on the woollen
manufacture. It had to fight its way to a place in the home
and foreign markets, and this could only be done by men who
possessed some amount of capital, who were capable of defraying

1 Reports, 1806, iii. 5-30. 2 [bid., pp. 174-83. :| Ibid., pp. 210-23.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 297

the initial costs, and willing to overcome many difficulties
before they achieved success. Whether these men were Norfolk
merchants or of local origin, they built up the industry on
a much more capitalistic basis than was the case in the woollen
trade. The small independent clothier never existed in the
worsted industry, but in his place stood a man who closely
resembled the clothiers of the West of England or those wealthier
\\(Ki lien clothiers of the West Riding whose status we have just
been considering. The worsted master was usually a large
employer, with a flock of workpeople at his command. This
contrast is seen in the difference between the cloth halls at
which woollens and worsteds were sold. The halls at Leeds
were intended to accommodate the legion of small woollen
clothiers who sought the Leeds market ; hence, the White
Cloth Hall provided 1,210 stands, and the Mixed Cloth Hall
found room for 1,770 stallholders. The number of worsted
masters was much smaller, but the amount which each man
had for sale much greater, and thus the Worsted Cloth Hall at
Bradford accommodated only 258 salesmen, but allowed each
to have a separate room for himself and his pieces.

This then was the great difference between the two branches
of the cloth industry ; in the woollen trade a large number of
small men, in the worsted a small number of big men. The
worsted master was generally the head of a comparatively large
establishment. He went to the chief fairs, or to the farmers,
buying considerable quantities of wool, which he then brought
home and gave into the hands of his sorters and dyers, who
worked under his supervision. The wool was then given out to
be combed and spun over a wide expanse of country. The yarn
thus produced was again collected. Sometimes it was sold,
especially to the southern weavers, but in most cases it was
handed out to domestic weavers round about, by whom it was
woven into cloth, the weavers being paid according to a piece
rate. Professor Clapham cites the case of Mr. Greenwood of
Oxenhope,1 near Haworth, who bought wool, combed and dyed
it at home with the assistance of a few journeymen, gave it out
to be spun, and then sold the yarn. There were many such

1 Article on ' Industrial Organization of Yorkshire Woollen and Worsted
Industries, in Kcotiomic /■'imhil, xvi, p. 517.

298 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

men, master woolcombers and spinners, who prepared yarn on
a large scale. On the other hand, many worsted masters carried
on all the processes of manufacture from sorting to weaving.
The early history of the Haggas family gives an admirable
instance of the kind. In 1715 James Haggas was bound appren-
tice to a Halifax worsted weaver. On the completion of his
training he went to live at Weethead, above Fell Lane, Keighley,
and here set up as a manufacturer of stuffs, employing hand-
combers and weavers, and selling his pieces at Halifax every
Saturday. His son James went to the Lincolnshire fairs to buy
long wool, which was brought home, sorted at Oakworth Hall,
where was the warehouse, and then given out to the various
workpeople. The pieces were woven in the houses scattered
over the hillsides, and every Friday, the day before market-
day, men might be seen going to Weethead, with heavy pieces
on head or shoulders, and returning with bags of warp and weft.1
Sam Hill of Soyland, near Halifax, is an excellent illustration
of the large woollen clothier who became a producer of worsted
goods. On February 3, 1737, he dispatched 200 shalloons to
a London merchant, and a week later announced that he would
forward a second 200 within seven days. How many of these
cloths were the products of his own employees we are not told,
but from one or two remarks concerning his workmen and the
amount of his wool purchases we gather that he was quite
a large employer.2

Thus, to recapitulate, the manufacture of woollen cloth was
still in the hands of small clothiers, though the larger employer
was by no means uncommon, whilst the worsted industry was
entirely in the hands of masters who carried on business upon
a considerable scale. These men made the cloth; but they
seldom finished it. The small woollen clothier in particular had
no equipment for the adequate dressing of the pieces which he
and his assistants wove. Hence when the cloth was taken from
the loom it was carried to some fulling mill, the property of
another man, and then, after being fulled, dried, and tentered,
was sold at the market ' in the white ' or ' in the raw '. The
cloth had still to undergo the processes of shearing, dressing,

1 Hodgson, Textile Manufactures of Keighley, pp. 47-8.

2 Letter Books, nos. 116, 125, 133, and 134.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 299

dyeing, &c, and these branches of the industry were carried
on by another class of men, who possessed the necessary equip-
ment. The master cloth-dresser, cloth-worker, dyer, and fuller
lived in the market-towns, or along the banks of some stream
as near the cloth-market as possible. They rented or owned the
building in which they worked, laid down capital in providing
the necessary machinery, and employed journeymen to assist
them in the task of dressing and finishing pieces. They worked j
on a commission system, for they seldom owned the pieces upon
which they were working. In a few cases the dyer or finisher
went into the market, bought the rough pieces from the clothier,
finished them, and then sold them to merchants, middlemen,
shopkeepers, or tailors ; but generally the cloths at which the
finisher was working were the property of some merchant, who
had purchased them from the makers and then handed them
over to receive the final treatment before taking them away to
sell. In such cases the finisher received a fee for each cloth
which he finished, out of which he had to pay the wages of his
journeymen, the remainder being interest on his capital and
profit to himself as entrepreneur.

There are still two figures in the eighteenth-century organiza-
tion with which we have not dealt — namely, the merchant and
the middleman. Their position and functions can most profit-
ably be discussed when we turn to a consideration of the methods
of marketing the Yorkshire cloths. But it may be well to state
at this juncture that these men were very important elements
in the domestic system. The merchant, either directly or
through his agent, was rising to an altitude from which he
could largely control the industrial field. Under the conditions
of the seventeenth century, when the industry was not nearly
so extensive or so highly developed, he had confined his atten-
tion almost entirely to the commercial aspect of the cloth
trade ; he had met the clothier in the market, bought pieces,
which he handed over to the cloth-worker, and finally sold to
his customers at home and abroad. lie had little direct influence
over the clothier or the finisher. But during the eighteenth
century, and especially with the rise of the worsted industry,
the merchant began to get a firmer grip over the industrial
units. lie commenced to buv direct from the maker, without

300 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

going into the market. He gave orders for large supplies of
goods to be made according to a sample presented by the
clothier, or in accordance with his own specifications. Some
clothiers, especially worsted manufacturers, spent their whole
time producing goods for one merchant or middleman, and their
wares never saw the cloth-market. Thus these men became
dependent upon the merchant, and worked directly under his
control, executing his orders. The letters of Joseph Holroyd,
a cloth-factor of Soyland, show him in 1706-7 acting as the
agent of London and foreign merchants, and placing large
orders for them with local clothiers. Merchants, when sending
their orders, supplied detailed specifications and fixed maximum
prices, and it was then Holroyd's business to obtain the required
cloths in accordance with the wishes of his patrons. Many
clothiers apparently spent their whole time supplying Holroyd,
and their pieces never went into the public market.1 The next
step came when the merchant actually set up as a clothier
himself, and figured in the double role of manufacturer and
merchant. As manufacturer he owned looms and other utensils,
and employed spinners and weavers making cloth out of his
raw material according to his specifications. When the cloth
was woven, it was finished in mills which were also his property,
by men who were his employees, and when the cloth was actually
completed it came into his hands and was sold by him in his
capacity as merchant. Thus the maker and the merchant were
combined in the same person, with the merchant as the pre-
dominating partner. These two important developments, the
working to the order of the merchant, and the engrossment of
the whole industrial procedure by the merchant, were very
evident in the eighteenth century. A cloth-dresser declared in
1705- that 'some merchants make cloth themselves', and
twenty years later Charles Clapham of Leeds described himself
as a 'Merchant and Manufacturer of Worsted Stuffs'.3 The
tendency developed rapidly during the next twenty years, and
when thi' new possibilities of machinery and power were revealed,

1 See Letter Books, Intro., pp. 6-8, and letters passim. For further treat-
ment of the nature of merchants and factors, see chapter on markets and
merchants, Chapter XI.

'■'■ House of Commons' Journals, xxx. 204.

•' General Collected Reports (1788), vol. xxxviii, no. 87.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 301

it was chiefly the merchants who, possessing the necessary
capital, seized upon them, set up mills, allied industry and
commerce, and provided the capitalist system of the nineteenth
century.

(d) Apprenticeship in the Eighteenth Century

In a previous chapter we have observed the extent to which
apprenticeship prevailed in the domestic system of industry,
and have noted the attempts of Elizabethan legislation to enforce
certain conditions upon those who sought an industrial educa-
tion. Apprenticeship, and the law which regulated it, still
survived in the eighteenth century, and found general theoretical
acceptance in the North of England long after it had been
placed in disregard elsewhere.

The clothier augmented his labour supply by taking one or
more apprentices, who might be drawn from one of three sources.
In the first place he might take his own son as a pupil, and
teach the lad all that he himself knew concerning cloth-making.
In such a case the apprenticeship was often an unwritten
arrangement between father and son. There was no indenture,
probably no promise to work for a stipulated number of years ;
it was a family agreement, intimate, loose, and informal.

Secondly, the clothier might take the son of a neighbour or
friend, or some other youth whose father wished him to receive
a definite and practical training. In this case a proper indenture
was drawn up and duly signed. The clothier was frequently
paid a premium to take the apprentice, and the indenture stated
in the most minute detail the terms of the contract, and the
obligations which were accepted on either hand. The nature of
the agreement and of the relations between master and pupil
will be best seen by ([noting the following indenture, the original
of which is in the Halifax Reference Library : l

'This Indenture made the Eleventh Day of December, . . .
one thousand seven hundred and sixteen, Between Stephen
ttirth of Wyke in the County of York, Clothier, on the one part,
and Thomas Gleadhill, Son of Jeremy Gleadhill of Halifax on
the other part : WITNESSETH that the said Thomas Gleadhill
hath of his own free Will and with the Consent of his ffriends,

1 I'lie indenture is mule out on the customarv printed form such as was
used tor the purpose. The special details were then Idled in as required.

302 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

Put and Bound himself Apprentice to and with the said Stephen
ffirth, and with him after the manner of an Apprentice to Dwell,
Remain and Serve from the Day of the Date hereof, for, during
and until the Term of 13 Years thence next following to be
fully compleated and ended. During all which said Term the
said Apprentice his said Master well and faithfully shall serve,
his Secrets shall keep, his lawfull Commands shal do, Fornication
or Adultery he shall not commit, Hurt or Damage to his . . .
Master shall not do, nor Consent to be done, but he to his Power
shall Lett it, and forthwith his . . . Master thereof Warn :
Taverns or Alehouses he shall not haunt or frequent, unless it
be about his Master's Business there to be done. At Dice,
Cards, Tables, Bouls, or any other unlawfull Games he shall
not play. The Goods of his Master he shall not Waste, nor them
lend nor give to any Person without his Master's License.
Matrimony with any woman within the Said Term he shall not
Contract, nor from his . . . Master's Service at any time absent
himself ; but as a true and faithful Apprentice he shall order
and behave himself towards his Master and all his, as well in
Words as in Deeds . . . And true and just Accounts of all his
Master's Goods, Chattels, and Money committed to his Charge,
or which shall come into his Hands, faithfully he shall give at all
times when thereunto required by his Master.

' And the said Stephen ffirth, ffor and in Consideration of
the Sume of thirty shilling of Lawfull Money to him paid at the
Ensealing hereof, doth Covenant, Promise and Grant by these
Presents to and with the said Thomas Gleadhill his Apprentice
that he shall and will Teach, Learn, and Inform him ... or cause
Him to be Taught ... in the Trade, Mystery or Occupation of
a Clothier, which he the said Master now useth, after the best
manner of Knowledge that he . . . may or can, with all the
circumstances thereunto belonging. And also shall find, provide
to and for his . . . Apprentice sufficient and enough of Meat,
Drink, Washing, and Lodging, together with all his Wearing
Apparell, Linen, as well as Woollen Clothes, Shoes and Aprons,
dureing the said Terme, And at the end of the Terme shall and
Will allow him one Suit of Cloths for the Workinge Days, and
another for the Holidays, fit and sufficient for Such an Apprentice
to have.'

(Signed by) Stephen ffirth, (Seal.)

his Mark

Thomas T Gleadhill, (Seal.)

If the master was a worsted clothier, or a woollen clothier on
an extensive scale, the indenture often stated that the apprentice
should receive tuition in wool-buying, marketing, and all the

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 303

other branches of the trade in which the large manufacturer
engaged. The following extract throws light upon this subject,
and is taken from a unique type of indenture. In this agreement,
dated 1792, x the master, a worsted manufacturer of Bingley,
received a premium of sixteen guineas, in return for which he
promised to train the apprentice in the ' art and Mystery of
a Worsted Stuffmaker, in all its Branches . . . and also shall
and will take his apprentice, in the last year of his Apprentice-
ship, to the Market, or into the Country, and instruct him in
the buying of Wool, the Apprentice finding his own horse, and
paying his own Travelling Expenses. And also shall and will
allow unto his said Apprentice one Fortnight in each and every
year during the said Term [five years], to go to School to improve
himself in learning '.

If the youth was apprenticed to a cloth merchant, the master
was to instruct him in the ways of foreign trade, and was expected
to take his pupil with him when he went abroad.

Frequently the apprentice paid no premium, and on some
occasions the master actually agreed to pay a small nominal
wage to his pupil. Thus in 1704 John Burton of Bramley,
clothier, undertook to teach James Wilkinson ' the misterie,
craft and occupation of a cloathier, with meat, drink, washing
and lodging and beding, and paying one shilling per year as
sallerie or wages, and finding him all cloathes and nesses-
sories V2

Thirdly, the apprentice might be drawn from the ranks of
the Poor Law children. When the churchwardens and Overseers
of the Poor had a ' poor child ' of whom they wished to dispose,
they could practically compel some eligible person to take the
child as apprentice. In Leeds this power of binding a parish
apprentice upon an unwilling ratepayer was very capriciously
exercised, and caused many complaints during the eighteenth
century. The Poor Law officials kept a book, in which they
entered the names of those persons they thought were fit and
able to bear the gift of an apprentice.3 Then, when a child had
to be got rid of, one of the townsmen was approached and

1 Apprenticeship Indenture of Thomas Lister, apprenticed to William
Smith of Harden, near Bingley. Copy in Bradford Reference Library.

2 Indenture, printed by J. H. Turner, Shipley, Idle, and District, p. t,j.
■' Poor Law Commission Reports, 1S34, xxviii. 729.

304 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

informed that he must take the child.1 Sometimes a clothier,
knowing that his turn to take a parish apprentice was coming
round, would anticipate the command of the Overseers by-
asking for a child. Generally, however, the clothier awaited
the order, and then made his objections. He might point out
that he still had with him the parish apprentice last allotted to
him, and that it was not just to saddle him with another at that
moment.2 He might protest, as did Samuel Durrans of Hunslet,
in 171 1, that ' there are severall other persons that are more
fitt and proppcr than him to have apprentices putt to them,
in regard he is unmarried \3 He might explain that he was
maintaining by his exertions an orphan relative, an aged father
and mother, or some other person, who, but for his support,
would be thrown upon the Poor Law charges, and hence, as he
was doing his duty to the community, he should not be further
burdened with a pauper child. Or he might refuse point-blank
to take the apprentice. These objections, however, were seldom
regarded (unless the plaintiff carried his protest to the local
justices), and the citizen was ordered to welcome the child into
his house. If he still refused, he was heavily fined. In 1775,
for instance, Alice Halstead, a widow of Morley,4 was fined five
and a half guineas because she refused to take a town apprentice.
In Leeds the fine was generally £10, and the Poor Law funds
of that town often profited to the extent of £1,000 a year by
reason of the fines imposed upon those who refused to take such
children.5 The Overseers were only ton pleased to get children
off their hands, and often placed out those who were obviously
physically or mentally unfit. Fortunately, the person with
whom the child was placed could appeal to the justices of the
peace for relief from his burden, in case the apprentice proved
to be useless. Thus in Leeds the justices from time to time
ordered the Overseers to take back such children ; one because
he had a lame leg, another because he was afflicted ' with sore
fface, and not fitt to be put out Apprentice ',6 whilst a few were
returned to the Poor Law authorities because it appeared to

1 Reports, 1806, iii. 134. ■ Leeds General Sessions, ii. 581 (1711).

:< Ibid., ii. 582 (1711).

1 Morley Town Book (1775), quoted in Smith's Rambles round Mot-lev, p. 47.

5 Poor Law Commission, app., Yorkshire section, Reports, 1834, xxviii. 729.

6 Leeds General Sessions, 28 Geo. II, vol. vi, pp. 378-9.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 305

the court that they were ' afflicted with a distemper called the
Evill, and not fit t to be an Apprentice '.

The apprentice was placed out when he reached the age of
twelve or thirteen years, though Poor Law children were often
disposed of at an earlier age. In the indenture quoted above
the child was apprenticed for thirteen years ; it seems that he
had been left an orphan, and was therefore indentured at an
early age for such a long period. Such a case, however, is
exceptional, and generally apprenticeship was formally taken
up between the twelfth and the sixteenth year. During the
years which preceded apprenticeship the boy would frequently
have been learning some branch of the trade whilst in his father's
house, where he would help in wool-sorting, spinning, and other
occupations such as were carried on in most houses in the
textile area. We must never lose sight of this consideration,
namely, that the domestic atmosphere was charged with in-
dustrial activity, and that the child grew up with the processes
of manufacture going on all around him. Thus, before he was
indentured, he would have a practical acquaintance with some
phases of the industry. During his period of tuition he was
a member of his master's family, an unpaid servant, and a pupil.
He was tied carefully by the terms of his indenture, and his
master had very considerable powers over him. His leisure-
time and his morals were under supervision. ' Taverns and
alehouses he shall not frequent ; games, etc., he shall not play ',
so ran the indenture, and in 1757 the magistrates of Leeds
made a declaration for the uplifting of the moral tone of both
apprentices and journeymen.

' Publicans permitting Journeymen, Labourers, Servants, or
Apprentices, to play at Cards, Dice, Draughts, Shuffleboards,
Mississippi, or Billiard Tables, Skittles, Ninepins, or any other
Implements of Gaming in their Houses, Outhouses, or Grounds,
shall forfeit 405. for the first offence, lor every subsequent
offence £10, to be levied by distress and sale ; a quarter to the
Informer, the rest to the Poor.'

It an apprentice or journeyman was known to be in a public
house, his master could obtain a warrant from the justices for
his apprehension."

1 Ibid., vi. ;ss, ami vii. u<>. - Leedes Intelligencer, August 30, 1757.

1526.12 X

306 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

At times the youth made a bold bid for freedom, and ran
away. One constantly encounters advertisements in the eigh-
teenth-century newspapers similar to the following : 1

' Run away, on the fifteenth of November last, John Oldham,
Apprentice to Jonathan Roebuck, Clothier, of Jacksonbridge,
near Scholes. . . . The said John Oldham will be twenty years
old the last Day of March next, is about five feet high, of a fair
complexion, has light coloured flank Hair, and' his little finger
on each hand crooked. He had, when he absconded, a blue
Waistcoat, and a light blue-grey Singlet, and a Shread Apron,
red and blue, a pair of good Shoes with bright Metal Buckles,
and slouch'd Hat. - If the said Apprentice will return to his
said Master, he will be kindly taken in, or if any Person harbours
him after this Notice he will be prosecuted.'

Such occurrences were only to be expected, even in cases
where the master was the very embodiment of kindliness and
good nature. The apprentice was bound for a number of years,
generally seven, in some cases less, in others for a longer period.
Long before that time was expired, he would be able, or suppose
himself able, to do a man's work and earn man's wages. He
would chafe at the terms of his indenture, and eventually seek
his freedom. In 1806 Mr. William Cookson, a Leeds magistrate,
declared that disputes often arose between apprentices and
masters, especially towards the end of the period of apprentice-
ship. This, he stated, was due to the fact that the young men,
as soon as they had learned their trade and were able to do the
work of a journeyman, became arrogant, and made themselves
obnoxious to their masters, in the hope that the latter would
release them before the expiration of their full time. If the
master refused to grant the apprentice his liberty, then the
pupil ran away, and so, stated Mr. Cookson, ' there is scarcely
a week that we (i.e. the magistrates) are not obliged to grant
warrants to apprehend runaway apprentices.' 2 If the master
was highly dissatisfied with the work and conduct of his appren-
tice, he could release him from the contract,3 and if the youth

1 Leedes Tntelligeneer, February 26, 1782. Similar picture in Intelligencer
for June 4, 1782.

2 Reports, 1806, iii. 172. Unruly apprentices were often placed in the
House of Correction, e.g. 1710, Leeds. Gen. Sess., ii. 545, an apprentice put
in the House of Correction ' as an Idle, dissolute and disorderly person '.

3 Leeds Gen. Sess., ii. 56, 9th October, 12 William III ; quarrel between
master and apprentice. Court decided it was best they should part.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 307

had been taken from the Poor Law officials, the justices of the
peace could relieve him of a charge which was an unprofitable
burden upon him.

The master was also protected by law against any attempts
to entice away his pupil. From time to time the justices of the
peace were called upon to order the restoration of an apprentice
who had been seduced by another master from the care of his
proper guardian. For instance, in 1698 Antony Dobson, of
Armley, clothier, had taken a parish apprentice and formally
indentured him, ' yet notwithstanding, one Peter Broadbent,
of Armley, clothier, hath invegled and Seduced the said [appren-
tice] out of the Service of the said . . . Dobson, and doth detain
and keep him in his own Service, contrary to Law and Justice '.
Dobson appealed to the justices of Leeds, who ordered that
Broadbent should return the apprentice, or ' answer the con-
trary at his perill '.

On the other hand, the apprentice could appeal through his
father or some relative to the justices of the peace for protection
against the abuses of his master. The justices had to insist on
both sides keeping to the terms of the indenture, and masters
were constantly before the bench, charged with some breach of
their trust. At almost every General Sessions held in Leeds
during the first sixty years of the eighteenth century some
apprentice was freed from his agreement to serve, because of
offences on the part of his master. The grievance might be
persistent cruelty, starvation, or neglect ; it might be that the
master was bankrupt, had fled his home, or was in gaol. What-
ever the circumstances, the apprentice could obtain his freedom,
if he proved that his master was not properly discharging his
duties. Witness the following instances. In 1708" William
Killingbeck, of Horsforth, made petition to the magistrates on
behalf of his son, John, whom he had placed apprentice with
Richard Hodgson, of Holbeck, clothier. The complaint was
' that Richard Hodgson hath left his ffamily, and is run to
Ireland, and that Sarah Hodgson, his wife, doth not follow the
said Trade, nor take care that the Apprentice be instructed
therein, whereby he is in danger to be Deprived of the means of

1 Leeds Gen. Sess. Records, October 5, [O98, ii. 4.
- Ibid., October 6, 1708, ii. 425.

X 2

3o8 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

getting his Liveing ' ; therefore it was ordered that the indenture
should be cancelled and the youth allowed to serve the remainder
of his time with another master. In the same year another
apprentice obtained his freedom, because his master was incar-
cerated in Rothwell Gaol for debt,1 and similar entries are
scattered up and down the North Riding Quarter Sessions
records. Charges of cruelty and neglect are no less common.
In 1709 complaint is made ' that John Atkinson doth not
allow his Apprentice Sufficient and necessary Meat, drink, and
Apparel, and ffurther, that he doth not take care that he be
kept att and instructed in his Trade '.2 In 1714 another appren-
tice reports that he ' hath not had sufficient Meat and Drink
allowed him, and that his Master hath several Times immoderately
corrected him ' ; 3 and four years later Sarah Brown complains
that her master, a clothier, is teaching her nothing by way of
a trade, and ' that she hath been very much crushed and abused
by beating and otherwise in her master's service '.4 In all these
instances the indenture was cancelled. If the apprentice was
nearing the expiration of his time he seems to have been excused
the remaining period, but if he had still some considerable time
to serve he was ordered to place himself at once under another
master.

One more topic remains to be discussed, namely, to what
extent legal conditions of apprenticeship were being maintained.
The Commission of 1806 declared that apprenticeship had main-
tained its ground more generally in the north than in the west,
but it also went on to state that this survival was ' rather from
custom than from a sense of the Law'.5 The apprenticeship
system had woven itself into the fabric of the domestic industry,
and was now part and parcel of the economic structure. The
youth who some day hoped to become a master needed a training
in the various parts of the work, since he would have to be
a man of many parts, and this comprehensive training could
best be obtained by serving a period of apprenticeship under
a fully qualified master. The law demanded that the period
should be at least seven years, and the Leeds Cloth Halls at first

1 Leeds Gen. Sess. Records, ii. 407. 2 Ibid., ii. 466.

3 Ibid., ii. 706. ' Ibid., iii. ■j-j .

r' Reports, 1806, iii, p. 1 3.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 309

forbade entry to any clothier who had not served the full legal
period. We have seen, however, that in the early seventeenth
century the full letter of the Elizabethan statute was not being
observed in the West Riding, and during the eighteenth century
the Act fell into greater neglect. This was inevitable in the
widely scattered districts, and the justices of the peace never
seem to have attempted to enforce the full demands of the Act
of 1563. 1 In Leeds, where supervision was more easily effected,
and where the Corporation was alive to a sense of its authority,
some attempt was made, from the Revolution of 1688 to the
middle of the eighteenth century, to enforce the terms of the
Statute of Apprentices. The chief offenders in Leeds were the
cloth-workers, i. e. those engaged in dressing the cloth. This
industry seemed to be full of men who had not served an appren-
ticeship. They were constantly being brought before the justices
on the charge of having violated the laws concerning apprentice-
ship, and were fined in accordance with the length of time they
had been engaged in the occupation. Cloth-workers abounded
as defendants in such cases, but clothiers, drapers, mercers,
bricklayers, tallow-chandlers, and tailors also appeared amongst
the offenders.2 Occasionally there was an indictment of a master
for having employed a journeyman who had not served the
legal minimum of seven years.3 Thus the authorities of Leeds,
during the first fifty years of the eighteenth century, tried
to administer the statute, and to uphold the standard of

1 The West Riding justices were not the only ones who looked with a lenient
eye upon offenders. In February 1702 the Kendal weavers petitioned Parlia-
ment, declaring that when persons were prosecuted for violating the appren-
ticeship Act they met with such favour from the local justices that the law-
was of no avail.

2 The indictments generally ran as follows : ' That XY ... on the first day
of May, in the fifth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord (xeorge the Second,
and continually after until the first day of May then next following, to wit
for the space of one whole month, at Leeds, unlawfully, voluntarily, unjustly,
and for his own gain hath sett up, occupyed, used, and excercised the Craft,
Mistcry, or Occupation, of a Broad Woollen Clothworker, being an art, Mistery,
or Manuall occupacion, used or occupyed within the Kingdom of England
[at the time of the passing of the 1563 Act] in which said Craft . . . the said
XY never was brought up or served as an Apprentice therein by the space
of seven years, in Kvill Example of all others in the like case offending and
against the peace of the King his Crown and Dignity, and against the form of
the Statute'. It would seem from this indictment that offenders were
seized after having practised the illegal occupation for the space of a month,
and hence the statutory tine of 40s. was inflicted {Leeds Sess. Records. April 2,
17 }?). :! Ibid., v. 222. jjS-o.

310 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

apprenticeship in the town, whilst to some extent the rule of
the Cloth Hall would maintain the same standard amongst the
clothiers around Leeds.

After 1750, however, there is an absence of apprenticeship
prosecutions in the Leeds General Sessions records, which seems
to indicate that the justices had abandoned their attempts, and
the latter part of the century was marked by a general break- v
down of any legal restraint upon apprenticeship. The witnesses
in an inquiry in 1802 all agreed on this point. One man declared
that he always thought the Act of 1563 was obsolete ; he himself
had only served for four years, and of the general body of
Yorkshire cloth-makers not one in ten of the workmen employed
in the woollen manufacture had served a regular apprenticeship :
many had not been apprenticed at all, and the others had done
only three, four, or five years, according to the age at which
they were indentured.1 Another witness stated that, as cloth-
dressing could be learned in a little over twelve months, there
was not the least occasion for seven years' training, whilst
a Mirfield representative in 1806 remarked that ' the apprentice-
ship law has never been thought of : ... I never heard it men-
tioned before that I know of '.2

The system of apprenticeship received a hard blow from the
growth of the worsted industry in the West Riding. The Act
of 1563 was understood to apply only to certain industries
which existed and were of importance at the time of the passing
of that statute. The worsted industry, however, came to the
West Riding subsequent to that date, and so the question arose,
Did the regulations concerning apprenticeship apply to the new
industry ? This was a difficult question, which no one could
answer. Hence, although many young men were apprenticed
to learn the worsted manufacture, many others entered into no
such formal pledge of service. Further, in the manufacture of
worsteds there was much greater division of labour amongst ■
the employees. One was a wool-comber and nothing else,
another spent all his time weaving, and so there was no need
for that many-sided industrial proficiency which the woollen
worker possessed. It would be quite unnecessary for a wool-

1 Reports, 1802-3, v- 3°S-

2 Reports, 1806, iii. 197. Evidence of Mr. Staincliffe.

ix I)URIN(i THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 311

comber to serve seven years when he could learn his trade in
one or two, and it would be equally undesirable that a man
whose whole task was to be weaving should bind himself as an
apprentice for a long space of time. Thus, both in the worsted
and woollen industries, apprenticeship was becoming obsolete.
It was now entered upon only by those who intended to become ,
masters ; the rank and hie of the workpeople never became
formally indentured, and so a Bradford witness in 1806 asserted
his belief that ' nineteen out of twenty have not served regular
apprenticeships in the textile industry of the West Riding '.*

This decline of the system is seen in the gradual relaxation of
all attempts to enforce the legal period. The prosecution of
a man for not having served seven years was a thing unknown
in i8o6,2 and it was only the fear of the onslaught of machinery
which made the domestic clothiers at that time seek for the
reinvigoration of an Act which most of them had transgressed.
The Cloth Halls of Leeds had long ago reduced their seven years'
stipulation to five years, whilst the later Halls, at Colne, Brad-
ford, and Huddersfield made no demand whatever concerning
apprenticeship qualifications. Moreover, during the century,
legislation itself admitted the justice of the case against the
Elizabethan Act, and provided a loophole of escape from the '
rigour of its demands. In 1725 Parliament renewed its attempt
to regulate the industry and to stamp out deceptive practices in
the manufacture of broad cloth.' This Act contained certain
clauses concerning apprenticeship, and declared that ' no person
who shall not have served for the space of seven years as an
apprentice ... in the trade of a broad clothier shall make or
cause to be made any broad cloths, under the penalty of forfeit-
ing £10 for every month ' he has worked.3 This meant that
a fully qualified clothier could not make broad cloths unless he
had served for seven years as an apprentice to the broad cloth
trade. The broad clothiers lived around Leeds, the narrow
clothiers around Huddersfield and Halifax, and thus a distinction
w;is fixed against the latter. This clause was obviously intended
to reinvigorate the statute of 1563, but it seems to have had
little effect, and when the Act was renewed in 17331 the appren-

1 Reports, [806, iii. 1S4. 3 Ibid., passim.

;i Statute 1 1 Geo. I, c. 24. * 7 Geo. II, c. 25.

312 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

ticeship clauses were removed entirely. In 1749 1 soldiers and
sailors who might be unemployed in times of peace were allowed
to take up a trade without having previously served an appren-
ticeship to that trade. A further enactment came in 1795, and
attempted to deal with another special case, namely that of
the wool-comber. Wool-combing formed a distinct part of the
worsted industry, and combers held a virtual monopoly of their
trade, because of the skill required. They spent the whole of
their time at one particular process, and seem to have earned
comparatively large wages by combing only. In 1795 it was
felt that these skilled hand-workers might be left stranded in
consequence of the coming of machinery, and some relaxation
of the law must therefore be made in order to allow them to
migrate to some other part of the textile field. The Act of 1795
therefore stated that all wool-combers who had served an
apprenticeship to combing, but were willing to apply themselves
to other branches of the trade, might transfer themselves to
some other occupation without legal let or hindrance.2 By this
time legal apprenticeship was practically dead. It had fallen
into neglect, and the clothiers who sought to revive the Eliza-
bethan statute during the next few years did so not from love
of the system, but because they wished to erect a bulwark
against the onslaught of the factory and machinery. Their
efforts ended in failure. Circumstances were changing, and
economic conceptions were becoming modelled on the laissez-
faire plan. The petitions of the domestic workers were of no
avail ; Parliament temporarily suspended the law concerning
apprenticeship, and finally repealed it entirely in 1813. Appren-
ticeship for the future was to be a voluntary agreement between
master and pupil, and as the factory system advanced its
frontiers, and machine production gained ground, the scope for
individual tuition and intimate personal relations largely dis-
appeared. In the modern textile world there is little room for
the apprentice.

(e) The Journeyman in his relation to the Clothier

The position of the journeyman during the eighteenth century
varied according to the nature of his employer. Amongst the
1 22 Geo. II, c. 44. - 35 Geo. Ill, c. 124.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 313

smaller clothiers engaged in the woollen manufacture the gulf
between master and man scarcely existed ; the two often worked
side by side, took their share of duty at the loom or the dye-vat,
with very little apparent difference in status between them.
The employer had probably been a journeyman in his day, and
the journeyman looked forward to the time when he might
possibly be able to set up as a small clothier for himself. With
the larger masters such as the worsted chiefs, the big woollen
clothiers, and the master cloth-finishers we rise to a more
highly developed type of employer, and therefore the contrast
between master and man is much more evident. The worsted
master, for instance, carried on his trade with a real division of
labour ; he employed his wool-combers, spinners, and weavers,
each a well-defined class in itself. He utilized a considerable
quantity of capital, and thus stood in a position high above
that of the people he employed. The big woollen clothiers, with
their ten or twelve looms in one room, and the master dyers or
cloth-dressers belonged to the same class, and in these branches
of the cloth industry there were quite distinct bodies of employers
and of workpeople.

In accordance with the statute of 1563 employees were still
engaged in some cases by yearly contracts, but it is doubtful
whether this rule was general throughout the whole industry.
In Leeds the justices occasionally punished master cloth-workers
for hiring, taking into service, and retaining men for a period
ot less than one year, but spinners and weavers were probably
engaged on the same terms as to-day, given work whenever the
clothier had any for them, and paid according to piece rates.

In a previous chapter we studied the assessment of textile
workers' wages by the justices of the peace, and noticed the
maximum rates allowed in 1047. l During the next hundred
years this practice of assessment was continued, but the regu-
lation of woollen workers' wages was soon abandoned. The
assessment of 1647 was renewed, without any alteration, up to
i(>72. In that year a new assessment was drawn up,2 in which
an all-round increase in wages was permitted, but from which

1 For ,1 fuller treatment of the assessment of wages in the West Riding,
see an article hv the present writer in the Kcotiinniv /<>itrntil, June IQ14.
- Sessions Order Book*, H, pp. 35-;.

514 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

the textile clauses were entirely deleted. There is no mention
whatever of the wages which were to be paid to ' Cloathworkers
and Dyers ', and from this time onwards no assessment was
made for this very important section of the community. The
reasons for this abandonment arc very obscure, and one can only
guess what were the motives which induced the justices to
remove from their sphere of control so important an industry.
It may have been due to the difficulties encountered in revising
the rates for textile workers Time rates had been fixed in
1647, and it may have been that an attempt was now made to
convert them into piece rates in accordance with the custom
actually in practice in the industry. Such a step would be
exceedingly difficult, because of the variety of cloths made in
the Riding. A second possibility is that the heads of the cloth-
ing trade were averse to any such increase in the textile wages
list as was being granted in most of the other occupations.
There is no evidence on this point, but one must remember that
there was in existence at this time the Corporation of Broad
Clothiers, established in the early years of the reign of Charles II.
When this organization was brought into being, the statute
which incorporated it forbade the Corporation to meddle with
wages, or to attempt to ' set or impose any other or lesser Rates
of Wages upon any inferiour Workmen, Servants or Labourers
. . . than such as shall bee from time to time allowed and approved
by the Justices of the Peace in their Quarter Sessions according
to the Lawes and Statutes ... in that case made and provided '-1
This clause is quite in harmony with the provisions for a mini-
mum rate laid down in the Act of 1603, but it is grotesquely
unreal in the light of the maximum figures which were being
assessed by the justices. The Corporation was set up in 1662,
and in the same year the assessment had been renewed as in
if>47, continuing without any alteration until 1672. But now,
in the latter year, when the whole schedule was to be revised,
there may well have been some searchings of heart amongst
clothiers and justices at the manner in which the assessments
of maxima for cloth-makers violated the law of 1603 and the
clause in the statute of 1662. The justices may have felt some-
what uneasy at their neglect of duty, whilst the Corporation of
1 Statute 14 Chas. II, c. 32.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 315

Broad Clothiers was probably opposed to any increase in wages,
since times were bad and the textile labour market was so over-
stocked that any number of workpeople could be obtained at
the old rates. In the circumstances, it seemed best to leave out
entirely the textile workers' wages list, and so from 1672
onwards the wages in the cloth trade were thrown open to
individual bargaining. In the eighteenth century the State
stepped in and made various enactments for the regulation of
the wages to be paid in the industry, and an Act of 1756 ' gave
the justices power to fix piece rates for weavers. But all these
statutes were practically useless, and did not actually affect the
Yorkshire branch of the cloth industry. At the same time there-
were many enactments to protect the worker from payment in
truck, and the various anti-combination laws of the century
demanded the proper disbursement of ' full wages . . . agreed
on, in good and lawful money of this Kingdom '.2

But the workman of the eighteenth century did not rely
much upon the justices of the peace for an increase in his wages.
Workmen were already beginning to be conscious of their class-
strength, and were embarking upon experiments in the methods
of industrial warfare. Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Webb have shown,
in their early chapters on the history of trade unionism, the
growth of organized labour during the eighteenth century,
especially in the more capitalistic areas of London, Norfolk,
and the West of England. Here the division between master
and servant had become complete, with a class of wealthy
industrial and commercial magnates on the one hand and
a proletariat on the other. Here there were trade unions,
strikes, and riots, to say nothing of countless petitions to the
King and Commons. These expressions of labour unrest,
which were most prevalent during the first third of the century,
called forth a series of anti-combination laws which culminated
in the Acts of 1799 and 1800, and laid the foundation of that
opposition against which trade unionism had to fight throughout
the nineteenth century.

The early Acts were aimed specifically at workers in wool,

1 Statute jq Geo. II, c. 33. This statute was repealed in the following
year (30 ( »eo. 1 1, c. 1 2).

- e. g. 12 Geo. I, c. 34 ; 1 3 Geo. I, c. 23 ; 22 Geo. II. c. 27.

316 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

and forbade the formation of clubs, societies, and all other
forms of combination such as should attempt to regulate the
trade, advance wages, and generally help to improve the con-
ditions of employment. Any person entering into such com-
bination was to be sent to prison for three months ; any wool-
comber or weaver leaving his employment before the termina-
tion of the period for which he was engaged was similarly
punished, and any workman who should ' damnify, spoil, or
destroy . . . any of the goods, wares, or works committed to his
charge ' was to pay double their value to the owner. Finally,
any person or combination of persons who attempted to intimi-
date or victimize an employer, by endangering his life, or
destroying his property, because he refused to comply with any
demands made by his workpeople, was to be transported for
a period of seven years.1

Legislation of this type was inspired by the outbursts in the
south-western counties, but the north was not free from indus-
trial disturbances during the century. Capitalism was estab-
lished and developed in the worsted and finishing trades. The
worsted trade of Yorkshire was in constant touch with the
southern branches of the industry, where the wool-combers
were very strongly organized, whilst the cloth-workers of Leeds,
living in a town and working in groups, would enjoy that social
and industrial intercourse from which springs combination and-
concerted action. Hence in the cloth finishing and the worsted
branches of the industry symptoms of labour unrest presented
themselves during the century which preceded the Industrial
Revolution. Take, for instance, the two following examples of
strikes in Leeds. The first was in 1706, and the heroes were six
cloth-drawers employed in that borough. These men banded
together and vowed that at a certain day and time they would
'down tools', and thenceforth refuse to work for any person
who declined to pay them i\d. an hour, in place of the id. an
hour which was the general rate. Apparently the men fulfilled
their promise, and consequently attracted the attention of the
judicial authorities of the town. They were brought into court
and heavily fined.2 In 1743 another body of strikers incurred

1 Statute 12 Geo. I, c. 34, extended in 22 Geo. II, c. 27.
- Leeds Gen. Scss. Books (1706), ii. 300.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 317

the wrath of the guardians of law and order.1 On this occasion
there were three men named, ' and divers other persons as yet
unknown ', all of them ' workmen and journeymen in the Art,
Mystery, or Manual Occupation of a broad Woollen Clothier '.
These men were ' not content to work and labour in that art
and mystery at the usual rates and prices for which they and
other journeymen and workmen were wont and accustomed to
work ', but were ' falsely and fraudulently conspiring and com-
bining unjustly and oppressively to encrease and augment the
wages of themselves and others '. In pursuit of this policy they
' did on the 24th January ... at Holbeck, in the Burrough, with
fforce and arms unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assemble
and meet together, and so being assembled and met, did then
and there, with like force and arms in a Warlike manner, un-
lawfully, riotously, and tumultuously incite, move, and stir up
other workmen and journeymen in the said . . . occupation to
conspire with them not to make or do their work ... at any
lower or less rate or price than twelve pence for each day's
work . . . To the great Terror of his Majesty's Liege Subjects, and
to the evil example of all others '. This was evidently a very
spirited outbreak ; the leaders were seized and brought before
the Leeds magistrates, but with what result is unknown.

The cloth-workers were meek as lambs when compared with
the worsted workers. The worsted industry had become strongly
organized in its southern home, and that organization spread to
the north with the establishment of the industry in the West
Riding. Time and time again the stuff weavers around Leeds
rose in riot and outrage, and attacked some fellow workman
who was probably a non-unionist, or struck at the fountain-
head and raided the employer's house. Two instances in par-
ticular stand out as showing the energy which was put into
these concerted attacks on an unpopular employer. In 1770
thirty-two stuff weavers of Leeds, being ' assembled, unlaw-
fully, riotously, and routously, did redeliver and return, unwoven
and unmanufactured, unto Joshua Musgrave, 14 lbs. of Worsted
Yarn, which by him had been delivered to one lohn Day, to be
wove and manufactured into two pieces of Camblet ; then,
being gathered together, they did remain and continue together
1 Ibid. (-'4th February, 10 Geo. II), v. .239.

318 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

in a tumultuous manner for a Space of half an Hour, Shouting
and making a great noise and Disturbance, and otherwise greatly
misbehaving themselves to the great Disturbance and Terror
of diverse of his Majesty's Liege Subjects ' ; for which expres-
sion of their animosity towards the master worsted manufacturer
they were fined five shillings each.1 Two and a half years later
28 worsted workers of Leeds did ' with force and Arms . . .
unlawfully . . . assemble and gather together . . . and being so
assembled then and there in and upon one John Rider [a master
manufacturer of worsteds] in the Peace of God and our said
Lord the King . . . did make an assault, and him did beat, wound,
and illtreat, so that his life was despaired of, and then did
Rioutously, Routously, Wrongfully, and Unjustly break and
enter the Dwelling-House of John Rider and did take and carry-
away 200 pieces of Woollen Stuffs, value £300 '.2

The wool-combers, who were the aristocracy of labour in the
cloth trade, and who earned the highest wages, were organized
in a union which had an almost national constituency. This
union was instituted some years before 1741, when it was
described in detail by a pamphleteer, who screened his identity
behind the pseudonym ' A Lover of his country \3 The organiza-
tion evidently began as a friendly society, paying benefits to
those who were sick or unemployed, out of funds raised by
weekly payments of 2d. or 3d. Gradually the union gained
strength, and then commenced to dictate terms to the masters ;
minimum piece rates were to be fixed for combing, and no master
was to employ a non-unionist. If the employer defied the union
in these respects, the members refused to work for him until the
outsider was dismissed. When a member was out of employ-
ment, he was given a ticket and money to enable him to go and
seek work elsewhere, and found a welcome amongst fellow-
members in other parts of the kingdom. Thus in spite of legisla-
tion, this union of wool-combers existed as a highly developed
association, resembling in many of its methods the big societies
of the following century. How long the club lasted we do not
know, but it is certain that throughout the century the wool-

1 Leeds Gen. Sess. Records (28th May, 10 Geo. Ill), vii. 183-4.

2 Ibid, (ist September, 12 Geo. Ill), vii. 290.

'J A Short Essay upon Trade in General, by ' A Lover of his Country ', 1741,
quoted by James, op. eit., p. 232.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 319

combers of Yorkshire were ;i strong and stalwart body of men,
who stood together for purposes of offence or defence, and were
the bane of their employers. Legislation existed which allowed
the clothier to indict his workpeople for false spinning, bad

workmanship, or embezzlement of materials ; and yet the
worsted master was so much afraid of the united opposition of
the labouring classes that he did not dare to put the law in
operation against offenders. It was not until the worsted chiefs
were given power to establish what was practically an employers'
union, namely the Worsted Committee, that the individual
master dare attempt to get his grievances redressed. The
wool-combers occasionally demanded increased wages, and,
should a master refuse, the three or four combers employed by
him declined to continue their work. Such incidents as the
following were therefore quite common : In 1777 three journey-
men wool-combers were convicted at the Bradford Quarter
Sessions ' for keeping up, continuing . . . making, entering into,
and being knowingly concerned together at Bowling in a Con-
tract, Agreement, or Combination, contrary to the fform of the
Statute in the case made and provided, to advance their wages
as journeymen woolcombers, and for presuming to put such
Contract, Agreement, and Combination into execution, and in
consequence thereof refusing to work for reasonable and accus-
tomed wages ; . . . [they were] therefore committed to the House
of Correction ... at Wakefield, there to be confined and kept to
hard labour for a space of three months.' x Again in 179 1 the
Worsted Committee prosecuted three I Ialifax wool-combers
upon ' a charge of Combination or Conspiracy in raising their
Wages '.2

During the later years of the century organized labour
became much more powerful in the West Riding. In January
1787 the carpet weavers of Leeds, after a ' turn out ' of several
weeks, obtained an advance in wages ; during this strike there
had been much rioting and robbery.' In 1793 the Corporation
• if the borough began to feel anxious at the growing industrial
unrest, and appointed a committee to consult with the Recorder

1 Quarter Sess. Order Books, Bradford, July u, 1777, vol. FF, p. 2.
- Minutes of Worsted Comm., January ,>, 1791.
3 Mayhall, Annals of Yorkshire, i. 166.

320 DISTRIBUTION AND ORGANIZATION chap.

' as to the necessary and proper measures to be adopted for the
amending and explaining the Acts of Parliament for punishing
Servants and Workmen for breach of their contracts, and for
preventing combination amongst workmen '-1 In the previous
year the Worsted Committee had looked askance at any exten-
sion of liberties for friendly societies, because such societies
might have a ' prejudiciall Tendency, by enabling the members
thereof to form illegal Combinations'.2 The Acts of 1799 and
1800 forbade combinations of masters and men alike, but in
spite of these Acts labour organizations continued. The evidence
before the Commission of 1806 revealed the existence of various
societies and unions, which were attempting to keep out non-
unionist workmen (or ' snakes ' as they were labelled), striving
to force up wages, by strikes if necessary, rebelling in sympathy
with any of their fellows who might be wrongfully dismissed,
and also acting as sick and provident societies. One society,
that of the clothworkers, had evidently succeeded in gaining
considerable control over that industry. It insisted that no
person over fifteen years of age should be taken as apprentice,
and a Leeds master finisher in 1806 admitted that he dare not
attempt to defy his men in this particular, ' because the men
would have left their work '. Another witness tells how he
dismissed a man (William Child) because of his advocacy of
a union called the ' Institution ', and because he spent too much
of his time ' going round to persuade men to think as he thought
in the villages, endeavouring to make converts, and exhorting
the workmen to stand up for their rights '. Strikes were carried
on with much bitterness, destruction of property, personal
attacks, and vigorous picketing.3

The strange feature about most of these later unions is that
they belonged essentially to the eighteenth century, by the way
in which they attempted to stamp out the first flames of the
Industrial Revolution. With the appearance of machinery
many people foresaw the inevitable. The employees and the
small clothiers saw clearly that the advent of machinery and the
entire abandonment of Tudor legislation would spell ruin for

1 Corporation Minutes, January 28, 1793, iii. 96.

- Worsted Comm. Minutes, April 2, 1792.

:i Reports, 1806, iii. 15, 36-8, 178, 187, 193, Ac.

ix DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

\21

them. Labour-saving machinery would remove the need for
many workmen, and the cost of purchasing and erecting the
new machines would mean that only the big clothiers and the
merchants would be able to take advantage of the new possi-
bilities. Hence the workmen and small independent clothiers
had to fight for their very existence, and many of the unions
established between 1780 and 1810 spent their time and energy
in trying to stop the How to the factory. They pleaded for the
maintenance of apprenticeship, for the revival of the Act of
1555 which forbade the congregation of machinery into one
place, for the prohibition of the use of gigmills, and for the
maintenance of all the old and now obsolete safeguards which
the flood-tide of laissez-faire was sweeping away. When they
found there was no help to be obtained from Parliament, they
took the law into their own hands, and for the next twenty years
fought against machinery wherever it made its appearance.
Then came the destruction of looms and spinning jennies, burn-
ings and gunshots, imprisonments, transportation, and execu-
tions, but all without avail. The day of little things was past,
and the small clothier, the domestic unit, and the little trade
union gradually passed out of sight. The next few decades
were full of circumstances which militated against unionism,
and only since 1914, amid the difficulties created by the Great
War, has labour organization become really strong amongst
Yorkshire textile operatives.

1 ^26. 12

CHAPTER X

THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE— FROM THE
SHEEP'S BACK TO THE CLOTH HALL

In the preceding chapters no attempt has been made to
describe in detail the various processes through which the wool
passed before it became a piece of cloth, ready for the market
and the consumer. It now becomes necessary, therefore, to
take up this theme, and to make a brief survey of the stages of
manufacture as they were carried on in the eighteenth century.
In many respects this description applies to all the centuries
during which the industry was being practised in Yorkshire,
for there had been little development in the industrial arts
between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries. The imple-
ments were almost the same, the treatment of the wool had
scarcely altered, and in industrial knowledge the clothier who
paid his penny a kersey in the days of the Lancastrian kings
was not very much behind his descendants who sold their pieces
on Leeds Bridge in the days of Anne. In the intervening period
the spinning-wheel had become universal in the North, and new
varieties of cloth had been introduced. Many minor improved
devices had made the hand-loom easier to work, and the clothiers
in the lawsuit of 1638 spoke with pride of the increased efficiency
of their methods. Further, during the eighteenth century there
was some adoption of better machinery and methods. But the
great fact remains that in the four centuries preceding 1760
there was not one tithe of that technical progress which was
made in the next half-century. Inventive genius lay almost
dormant during those centuries, and did not awaken until the
reigns of the Georges.

The reasons for this are not hard to find. Inventive activity
is stimulated chiefly by an increased demand from the market.
So long as production, jogging along on old-fashioned lines, can
meet the demand, there is no powerful stimulus to the discovery
of better methods. This was the general situation up to about
1700. A slowly growing demand could be met by traditional

THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 323

methods of production, thanks to the increase in population.
But with the eighteenth century came a largely increased demand
for textile goods, in order to cope with which it was necessary
to devise some means for accelerated production. Once this had
begun in one branch of the industry it spread to others. Quicker
weaving called for faster spinning : therefore the flying shuttle
made necessary the discoveries of Ilargreaves and Crompton,
which in turn necessitated further acceleration in the rate of
weaving, in order to consume the swollen supply of yarn.

Increased demand is, however, only part of the explanation.
The fact that most of the inventions came in the cotton manu-
facture suggests that in a new industry, free from tradition,
technical progress is likely to be more rapid than in older trades.
The woollen industry was bound tight in the customs of centuries
and its devotees were therefore loth to venture on new lines.
Inventions applying solely to the treatment of woo], e. g. comb-
ing machinery, were slow in making their appearance, and even
when the big textile inventions had proved their worth in the
cotton trade they were adopted very slowly in the West Riding
industry. The cotton manufacture, rising in the eighteenth
century, had no age-worn creed to fetter its development, and
therefore supplied conditions far more favourable to the advance-
ment of industrial methods.

Now let us turn to the processes of manufacture as practised
in the eighteenth century, and first we must consider

The Wool Supply

The story of the English wool supply from 1660 to 1825 is

one of reiterated but scarcely successful attempts to keep

English wool for English looms, and thus deprive foreign workers

of their supplies of English fleeces. An Act of Charles II had

revived the absolute prohibition on the exportation of the

commodity, and this Act, frequently reinforced by subsequent

statutes, remained in operation until 1825. William III drew up

elaborate plans for patrolling the coast, and appointed inspectors

to keep watch for smugglers.1 The Yorkshire coast was placed

under the control of a surveyor, who, aided by eighteen ' riding

1 Various Acts, e.g. 10 Will. Ill, c. 40. See also Memoirs of Wool, vol. ii,
passim.

Y 2

324 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

officers,' attempted to suppress illicit exportation from the big
ports as well as the tiny creeks.1 Ingenious schemes were
suggested for the detailed registration of all wool immediately
it was sheared, for the erection of big bonded warehouses to
which all the wool should be brought, for the prohibition of
coastwise trade in wool, except by special vessels ; and a com-
mission which inquired into the matter in 1732 was advised by
some witnesses to recommend that the whole English wool clip
should be bought by the State at fixed prices, and then sold to
those who needed it under stringent rules concerning its use.2
The question was indeed a very pressing one, and the Govern-
ment was willing to do anything to stop the flow of wool to foreign
parts.

In spite of these efforts English fleeces found their way to
the Continent. The coasts of Kent and Sussex formed a happy
hunting ground for southern smugglers, and on the more deserted
northern coasts ' owling ' proceeded merrily throughout the
eighteenth century. At the same time much wool crossed the
Cheviots and passed from Scottish ports across the sea.3 France
now took the chief share, especially of long wool needed for
making worsteds, of which wools England had large supplies,
whilst France had very little. English writers of the period
spoke with indignation of the manner in which they had seen
English wool landed at Dunkirk, and referred to the places
where French and Dutch looms were kept at work by the
supplies of raw materials smuggled from England. Dyer
lamented the existence of the traitor who would so far sink his
patriotism as to carry away supplies of long wool ' to the per-
fidious foe '.4 The Northamptonshire manufacturer-pamphleteer
in 1738 waxed angry at the fact that ' we have the misfortune
to have among ourselves some who are so base as to contrive all
manner of ways and means to owl . . . wool abroad ... to those
who are utter enemies to our interests and happiness ' 5 ; and
the Leeds Corporation in 1742 and 1767 appealed to the House

1 Memoirs of Wool, ii. 67. This was in 17 17.

2 Add. MSS. 33344, rT. 63 et seq.

3 See Treasury Papers, vol. lxxiv, and passim 1690-1730.
* The Fleece, by John Dyer, LL.D. (1757).

5 Observations on British Wool, by a Manulacturcr of Northamptonshire
(1/38), p. 2.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 325

of Commons to give its earnest attention ' for the preventing
the pernicious practice of running our Wooll from Great Brittain
into fforeign Countrys '.*

During the 'seventies the wool market became somewhat
easier. The improved breeding and closer attention now de-
voted to sheep rearing had increased the production of English
wool, whilst the importation from Ireland and other sources
was becoming considerable. These factors, along with the
slump caused by the American War, brought down the price of
wool very quickly. In 1775 the price was 8^d. per lb. ; in 1779
it was only 6d.'2 This severe decline brought the wool-growers
to their feet; they were compelled to sell cheaply, and yet they
had considerable stocks remaining on their hands. If only they
could obtain permission to export the surplus, they would be
able to get a good price for the wool abroad. In 1780 and 1781,
therefore, an agitation began, especially among the Lincoln-
shire wool-farmers, to obtain permission to make a limited
exportation of English wool, and also to forbid the importation
of Irish yarn. In October 1781 a general meeting was held at
the castle of Lincoln, where a committee was chosen to prepare
petitions to Parliament asking for these favours. Outwardly,
the Lincolnshire men seem to have been very moderate in their
demands, and did not seek the repeal of the anti-exportation
laws. They asked only for licence to export a limited quantity
of the surplus wool which the period of depression had left on
their hands, and sought for protection against imported supplies
which might deprive them of part of their home market. But
in a moment the industrial and commercial interests of York-
shire and East Anglia sprang to arms, as if their very existence
was at stake. This insidious proposal of the men of Lincoln-
shire must be met by the strongest opposition, and the clothing
districts set to work to defeat the wishes of the wool-growers.
The first big meeting of the woollen manufacturers and mer-
chants was held in Leeds on December 19, 17S1, when many
resolutions were carried. It was decided that ' the exportation
of any sort of wool is injurious, and must be strenuously opposed,
and that applications for stopping the importation of Irish yarn

1 Corporation Minutes, ii. ,j? and 4<if>
- Bischott, op. (it., app. vi.

326 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

be resisted '. Two committees, one of merchants, the other of
manufacturers, were elected to carry on the campaign. They
were to open up correspondence with merchants and manu-
facturers in other parts of the kingdom, and so rouse general
opposition. Lastly, it was decided that since the welfare of the
landed interests was thought to be at stake, the assistance and
support of the gentry should be sought.

Similar meetings were held at Halifax, Huddersfield, Rochdale,
Newcastle, Carlisle, Exeter, Norwich, and in all the East Anglian
counties. At all these gatherings the resolutions passed at
Leeds were endorsed, or similar ones carried. The High Sheriff
and Grand Jury at York in March 1782 declared against the
men of Lincolnshire, and the justices of the peace in the
West Riding expressed their practical sympathy by granting
£100 to help in defraying the expenses of the campaign. The
whole clothing interest was in arms against the wool-growers.
Some pointed out that although the price had fallen the quantity
had increased, and so the growers were really more prosperous,
and Arthur Young urged that over-production should be
checked by turning some of the pastures into arable land, and
by growing hemp or flax under a Government bounty. The
men of Lincolnshire stuck to their guns as the national attack
concentrated upon them. Delegates from various parts met in
conference in London in January 1782 and drew up a monster
petition, expressing the abhorrence of the whole industry at the
proposals of the wool-growers. Against such united action
Lincolnshire could not hope to succeed in gaining what it desired,
and when the wool-farmers' requests eventually came before the
Commons they were summarily rejected.1

This failure only urged the wool-dealers to take the risks of
illicit trading, and smuggling of wool continued apace. In 1784
42,000 lb. of wool were seized at English ports, but large
quantities evaded the vigilance of the customs inspectors.
Sometimes the material was carried abroad in bags labelled
' Hops ' or the like ; at other times small boats, laden with wool,
pushed out to sea, and met the ships some distance from port.
Few ships in fact left the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire coast

1 For all the details of this agitation see I. cedes Intelligencer, 1781-2 ; also
Bischoff, op. cit., i, pp. 209-15.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 327

towns without having one or two sacks surreptitiously stowed
away in their holds.1 The merchants and clothiers therefore
clamoured for stricter legislation and more rigorous enforce-
ment. The Worsted Committee set the ball rolling, and evidence
was given before a Parliamentary Committee by Mr. Charles
Clapham of Leeds and Mr. John Hustler, the grand old man
of eighteenth-century Bradford, to show the extent to which
the home industry was being baffled by the unlawful traffic.
The trustees of the cloth halls prosecuted a vigorous campaign,
and the West Riding justices gave financial support. These
exertions were rewarded by the stringent Act of 1787-8 2; by
this statute any person concerned directly or indirectly in the
exportation of wool was liable to a fine of £3 for every pound
weight he had exported, and also to three months' solitary
imprisonment for the first offence, and six months for the
second, along with the forfeiture of ships, boats, carriages, &c,
concerned in the smuggling operations. Regulations were
imposed on the carriage of wool from one part of the kingdom
to another, and other provisions made to ensure that the foreigner
should no longer feed upon English raw materials. When the
news arrived that this measure had passed all its stages in both
chambers there were great rejoicings and processions of work-
men in all the Yorkshire clothing towns. The bells of the
churches and cloth halls were rung, speeches and self-congratula-
tions indulged in, and bonfires illumined the skies at dusk.3

As to the exact value of such Acts one can make no accurate
estimate. They required an efficient and alert machinery for
their enforcement. Popular feeling and commercial interests
would aid in the detection of offences, whilst the officials of the
Worsted Committee did much to bring culprits into the dock.
Still, a dark night, a lonely expanse of coast, and a handful of
experienced sea-dogs were sufficient to evade the strictest
watch, and smuggling of wool continued. Some cases of detec-
tion are recorded, as for instance the following:

1788. Edmund Barker of Thorne was committed for three
months to York Castle for exporting wool from Goxhill

1 Report of Pari. Committee, i;Sm, Gen. Coll. Reports, vol. xxxviii, nos. 82-5,
St.

- :S (,co. Ill, c 38. See also West Riding Quarter Sessions Order Books,
1111, passim. ■> Miyh.ill, op. cit., 1. 170.

328 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

in the East Riding to Dunkirk, besides forfeiting all his
goods and chattels, and paying £3 for every pound of wool
exported.

In the same year three Swedish ships were seized at Hull for
smuggling wool out of the kingdom. For a number of years
they had been surreptitiously exporting some 1,300 packs
annually.1

1789. Messrs. Hainsworth & Son, Leeds merchants, were
found guilty at Appleby Assizes, ' both of illegal package and
. . . exportation ' of fleeces.2

The home supply of wool was therefore of vital importance to
the Yorkshire manufacturer. The wools of the Lincoln and
Leicester breeds, with heavy fleeces and long fibres, were the
special demand of the worsted weaver, whilst the Yorkshire
and other strains supplied the shorter fibres for the woollen
cloths. The supply from the Yorkshire sheep was wholly
inadequate, and its quality was not sufficiently good for many
of the fabrics woven in the county. Until about 1770 no one
in Yorkshire had paid serious attention to sheep-breeding, and
the average fleece of the sheep reared on the wastes and commons
seldom weighed more than 3^ lb. True, this was an improve-
ment on the conditions of the seventeenth century, for Best in
his Rural Economy (1641)3 says that ' usually six of our ordinary
fleeces make a just stone ' of 14 lb. Luccock at the end of the
eighteenth century allowed one sheep to eight acres, and remarked
that the fleeces of Yorkshire sheep were small in weight, very
dirty, and generally used in the district where they were pro-
duced, never going out of the county.4 In the eighteenth
century, therefore, as in Stuart times, it was necessary to draw
upon the wool supplies of other counties, and the southern
parts of England supplied large quantities of raw material for

1 Mayhall, op. cit., i. 163.

2 Ibid., i. 167. Also Gentleman's Magazine, September 1789, p. 855.

3 Rural Economy of Yorkshire, by Best (1641) ; Surtees Soe., vol. xxxiii,
p. 24. See A. Young, Northern Tour, passim.

4 Luccock, Observations on British Wool (1800), p. 323. When attention
began to be paid to the improvement of sheep the fleece increased in weigh 1
from 3} lb. to 7 or 10 lb. (see Young's Northern Tour). A story is told of
a moorland shepherd who, when asked by Sir John Sinclair how many sheep
he allowed to the acre, replied, ' Why man, ye begin at t'wrang end first.
Ye should ax how many acres to a sheep ' (' Essay on farming of West
Riding ', by Charnock, Journal of Royal Sue., lx. 300).

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 329

the Yorkshire looms. Further, foreign supplies were being
drawn upon to a much greater degree during the century. In
1752 Yarmouth and Lancaster were opened as ports for Irish
wool and yarn,1 through which new supplies of raw and semi-
manufactured materials flowed into East Anglia and the West
Riding. Additional stocks were obtained from the southern
counties of Scotland,2 and in 1766 nearly 2,000,000 lb. of wool
were imported, chiefly from Ireland, Spain, Portugal, and
Saxony.3

The wool, when shorn from the sheep's back, might be sold in
a number of ways. In the first place, clothiers and wool-staplers
made annual excursions to the wool-farms, and purchased part
or the whole of the year's clip. Secondly, many wool-buyers,
especially the large clothiers and wool-rtaplcrs, made contracts
to purchase the whole yield of a farm for a number of years.
Thirdly, the wool-grower, instead of waiting for buyers to come
to the farm, might bring his wool to the fair or market, and
there dispose of it. All three courses had their adherents.
The visit to the farm was a recognized method of purchase :
long-period contracts were common, and the big wool markets
and fairs of Guisborough, Beverley, and Wakefield, or the
smaller meetings at Dent, Bedale, and similar market towns,
were great events in the life of the district and the county.
The greatness of the Beverley wool sales was now a thing of
the past, whilst Wakefield had stepped forward rapidly in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and was now the great
wool market of the clothing area. Growers and dealers in
Lincolnshire and other counties forwarded their wool to Wake-
field, where it was sold by agents and staplers to the clothiers
of the surrounding districts.

The wool-stapler, described in the London Tradesman (1757)
as the ' Sheet-Anchor of Great Britain ', is worthy of a moment's
attention. He was the descendant of the Merchants of the
Staple and the broggers who were so abominated in the sixteenth
century The Merchants of the Staple had developed an internal
track' in wool as their foreign trade declined, and now, although

1 Statute j; Ceo. II, cc. 14 and [9.

J Adam Smith. op. tit., II. v. _>Si-j.

'■ Hobson, Evolution of Modern Capitalism, p. 65.

330 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

the society was dead, the wool-stapler survived,1 and was,
according to Defoe, ' a very important and considerable sort '
of tradesman in the eighteenth century.2 Success in the business
required a large amount of capital, £1,000 to £10,000 being the
sum regarded as necessary for setting up as a master in the
trade in London.3 The stapler was to be found in every part
of the kingdom where wool was produced or required. His
business was to buy and collect large quantities of wool from
varied sources. Hustler, one of the most famous Bradford
staplers, declared to the House of Lords in 1800 that he was
accustomed to buying wool himself from nineteen counties,
whilst his partner and agents made purchases in at least another
fourteen.4 On the farm or in the market squares he made his
purchases, which he then carried away, by land or by water, to his
head-quarters, a warehouse in the heart of the clothing district.
Here the wool was cleaned, sorted, and classified according to
its qualities and the uses to which it was to be put. Thence to
the market stall, where the various clothiers came to purchase
their supplies, large or small. Every manufacturing town had
its market, where the manufacturer who could not journey to '
the East Riding to buy a hundred fleeces was able to procure
his two or three stones of wool, the raw material for a week's
work. The wool-stapler allowed a certain measure of credit,
a facility of which most clothiers availed themselves.

' A wooll seller knows a wooll buyer ' is an old Yorkshire-
proverb, but if it was intended to indicate that the two were

1 A paper, temp. Car. I (D. S. P., vol. 515, f. 139), states the nature of the
staplers' internal trade. They bought wool, sorted it into long or short, '
and then subdivided each kind into four or live qualities. Each class was
then taken to the particular district where it was needed. ' And divers
places, as in Yorkshire and at Oswestree, where there dwell many clothiers
that make course cloth, rugs, course cottons and flannels, and use onely course
sorts of wooll, buy these sorts of wooll of the staplers, ready sorted.'

- Defoe, Complete Tradesman, 1X41 edition, ii. 188-9.

3 London Tradesman, by R. Campbell (1757), pp. 199 and 340. The
description given there reads as follows : ' He is the first Man into whose
Hands that valuable Branch of our Trade, the Wool comes. He buys it up
from the Farmer, and keeps large Warehouses in Town to receive it. He makes
it up into several Sortments fit for the Manufacturers. It is a very profitable
Branch, but cannot be enter'd upon with little Money.'

' Minutes of Evidence before the House of Lords, relating to the Woollen
Manufacture (1800), p. So. Another wool-stapler declared that he bought
wool in thirteen counties. He made four journeys annually into nine counties,
and .in annual tour of four other counties ; p. 94.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 331

matched for shrewdness it seems, like most proverbs, to be only
partially true. Throughout the century there were numerous
complaints that the buyer was being duped and deceived by
the seller. To such a pitch did this rivalry of wits attain that
widespread agitations were carried on in 175 1-2, which brought
about the passage of remedial legislation for the evils cited.
A short extract from the petition of 1752 will best explain the
whole story. The petitioners stated that ' in order to dis-
tinguish each grower's sheep feeding on common lands, it has
been the ancient custom to put a mark of pitch or tar and other
ingredients, capable of enduring the severities of the weather,
upon some conspicuous part of the sheep ; but of late years
they have in many places loaded the fleece . . . with such exces-
sive quantities of marking stuff, in order to increase its weight,
that the manufacture has been rendered universally difficult
and often unprofitable ; that in order to make it workable the
manufacturer is obliged to clip off with the mark as much wool
as occasions a very great waste of that valuable commodity . . .
and notwithstanding the greatest attention of the most careful
manufacturers, the marking stuff is wrought into the goods of
all sorts, which, when finished, are so spotted and stained thereby
that their value and credit are greatly impaired at home and
abroad.' The clothiers also complained ' that in all parts of
the kingdom the wool-growers, in order to increase the weight
and enhance the price of the wool, permit to be wound up, in
the fleece, wool of inferior qualities, as tail wool, unwashed wool,
lamb wool, etc., and also clay, stones, dung, sand, and other
rubbish, to the inconceivable loss and deceit of the manu-
facturers, several of whom have found a total loss of one-
fifteenth of the weight they bought ; . . . in truth they now find
very few pareels of wool fairly wound and free from brands '.l
The petitioners were unanimous in condemnation of such
practices, and legislation at once made provision for the

1 Petitions came from all parts of the country. See the list of towns in
the previous chapter. Dyer also speaks of the practice of applying pitch.
The h'lcece, Hook li. 564 :

Why will ye joy in common fields, where pitch
Noxious to wool must stain your motley (lock,
To mark your property ? The mark dilates,
• •'.liters tile (lake depreciated, defiled,
I n tit for beauteous tint.

332 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

punishment of offenders — a very desirable step when one con-
siders the extent to which such frauds must have hindered
a manufacture which knew little or nothing of the use of
chemicals in washing and cleaning wool.1

M annfacture
We now follow the wool through the various processes, until
it passes to the cloth market. Where the fleece had been bought
whole and unsorted it was necessary to classify the locks, and
set them aside, as long or short, good or inferior.

In the same fleece, diversity of wool

Grows intermingled, and excites the care

Of curious skill, to sort the several kinds.

Nimbly, with habitual speed,

They sever lock from lock, and long from short,

And soft and rigid pile in several heaps.2

The short wool was laid aside by those engaged in the worsted
industry, and when augmented by the short fibres brought out
in combing was sold to the woollen manufacturers, who used
only short-staple wool.

After sorting the wool must be cleaned, and, if necessary,
dyed, before being worked up into a thread. If the cloth was
to be a ' mixed ' (i. c. a dyed) fabric, the wool, after being
washed, scoured, and cleared of dirt, burrs, twigs, &c, was
dyed. The clothier had a small dyeing vat of lead, which some-
times stood outside his door, and occasionally was located in
a ' dye house ' attached to his cottage. Here the wool was
dyed, frequently on primitive lines, and the resulting colour
was often far from pleasant. Luccock waxed scornful over the
methods and results of dyeing, and concluded his indictment as
follows : ' But indeed what can we expect but faint, muddy,
and uncertain colours, where wool is dyed, as is too much the
custom in Yorkshire, without being scoured, in pans unwashed,
and with materials mixed together upon a floor unswept, where
a little before perhaps have been mixed ingredients calculated
to produce a totally different tint '.3 Not all wool was dyed,

1 Before 1752, prosecutions are often recorded of fraudulent wool-dealers,
e.g. North Riding Sens. Rec, vii. 219, Thirske, 1709: ' A Harriby yeoman for
selling 160 fleeces of wool with certain tails and other deceptive locks.'

2 Dyer, op. n't., ii. 564.

'•> Luccock, op. 1 it., p. 172. Luccock lived in Leeds, and knew the Yorkshire
industry well.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 333

for a large proportion of the wool was woven into white cloths, and
consequently was not dyed until after the cloth had been made.1

The wool, whether white or dyed, was now sprinkled with oil
and placed layer upon layer on the floor, each layer being
sprinkled with oil ; the whole mass was then tossed about, beaten
with sticks, and thoroughly mixed up and permeated with the
oil, so as to facilitate subsequent processes. Then came the
distinction between the two kinds of wool — the short staple for
woollens went to be carded, the long staple for worsteds to be
combed. The carding was intended to work the wool into
a Huffy mass of inseparable fibres, prior to spinning. Hand
cards were used, and consisted of two boards fitted with handles,
and covered on one side with wire teeth set in leather. A
handful of the wool was placed between the boards, which were
then brought close together, and worked about in every direc-
tion, especially in a circular motion. Thus the wool was mixed
into a sheet of interlaced fibres, ready for spinning. Paul had
invented some carding machinery in 1748, but the invention
did not become generally adopted until improved by Lees and
Arkwright in the 'seventies.

Wool-combing, as indicated in an earlier chapter, aimed at
extricating the short fibres, laying the long ones in parallel lines,
and clearing the wool of knots and foreign substances. The
implements of the hand wool-comber were few and simple,
consisting of

1. A pair of combs on handles. Each comb might contain
from three to eight rows of teeth, which along with the handle
formed an implement shaped like a T. The teeth in the outside
row might be up to eleven inches in length, those in the inner
rows becoming shorter with each row.

2. A post, to which one of the combs could be fixed on a peg
or pad.

3. An iron comb-pot or stove, for heating the teeth of the
comb and warming the wool. This heating was necessary to
keep the fibres as soft, flexible, and elastic as possible, and the
combs were constantly being reheated.

1 The description of the processes is taken from Luccock, who is followed
by James. Two admirable pamphlets on Hand Card-making and Hand-
combing have been written by Mr. II. Linj; Roth, of Bankriekl Museum,
Halifax.

334 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

The actual procedure differed from district to district, and
there were many variations in the West Riding itself.1 Accord-
ing to one account, the workman took a tress of wool about
four ounces in weight, sprinkled it with oil, and rolled it in his
hands to get all the filaments properly oiled. He then fastened
a heated comb to the post, with the teeth in a horizontal position.
Taking half the tress, he threw it on to the teeth, and pulled it
through repeatedly, leaving a few fibres each time on the comb.
When he had in this manner treated all the wool in his hands,
he placed the loaded comb on or near the stove to warm while
the second comb was similarly employed on the other half of the
tress. The two combs were then taken by the handles and
worked contrariwise through the wool, until one comb had taken
it all on to its teeth. In some instances the comber sat on a low
stool for this last process, working the combs on his knees : in
others, one comb was fixed to the post. The long fibres were
now gently pulled off the comb by hand, the short ones remaining
on the butts of the teeth. A variation of this method was to
throw the wool on to a comb attached to the post, and work it
off on to the second comb, after which it was worked back on
to the original comb. In the nineteenth century it was customary
in the Bradford and Halifax area for combers to wash the wool
after the first combing, and then repeat the whole process. The
long fibres drawn from the comb by hand were called ' tops ' :
the short ones which remained on the teeth were known as
' noils '. The former went to the worsted makers, the latter to
the woollen.

Wool-combing was admitted to be the most unhealthy branch
of the trade. The work was done near the charcoal stove, which
filled the room with noxious fumes. One writer, reporting on
the health of the industrial towns in 1845, gave a ghastly picture
of the effects of wool-combing under domestic conditions. ' The
workpeople are obliged to keep their windows open in all weathers,
to prevent or to mitigate the evil effects of the gas. They are
roasted to perspiration on one side, and often have a current of
cold air rushing upon them from the window. They look pale

1 For details of the various methods see James, op. cit., pp. 249 et scq.,
or Burnley, Wool and Wool-combing (1889), pp. 88-90 ; the best description
of the implements and their use is found in Roth, Hand Wool-combing,
Halifax, 1909. This pamphlet of ten pages is profusely illustrated.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 335

and cadaverous, few reaching fifty years of age. Their roasting
employment and exposure to the gas gives them a desire for
spirits and opiates.' l The writer on the woollen manufacture
in Ure's Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, and Mines (1861
edition) declared that hand-combing was far more severe labour
than any carried on by machinery, because of the hot close
atmosphere of the combing-room ; hence he wrote 'This is
a task at which only robust men are engaged.' 2 Of course
there was the open country, the fresh air, and the patch of
ground outside. The comber was able to earn good wages if he
worked regularly, but the work was hard, and the comber seldom
did work regularly. I le took occasional holidays, often drinking
heavily ; he spent some time tending his garden,'1 or occasionally
participated in a strike. But all these things did little to counter-
act the effects of the monotonous work and the charcoal fumes.
The wool, whether carded or combed, was now ready for
spinning. This might be done by the wife and children of the
small woollen clothier, or by the people living in the vicinity.
But the entire population of the clothing area was insufficient
tor producing an adequate supply of yarn, and much of the
wool was therefore taken far afield in Yorkshire and into the
adjoining counties. James gives an instance of a clothier,
residing at Otley, who put out his wool to be spun in Cheshire
and North Derbyshire.4 The manufacturers of Bradford and
Halifax forwarded large quantities of raw material to Craven,
the North Riding, and Lancashire. This carriage of wool from
place to place was a prominent feature of the industry, and was
inevitable so long as population was dispersed. The Otley
manufacturer mentioned above bought his wool at York or
Wakefield, and brought it 25 miles along the worst of roads to
Askwith, near Otley. Here it was sorted, given out to be
combed, and returned to the master's head-quarters: it then
went to Cheshire to be spun, was returned to Askwith, and again
handed out to be woven. Finally, the cloth went to Colne

1 Health of Towns Commission, 1845. Report on cottage combers of
Bradford ; Yorkshire section, p. 19.

- Ire, of>. rit., iii. 1045. See also Roth, Ham/ Wool-combing, p. 10.

3 At liciton, near Bradford, there were certain gardens to which the name
of ' Wool-combers' Gardens ' still clung in the later nineteenth century.

' James, op. cil., p. joj.

336 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

market to be sold. Yarn prepared in the Leeds and Bradford
areas had formerly been sent to Norfolk ; waste silk from
London was washed, combed, and spun at Kendal, and then
returned to be woven at Spitalfields. All this meant the employ-
ment of ' a prodigious number of people, horses, carts or wagons ',
and a waste of time almost inconceivable. There can have been
little speeding up in the old form- of industry, when one man's
business covered a whole county.

The wool was taken these long distances on the backs of pack-
horses, and when it reached its destination was usually deposited
with some agent, whose business it was to distribute the work
over the countryside. The agent was sometimes a farmer or
shopkeeper ; but a great part of this distribution was apparently
done by women, who augmented their earnings as spinners by
the commission of one halfpenny per pound paid for putting
out and collecting the wool.1 When the spinning was being
done by those who lived near the clothier, the spinner came to
his employer's warehouse for the supply of wool. Spinning was
done on the old distaff or on the single-thread spinning wheel.
The former was still retained to some extent in East Anglia,
but in the West Riding it had entirely disappeared, and the
spinning wheel was a common feature in the equipment of almost
every Yorkshire home. When the inventions of Wyatt and
Paul were introduced about the middle of the century they met
with some little favour, but until the 'nineties the bulk of the
yarn for the Yorkshire looms was prepared by the spinning
wheel. The work was largely carried on by the female members
of the family or by the children. The employment of the
youngest children was general, the parents being only too
pleased to get their children to work, augmenting the family
income by one or two shillings a week. Industrial schools and
workhouses throughout the century devoted much of their
time to teaching children the arts of ' scribbling ' or mixing
wool,2 and spinning.3 Defoe, Young, and other writers noted

1 James, op. cit., pp. 311-12. See chap, xii, section on Worsted Committee,
lor notices of female distributing agents.

2 Dodsley's Description of Leeds (1764); manuscript transcript in Leeds
Reference Library.

3 Poulson, Bcverlac, Ip. 796. There were also in existence schools to which
children went to be taught spinning.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 337

with pleasure and satisfaction the prevalence of the practice of
employing small children in these branches of the industry.

Around the spinning wheel has centred the Arcadian concep-
tion of eighteenth-century bliss ; but, like most popular opinions
as to the charm of the ' good old times ', it must be taken with
a great deal of caution. Southey spoke of ' contentment spinning
at the cottage door ', and James had it on the authority of an
old villager that the women and children of Bradford Vale used
to flock on sunny days with their spinning wheels to some
favourite pleasant spot, to pursue the labours of the day,
though, James adds slily, ' these spinners in the sun were not
free from the vice imputed to their grand-daughters of the
modern tea-table \l But, even assuming that the spinners at
the cottage door or on the village green were the embodiment
of contentment, and that fine sunny days were more frequent
in the eighteenth century than they are to-day, the system was
full of faults and imperfections, and open to one or two serious
objections. In the first place, this employment of the house-
wife must have meant a grave neglect of domestic duties, or
a very heavy additional demand upon her energies, if she was
to be a wage-earner and also a housekeeper. Washing, baking,
cleaning, &c, must have been relegated to odd moments and
evenings, and the woman must have had even less opportunity
for rest and recreation than she has to-day. To see what this
meant, one has only to observe the state, of affairs in the twentieth
century in those households where the wife spends her days in
the mill, and discharges her domestic duties before or after
factory hours.

Secondly, the employment of young children was open to
grave abuses. ' Scarcely anything above four years old, but its
hands were sufficient for its own support ', said Defoe, and the
part played by children in the eighteenth-century industry was
quite important. The gross earnings of children under ten years
of age must have been very considerable, and formed an integral
part of the family income. But at what a cost ! We to-day
know the price which has been paid in lives and health by the
half-time system, and there is no reason to suppose that the
employment ot even younger children in the eighteenth century

' James, "/'■ at., p. jS<(.
1520.1; Z

338 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

took a less heavy human toll. True, the work may have been
light and the hours short, but even that is very doubtful.
Yorkshiremen, either from thoughtlessness or necessity, have
seldom spared their children, and one cannot doubt that many
young workers were kept at tasks beyond their strength for
long hours daily, to the ruining of their health and general
physique.

The methods of spinning employed during the early part of
the century were still primitive, and involved a great proportion
of manual labour. Progress was slow, and the spinner could do
little more than i lb. per day. Hence, although the industry
was so widely scattered and every available person employed
at the work, the supply of yarn was inadequate to meet the
needs of the weavers. The proportion of spinners to weavers
was now greater than in the sixteenth century,1 due apparently
to some acceleration in the speed of weaving. In 1715 it was
stated that 7 combers and 25 weavers employed 250 spinners,
i.e. 1 comber to 35 spinners and 1 weaver to 10 spinners.2!
Other estimates allowed 9 spinners to each weaver,3 and even
when spinning had been accelerated by the use of hand jennies
in the latter part of the century the work of one weaver con-
sumed the yarn produced by four spinners. The early figures may
include a number of children, but even if this was so it would
be very difficult for the clothiers to procure a steadily increasing
supply of yarn as the industry grew in size. Old and young
were employed, and yet the supply of yarn was inadequate.
The scarcity was accentuated when the adoption of the flying
shuttle made weaving so much more rapid, and thus the weaver
was often compelled to remain idle for a day or two because he
could not secure a supply of yarn. In these circumstances it
was essential that some means should be devised for the accelera-
tion of the process of spinning, and the first great inventions
following Kay's shuttle were concerned with the spinning of
yarn.

The supply of yarn was insufficient. Further, the quality of
the produce varied considerably. The shopkeeper was not quite

1 Sec Chapter III, section on Journeymen.

2 Great Britain's Glory, by Hayncs (17 15), pp. 8-9.

3 The Weavers1 True Case, by a practical weaver, 1720 ; Smith's Memoirs
of Wool, vol. ii.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 339

the most suitable man for giving out work to the best spinners
only, or for remonstrating with those who did faulty work. He
would not offend the most incapable spinster by refusing to
give her work, so long as she was a good customer at his counter.
The employment of children was a cause of imperfect workman-
ship, and the clothier had to pay for the tuition of his future
workpeople in uneven and badly spun threads. Also, it was
wellnigh impossible to secure uniformity of yarn. The clothier
asked for a definite standard when giving out the wool to be
spun, but the tendency would be for each house and each
spinner to vary a little in the thickness and firmness of the yarn ;
some sent in ' hard twisted ', others ' soft twisted ', and it was
very difficult to reduce the work to one standard.1 Thus in
irregularity, inadequacy, and inequality of supply the domestic
system of spinning was rapidly becoming more and more
unsuited to the needs of the times. It must vanish as soon as
new possibilities were discovered, and hence we find that j
spinning was amongst the first processes to be absorbed in
a factory system, where machinery and power could cope with
the needs of the loom.

The yarn, when spun, was returned to the local centre, packed
up, and forwarded to the clothier. Should he be catering for
the looms of some southern field, the packs were dispatched to
East Anglia, Gloucestershire, or elsewhere.2 If the master
utilized the yarn himself, he handed it out to his weavers, who
wove it into a piece in his loom-shop or in their own homes.
The small clothier gathered up the yarn produced for him by
the labours of his family or neighbours, and set to work to weave
the cloth, with his own hands. The loom was prepared and the
warp inserted in a very primitive manner, especially if we can
accept Dyer's description as being at all representative :
And now [the weaver] strains the warp
Along the garden walk or highway side,
Smoothing each thread ; now fits it in the loom
And sits bet Ore the work.3

1 Reminiscences of an Octogenarian, by II. ill, printed in James, op. cit.,
p. .? u . To express it in technical terms, some spun to 16 hanks per pound,
others to 24 hanks. When the manufacturer i^ot his yarn hack it had to be
sorted, and the hard yarn used tor warp, the soft lor weft.

- I he witnesses in 1S0O referred to the sale of North Country yarn 111
Gloucestershire and other parts. 3 Dyer, op. cit., iii. ^70.

Z 1

340 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

At the beginning of the eighteenth century the loom was still
comparatively simple in design. It was little more than a box-
like framework, fitted with rollers, healds, and treadles. The
village carpenter often served as loom constructor, though in
the more populous clothing areas loom-makers were to be found.
It was then placed in the loom-shop, if such a structure was
attached to the house ; otherwise, it found a resting-place in
the least inconvenient quarter of the home. Prior to the adoption
of the flying shuttle, the weaving of narrow pieces was effected
by passing the shuttle from hand to hand through the divided
warp threads. This method had marked limitations and many
faults. It was slow, clumsy, irregular, and required that the
weaver should work leaning over the fabric, a position very
detrimental to health. The weaving of broad cloths presented
a still greater difficulty, since these pieces were of such a width
as to render it impossible for one man to weave them. Dyer
gives one of his most idyllic pen-pictures to a description of the
method adopted.

Or if the broader mantle be the task,
He choses some companion to his toil.
From side to side with amicable aim
Each to the other darts the nimble bolt,
While friendly converse, prompted by the work,
Kindles improvement in the opening mind.1

The weaving was apparently merely an obbligato accompani-
ment to the elevation of two kindred spirits by mutual intercourse.

This slow and cumbrous procedure was ended by the adoption
of Kay's ' flying shuttle '. Kay devised the idea of mounting
the shuttle on four small wheels, which would enable it to run
from side to side of the loom when knocked by hammers, of
wood or leather, worked by cords held in the hand of the
weaver. The new contrivance was slow in finding a place in the
textile world. It was first made public in 1733,2 and roused the
fiercest enmity in East Anglia and Lancashire. It appears to
have found a better reception on the eastern side of the
Pennines, where it solved the difficulty of weaving broad cloths.
Hence it seems that a number of Yorkshiremen began to make
use of the invention, in a manner which drew from Kay the
1 Dyer, op.cit., iii. 570-1. 2 Patent no. 542, May 26, 1733.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 341

following announcement in the Leeds Mercury, August 27,

*737--

' Whereas John Kay of Bury . . . having obtained a patent
for his new invented shuttle for weaving of broad cloths, and
dyvers clothiers within the West Riding . . . have made use of
the said shuttle without the lycense of the said John Kay,
contrary to the prohibition in the said patent, This is to give
notice that if any person will come to Mr. John Lazenby in
Leeds, and lodge an information against a sufficient number of
clothiers, &c.'

A reward was promised, and no divulgence was to be made of
the informant's name. Whether or not the reward was claimed
is unknown, but in the following year Kay came to Leeds and
began a series of lawsuits against the offenders. The weavers
refused to pay royalty, and formed a shuttle club which fought
Kay, making the lawsuits so protracted that the inventor was
ruined by legal expenses, and in 1745 he was compelled to flee
from the town before the anger of his opponents.1 From the
evidence given in 1806 we learn that the flying shuttle was not
really extensively used in Yorkshire until about 1760-70,2 and
many of the older men who appeared before the Parliamentary
Committee in that year could remember the day when narrow
cloths were woven by throwing the shuttle from hand to hand,
and wider cloths required two men, or a man and a boy, to make
them. Even when the improvement had been adopted, the
loom was still limited in its scope. Its motions were heavy and
cumbrous, as any one will quickly realize by examining and
experimenting upon the few hand-looms which have survived.
Fancy patterns could only be woven slowly and at great
expense, and the rate of weaving ordinary cloths was far from
rapid until later inventions had increased the speed at which
the loom could work, strengthened the shuttle thread, and
applied other than manual power.

The weaving suffered from frequent interruptions, due, in the
first place, to a shortage of yarn. Then there were the breaks
occasioned by taking the pieces to the clothier's head-quarters,
the fulling mill, or the market, as well as those which occurred

1 Swire Smith, Manufacture of Textile Fabrics, printed for private circula-
tion, p. 4. See also Mantoux, La Revolution industrielle (1906), p. 199.
3 Reports, 1806, iii, pp. 81 , 128, 166.

342 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

in the harvest and haymaking seasons,1 when men, women, and
children tramped away to the fields of the Vale of York, the
East Riding, Lincolnshire, and Nottinghamshire, to assist in
gathering in the harvest.

Next from the slackened beam the woof unroll'd

Near some clear gliding river, Aire or Stroud,

Is by the noisy fulling mill received,

Where tumbling waters turn enormous wheels,

Where hammers, rising and descending, learn

To imitate the industry of man.

Oft the wet web is steeped, and often raised,

Fast dripping, to the river's grassy banks,

And sinewy arms of men, with full strained strength,

Wring out the latent water. Then up hung

On rugged tenters to the fervid sun,

Its level surface reeking, it expands,

Still brightening in each rigid discipline,

And gathering worth.2

Such is Dyer's description of the next processes, milling or
fulling, and tentering. The piece, when taken from the loom,
was laid upon the floor, treated with various evil-smelling
liquids and pigments, and trampled under foot, in order to
remove the bareness of the web, and mat together the warp
and weft. The odour which emanated from the cloth after
receiving this treatment must have been revolting, for dung,
manure, &c, were often ingredients of the pigments. May in
1613 referred to ' the Scent of these Northern dozens ',3 and
Mr. Sykes in his history of Huddcrsneld remarks on the con-
tinuance of the practice in the eighteenth century.4 The cloths
were then taken to the nearest fulling mill, in some cases a con-
siderable distance away. Here the piece was ' scoured ' with
fuller's earth, treated with soap, and beaten with heavy hammers
or ' stocks ' (worked by a water wheel or horse gin), in order to
wash out the impurities, grease, &c, and thicken the fabric by
shrinking and ' felting ' together the fibres of wool. It was
finally washed in the river, to get rid of the soap and fuller's
earth, and, after being measured and stamped by the inspector,

1 Bigland, Topogr. and Hist. Description of the County of York (1812),
p. 612 ; also James, op. cit., p. 312.

- Dyer, op. cit., iii. 570. 3 May, op. cit., p. 21 et'seq.

4 Sykes, Huddcrsficld and its Vicinity, pp. 78-9.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 343

was taken back home, or to some place where the clothier had
the use of tenters.

Before leaving the topic of mills and milling, it might be
appropriate to note a curious point which arose about 1739.
During the second quarter of the century the output of cloth
was increasing, and consequently the work of the fuller grew
heavier. The clothiers were busy, and they kept the mill-men
equally so. When time was so precious, it seemed a pity to
waste it by relinquishing industrial pursuits on the Sabbath.
The clothier's conscience might not allow him to weave on that
day, and the journeyman would prefer to enjoy his weekly rest.
But there was nothing to prevent the clothier from doing some-
thing, or rather from inducing some other person to do some-
thing for him. Hence it was represented to the Quarter Sessions
at Pontefract in 1739 that ' it is, and for many years last past,
hath been a common Practice to mill Narrow Cloth upon Sun-
days, and that the Clothmakers are now arrived to such a
Scandalous and Shocking Degree of prophaning the Sabbath
this way, that they even contrive to bring more cloths to be
milled upon the Sunday than any other day, Whereby both
Masters and Servants are guilty of a public Neglect of the Holy
Duties of the day, and by certain Consequence are insensibly
drawn into the Commission of all maner of Sin and Wickedness,
To the great displeasure of Almighty God, the Scandal of the
Kingdom, the Evil Example of their Neighbours, and the breach
of all Laws, both divine and human '. For prevention of such
enormities in future, it was ordered that ' no Millman of narrow
woollen cloth shall wet, stamp, or put any cloth into his Mill
after 12 of the Clock on Saturday Night, or before 12 on Sunday
Night, on pain to forfeit his Salary ' for the milling of such
cloths. The justices of the peace were requested to be very
vigilant in the detection of offenders, and to punish all clothiers,
or their servants, who should take cloths to the mill on Sunday,
or indeed engage in any kind of textile occupation on that day.1

From the mill the cloth went to the tenter frame, on which

the cloth was stretched, and its dimensions were increased

by fixing one end and one side, and by fastening a movable

beam to the other edge, as well as by pulling at the free end.

1 Quarter Sessions Order Books, U, p. 141, Pontefract, May 1, 1739.

344 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

The cloth was attached to the beams by tenter-hooks, and then
left for a day or two to dry and assimilate itself to its stretched
proportions ; after that it was ready for the market. The
piece would still be rough and unkempt ; the white cloth would
have to be dyed and finished before it was ready for the tailor,
and the mixed woollen cloth had still some processes to
undergo. The worsted piece was not fulled at all, but it still
required much attention after weaving before it was ready to
be made into garments.

With the cloth ready for the market we leave the cottage
system of manufacture. We have followed the material through
its various stages, and seen the family at work ; but yet there
is much that we do not know about the real nature of the worka-
day life of these people. Thoresby's antiquarian writings do not
give it us, and even Defoe's masterly pen left much unwritten.
Perhaps the following extracts from a poem, written about
1730, will serve to give us a more intimate picture of family
life and labour. The poem is ' descriptive of the Manners of the
Clothiers ',* and is written in a style at once intimate and
colloquial. The scene is situated ' some hundred yards from
Leeds, crowded with . . . industrious breeds ' of merry clothiers,
amongst whose ' greasy throng ' of workpeople the writer finds
himself. The day begins early with breakfast of oaten cakes
(the famous ' Havercake '), milk, and porridge. After which all
get away to work,

And through the Web the Shuttle throw.
Thus they keep time with hand and feet
From five at morn till eight at neet.2

Their wooden clogs, the whirr of the spinning wheel, and the
constant chatter make a continuous hum throughout the day.
Then, at eight in the evening, the workers are summoned by
the housewife, and having washed themselves gather round the
supper table. Whilst the meal is in progress, the master addresses
his family, apprentices, and journeymen.
Lads, work hard I pray,
Cloth mun be pearked next Market day.3

1 The only copy of this poem which I have encountered is a manuscript
copy in the Leeds Reference Library. It is bound up in a volume of Miscel-
lanea, entitled ' Matters of Interest '. 2 i.e. night.

3 i.e. 'must be perched ', or examined to see that there are no holes or
faults in the piece.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 345

And Tom mun go to-morn to t'spinners,

And Will mun seek about for t'svvingers,

And Jack, tomorn by time be rising,

And go to t'sizing mill for sizing.1

And get your web and warping done

That ye may get it into t'loom.

Joe, go give my horse some corn,

For I design for t' Wolds tomorn.

So mind and clean my boots and shoon,

For I'll be up i' t'morn right soon.

Mary, — there's Wool — tak thee and dye it.

Here is an admirable picture of a master clothier employing
his own family and one or two others, probably apprentices, in
his own house, and a number of spinners in the neighbourhood,
lie sets out for the Wolds to buy wool, but, before going, gives
detailed orders to his assistants, and instructs his wife Mary to
proceed with the dyeing of wool. At this order Mary begins
to protest against being expected to do textile work as well as
housework, and we get from her lips the very objection which we
raised above against the employment of women in spinning, &C.

Mistress. So thou's setting me my wark.

I think I'd more need mend thy sark.2
Prithee, who mun sit at bobbin wheel,
And ne'er a cake at top o' th' creel,3
And me to bake and swing and blend,
And milk, and barns to school to send,
And dumplings for the lads to mak,
And yeast 4 to seek, and syk as that ;
And washing up, morn, noon, and neet,
And bowls to scald and milk to fleet,
And barns to fetch again at neet.

To which forcible statement of objections the husband replies
in the strain of ' Business is business ' .

Master. When thou begins thou's never done !
Bessy and thee mun get up soon,
And stir about and get all done ;
For all things mun aside be laid,
When we want help about our trade.

1 Sizing used to treat warp with, to strengthen it before patting into loom.

J Sark : shirt.

' Creel the wooden framework hung near the roof, on which clothes and
cakes of oat bread were hung to dry.

1 Yeast for baking, and probably for brewing herb beer and other drinks
which are still consumed in the Riding. ' Syk' = such.

346

THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE

CHAP.

Those last two lines sum up the whole situation, and against
them further protest is useless. The wife therefore resignedly
remarks :

Why Bairn, we'll see what we can do,
But we have both to wesh and brew,
And shall want Malt, Hops, Soap, and Blue,
And thou'll be most a week away,
And I's hev t'wark folk to pay.
Master. Let paying for their wark alone,

I'll pay 'em all when I come home.
Keep t'lads at wark, and take this purse,
And set down what thou dost disburse.

By this time supper is over, and the wife suggests to her

husband,

Come, let us go to Joe's,

To talk and hear how matters goes.

As the two go out, other young people come in from neighbour-
ing houses, and the merry party sits round the fire, drinking,
smoking, laughing, and telling stories and jokes connected with
the work of the day, its accidents and humours.

Thus they do themselves well please

With telling such like tales as these,

Or passing of a merry joke,

Till ten gives warning by the clock,

Then up they start — to bed they run,

Maistcr and Dame home being come.

They sleep secure until the horn

Calls 'em to work betimes i' th' morn.

Ere clock strikes eight they're call'd to Breakfast

And bowls of milk are brought in great haste.

Good Water-Pudding,1 as heart could wish

With spoons stuck round an earthen dish.

Maister gives orders to all in full,

Sets out to t'Wolds to buy his wool.

And while the good man is away,

The neighbour wives all set a day

To meet and drink a dish of tea

With Dame while she is left a Widow.

And so the poem ends with a vivid picture of this ' At Home',
and the neighbouring women indulging that propensity which is
known to-day as ' calling ', with the ' ca ' pronounced as in ' cat '.
1 Probably oatmeal porridge.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 347

The horn referred to a few lines from the end was an ante- j
cedent of the later whistle or ' buzzer '. Horn-blowing wis
practised at Bramley, Ossett, Yeadon, Otley, and probably in
most places, and it seems to have been the custom to depute
some individual to blow a horn vigorously in the village streets,
to awaken the apprentices and journeymen. The horn was
blown at five o'clock in summer and six in winter ; again, at
eight in the evening, it gave the signal to cease work for the
day. Even so late as i860 one of the Otley mills called its
employees to work by means of a horn blown in the streets near
the mill.

During the second quarter of the nineteenth century, when
the power-loom was ousting the hand-loom from the place of
supremacy and the factory system was playing havoc with the
old domestic organization, the lot of the hand-loom weavers
was very hard. Their wages had gone down, unemployment
was rife, and their day of grace seemed quite at an end. In these
circumstances the hand-loom weavers looked back, with longing
eyes, to the time when the factory was as yet unknown, and
sighed for the ' good old times ' of the domestic system. To
them, in their suffering, the eighteenth-century industrial world
became idyllic, the very embodiment of perfect happiness and
simplicity — Arcadia transplanted. This idea of the beauty and
glory of the pre-factory system became generally accepted
during last century, and many writers have sketched the
domestic organization of industry in most glowing colours.
Such an opinion, however, requires to be examined in the cold
light of actual facts, so let us for a moment pause, and consider
what were the chief points of advantage and disadvantage in
the system which we have sketched in these chapters.

The employee was all in favour of the domestic system. He
preferred to work in his own house, where there was an air of
liberty and freedom from restraint and supervision. He could
suit his work to his pleasure, he could enlist in addition the
services of his family. William Child, for instance, resided at
Wort ley, and worked as a journeyman in his own home, where
he had two hand-looms and a spinning jenny. Not only did he
work, but his wife and six children were also pressed into service.
His wile spun the yarn, the younger children wound it on to

348 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

bobbins, and the eldest son, a cripple, occasionally did a little
weaving on the second loom.1 These two advantages are
emphasized in the Report of the Commissioners on the Hand-
Loom Industry in 1839-40. The commission remarked on the
tenacity with which hand-loom workers still stuck to their
trade, and stated in a very lucid manner the reasons for this
forlorn clinging to a decaying industry. These reasons sum up
the situation in the eighteenth century so well that they are
worthy of citation : (1) Hand-loom work in the weaver's own
cottage ' gratifies that innate love of independence which all
more or less feel, by leaving the workman entirely master of his
own time, and the sole guide of his actions. He can play or
idle, as feeling or inclination leads him ; rise early or late,
apply himself assiduously or carelessly as he pleases, and work
up at any time by increased exertion hours previously sacrificed
to indulgence or recreation. . . . There is scarcely another con-
dition of any of our working population thus free from external
control '. Undoubtedly this independence was a great asset to
the workman. He could choose his own hours of labour, go
from the loom-shop to his garden, and in harvest time tramp
away to the fields and help to gather in the crops. (2) ' It con-
centrates the family under one roof, gives to each member of it
a common interest, and leaves the children under the watchful
eye of the parent.' 2 From many other Sources one has this
same advantage pointed out ; ' large families are no encum-
brance ; all are set to work ', said Arthur Young,3 and Radcliffe
remarked that ' even the aged who retained the use of their
eyes and limbs were able to earn their bread in some degree '.4
Thus, as one journeyman bluntly expressed it in 1806, ' certainly
we prefer having work in our homes ; . . . We can begin soon or
late, we can do as we like in that respect, and those of us who
have families have an opportunity in one way or another of
training them up in some little thing '.5

The third advantage which has been urged in favour of the
domestic system is its healthiness, its revelry in fresh air and

1 Reports, 1806, iii. 102 et seq.

2 Hand-loom Commissioners' Report, 1839, p. 604.
:l A. Young, Northern Tour, iii. 250.

4 Radcliffe, Origin of Power-Loom Weaving, p. 60.
' Evidence of W. Illingworth, 180O Reports, vol. iii.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 349

rural surroundings, which had their effects in producing a high
standard of national health, and a general increase in the average
length of life. Many instances of longevity are quoted. We
hear of fathers 140 years old accompanying sons aged 100 l ;
of a man in his ninetieth year marrying a wife who is already
a century old2; and Defoe declares of the Halifax district,
which he knew so well, that ' the people in general live long,
they enjoy good health, and under such circumstances, hard
labour is attended by good health '.3 But it is dangerous to
base generalizations of longevity on these recorded instances.
One would require to see the birth certificates of these veterans,
and the very fact that their lengthy existence is commented
upon by contemporaries shows that they were the exception,
rather than a common feature of the world of that day. If,
however, one admits that there may have been a longer standard
of life and a higher degree of health, one must attribute it to
the whole manner of living, and not merely to the fact that
industry was carried on in the home rather than in the factory.
There was much in the cottage industry which was quite as
unhealthy as the conditions in the early factories. The cottage
itself violated many laws of hygiene, and was often low, dark,
damp, and ill-ventilated. The very presence of manufacturing
processes in or near the dwelling and sleeping apartments did
not add to the health-giving qualities of the domicile. The use
of oil and evil-smelling concoctions in the treatment of the
material, the mixing of the dye ingredients, and the boiling of
the dye-vat, all must have helped to render the atmosphere of
the cottage foul and unpleasant. The use of charcoal stoves
and the general conditions of combing stamped at least one
process as deadly, whilst the working of all the other branches
of manufacture must have been attended by a dirtiness of
dwelling and pollution of atmosphere quite equal to that of
the later mill-room. The cottage industry, in so lar as it was
carried on in or adjoining the house, was unhealthy. What
really made for health was not that the work was done in the
cottage, but that the cottage was in the country. In the tree
open expanse of countryside, in the possibility oi alternating

1 Defoe, op. (it., iii. 145. - Annual Register, 17OJ, ]>. 78.

1 Defoe, iii. 1 sj .

350 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

farming and industrial pursuits, in the enjoyment of the simplest
of diets, in the lack of great stress and bustle, and the absence
of working under high pressure were to be found the forces
which helped to counteract the influence of manufacturing con-
ditions within the house, and gave the worker an opportunity of
renewing that strength which the circumstances of his occupation
tended to sap away.

One last merit has been occasionally attached to the domestic
system, especially by disciples of the school of Ruskin and
Morris. These men claim that the application of manual skill
and labour, such as was to be found in the cottage industry,
gave the workman an interest and pride in the work which he
was doing. The joy of creation and the gratification of seeing
the product of his labour gradually evolving, these were some
of the sentiments which are supposed to have chased through
the mind of the eighteenth-century weaver. But did the textile
worker ever feel these sensations ? Was there much joy or
pleasure in working from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m. at a slow and cumbrous
hand-loom, making cheap cloth, every yard of which was like
every other yard ? Was not this manual labour very mono-
tonous, physically exhausting, and devoid of any variety and
pleasurable excitement ? Had these men been carving gargoyles
or statues of saints for cathedrals, there might have been the
joy of craftsmanship and creative art in their work. But between
the production of artistic masterpieces, either in stone or metal-
work, and the manufacture of yard after yard of cheap kerseys
there is a great gulf fixed, and William Child, the weaver at
Wortley, found his work just as monotonous as does his modern
counterpart, except, of course, when he left his loom and went
away round the villages, persuading men to think as he thought
and join the union of which he was a shining light. 'The Indus-
trial Revolution has been accused of having destroyed man's
joy in labour, and of depriving him of that pleasure which lie is
supposed to have experienced from working in his own home,
at something which was entirely the work of his own hands.1
But the Industrial Revolution never destroyed any such joy
and pleasure in the textile industry, simply because they never
existed. The trivial round and common task of the eighteenth-
1 This phrase is taken from Cole, The World of Labour (1913), p. 10.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 351

century worker was drab and monotonous, and he would be
intensely amused if he could realize the glamour which has
been cast, to-day over his dreary toil.

Such were the advantages from the workman's point of view,
and many masters were quite willing to let the work be done
in the men's homes rather than in their own shops. The weavers
were paid at the same piece rate whether they were home workers
or not, but masters felt that, human nature being what it was,
it might be desirable to have one's employees under direct
supervision. Thus in 1806 Mr. Walker, of Wortley, explained
that he had his men working together as much as possible, ' on
purpose to have [the work] near at hand, and to have it under
our inspection every day, that we may see it spun to a proper
length ' ; and he declared that cloth was generally ' more
perfectly wrought and with less imperfections at home than
abroad '.* In similar vein Mr. Atkinson, of Huddersfield, stated
that he gathered his workpeople together ' principally to prevent
embezzlement ; but if we meet with men we can depend on for
honesty, we prefer having [the cloths] wove at their own houses '.2
This feeling on the part of masters, that it might be preferable
to gather one's workpeople together, had gained ground during
the eighteenth century. With the expansion of the industry
the need for better organization and consolidation became more
pressing. The capitalist employer or the merchant was beginning
to supervise the work, gauge the market, introduce new methods
or new machinery, and supply large orders in a given space of
time. But these things were very difficult, if not impossible,
under the loose unregulated organization which existed in the
domestic system. The liberty of the employee easily became
licence ; we cannot ignore the persistent accusations of idleness,
drunkenness, Mc, which are encountered throughout the century,
.md though they may often be exaggerations they contain a sub-
stratum of truthful evidence that the weaver or comber had his
seasons of lassitude and low pleasure, in which his own enjoy-
ment caused delay and inconvenience to the master for whom
he worked. Supervision of workmanship was impossible, the
institution of regular standards of production could not be
made, and the absence of the overseeing eve was responsible
1 Reports, iSu'>, iii. 175 ut scq. - Ibid., iii. 220.

352 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

for that burning question of the embezzlement of material which
will be dealt with in a later chapter.

The domestic system made it impossible to realize economy
of supervision. It was equally impossible to effect any economy
of time. In handing about the material from person to person,
from place to place, from county to county, days and even
weeks were wasted. Thirdly, there was the obvious obstacle
to the introduction of new and large machinery into the cottage.
The hand-jenny, when it became popular in the third quarter
of the eighteenth century, did to some extent oust the spinning-
wheel, being of such a size that it could be kept and worked in
a room of the ordinary dwelling-house. Later inventions, which
involved a larger machine or the use of power, were of no avail
in the domestic workshop, and with their improvement and
adoption the factory system grew apace. Thus, to sum up, the
domestic system was to industry something of what the common
field system was to agriculture. It fostered and preserved the
small unit ; it gave some measure of independence and freedom
of action to the worker ; it brought with it, as important con-
comitants, conditions which worked for general physical well-
being. But it was wasteful and uneconomical; it was conservative
and antiquated ; it was inadequate to meet growing demands,
and to a great extent incapable of exerting itself to answer any
sudden expansion in the market.

Such a system, loaded with difficulties and disadvantages,
was sure to be outrun by any new order which could produce
greater concentration and more efficient organization. This
alternative was already in the field, in the congregation of work-
people under one roof in the eighteenth -century factories. The
modern factory system is based on the economy of the accumula-
tion of machinery and the application of power ; it embodies
the use of capital, the congregation of workpeople, the division
of labour, and the exercise of supervision. Each of these factors
has great value in itself, but the major part of the economic
advantage of the factory springs from the use of machinery
capable of performing work quickly, and the use of power which
can make the machinery go at a high speed. Until these ele-
ments oi speed became possible, the factory system did not
possess any very great advantage over the cottage industry.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 353

There would be the initial eost of acquiring a sufficiently large
building, which would mean a considerable outlay of capital.
Then the intending factory owner would have to encounter the
objections of his workpeople, who preferred to carry on their
occupation under their own roof. Even were such a factory
established, its only merit would lie in the possibility of super-
vising the various processes, and this in itself did not seem to
be a sufficient justification for any great expenditure in bringing
the manufacture under factory conditions. Hence the factory
remained a rarity until the end of the eighteenth century.

VVc must, however, note the instances in which certain
elements of factory organization were being applied prior to
the Industrial Revolution. The big clothiers around Leeds,
with their dozen looms gathered into one room, had realized the
advantage of employing men who worked together under personal
supervision, and their loom-shops might be regarded as miniature \/
factories, although the only power which was applied came from
the hand or foot of the worker. Similarly there was the assem-
bling of workpeople in the clothing farms west of Halifax, such
as was described by Defoe : ' We saw the houses full of lusty
fellows, some at the dye-vat, some at the loom, others dressing
the cloth, the women and children carding or spinning, all
employed, from the youngest to the oldest.' l These instances
belong to what one might call the first phase in the develop-
ment of the factory. The same machinery was used as in the
cottages, the same power applied ; the only respect in which
they can be regarded as factories lies in the assembling of
workers, the division of labour, the slight accumulation of
capital, and the exercise ol supervision.

The adoption of water-power for working machinery brought
the factory to its second stage. The use of the water-wheel for
grinding logwood or corn and for working lulling stocks was
common in preceding centuries. During the early part of the
eighteenth century the possibilities of water-power were much
more clearly realized, and quite large establishments were
erected to utilize the latent force of the northern streams.
The Derby silk mill, erected in 1719,2 was amongst the first
great factories in the modern sense of the- word. Its machinery
1 I H'toi1, <<p. cit., iii. 137. - Bray's Tour (17S3), p. 10S.

1 ^j".ij A a

354 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

was driven by a wonderful maze of gearings, in which, according
to a contemporary writer, 26,586 wheels and 97,746 movements
were all fed by one huge water-wheel.1 The mill employed 200
hands, and turned out enormous quantities of silk yearly. This
mill had its imitators, and there was a similar establishment at
Sheffield, employing 152 hands, with its mechanism driven by
a great water-wheel. Thoresby notices a mill in Leeds ' wherein,
by the ingenious contrivance of Mr. John Atkinson, of Beeston,
one water-wheel carries both the rape mill, a mill for grinding
logwood, also a fulling stock . . . and a twisting mill with eighty
bobbings '.2 Similarly, a certain Mr. Joseph Stell converted
a fulling mill at Keighley into a silk mill driven by water-power,
where he wove tapes, ribbons, &c, until he came to an untimely
end for counterfeiting coins, when his work perished with
him.3

Charity, whether private or public, did something to establish
instances of congregated industry and of the use of power and
new machinery. Eleanor Scudamore died in 1698, and left £50
to be spent, at the discretion of the mayor and vicar of Leeds,
for the use of the poor. They thereupon decided to employ the
legacy in buying wool, tools, and implements for the manu-
facture of woollen cloth.4 In the Leeds ' Workhouse ', set up
by Alderman Sykes in 1629, the poor children were ' taught to
mix woolls and perform other parts of that manufacture ',5 and
in Thoresby's time ' many poor girls and boys [were] taught to
scribble, a new invention whereby different colours in the dyed
wool are delicately mixed '.6 hi the similar institution at
Beverley the poor were employed in work to which they were
accustomed, spinning, knitting, &c.7 Celia Fiennes 8 found at
Malton (about 1696) ' an establishment by mine lord Ewer's
coheiress ', who used the rooms of outbuildings and the gate-
house of an old mansion ' for weaving and linning cloth, havcing
sett up a manufactory for linnen which does employ many
people '. Sixty years later Sir George Strickland made his

1 Young, Northern Tour, i. 134; also Bray, op, cit., p. 246.

2 Thoresby, Ducatus, p. 79. 3 Keighley Past and Present, p. 107.

4 Leeds Gen. Sess., ii. 18, April 19, 1699.

5 Dodsley's Description of Leeds, 1764. 6 Thoresby, up. cit., p. 84.

7 MSS. dated 1732, quoted by Poulson, Bcverlac, p. 796.

8 Celia l-'iennes, Through England on a Side-Saddle, p. 74.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE .555

experiments in industrial charity on similar lines. He estab-
lished a woollen manufactory at Boynton, four miles west of
Bridlington, which, says Young, ' deserves the greatest praise.
In this country the poor have no other employment than what
results from a most imperfect agriculture, consequently three-
fourths of the women and children are without employment. It
was this induced Sir George to found a building large enough
to contain on one side a row of looms of different sorts, and on
the other a large space for women and children to spin. The
undertaking was once carried so far as to employ 150 hands,
but the decay of the woollen exportation reduced them so much
that those now employed are, I believe, under a dozen.' l The
houses of correction in the West Riding were centres of woollen
industry, and here the inhabitants were compelled to spend
their time, not in picking oakum or breaking stones, but in
preparing yarn.- The Wakefield House had ' cards and spinning
wheels for the prisoners, for their use and employment ', and
similar institutions in other parts made like provision.3

But the finest description of a charitable mill comes from the
pen of Dyer, who certainly knew Yorkshire very well. In his
poem lie has been bewailing the effects of thriftlessness and wild
intemperance in demoralizing and disorganizing industry. He
then expresses his sympathy with the maimed and genuine poor,
for whose sustenance he advocates ' houses of labour, seats of
kind restraint '. This is followed by an account of what was
evidently a highly organized charitable or poor law work-
house.

Behold in ("aider's Yale . . .

A spacious dome for this fair purpose rise.

By gentle steps
Upraised from room to room we slowly walk,
And view with wonder and with silent joy
The sprightly scene ; where many busy hands.
Where spoles, cards, wheels, and looms, with motion quick.
And ever murmuring sound th'unwonted sense
Wrap in surprise. With equal scale
Some deal abroad the well assorted fleece
These card the short, these comb the longer wool.

1 Voiin^', of), cit., ii. 7.

- Turner, Wakefield House of Correction, p. 70.

' Leeds Gen. Scss., ii. 291 (1705).

A a 2

356 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE chap.

The next process, spinning, was performed by means of Paul's
machine, which is described as follows :

We next are shown
A circular machine of new design,
In conic shape. It draws and spins a thread
Without the tedious toil of needless hands.
A wheel invisible beneath the floor
To ev'ry member of th' harmonious frame
Gives necessary motion. One, intent,
O'erlooks the work.

We have the dyer making colours ' to tinge the thirsty web ',
and the other processes are described in detail. Thus Dyer
sketches an establishment which seems to have been well
organized and systematized on the lines of the modern factory.1
From the lines in Dyer's poem we gather that similar ' mansions '
were to be found in many parts of the Riding.

These are all the instances which have been encountered of
Yorkshire factories prior to the Industrial Revolution. Probably
there were more than one is accustomed to suppose, but even
then the sum total is only small. The forces already analysed
all combined to retard the growth of factory production, and to
favour the survival of the old order. How long then did the
cottage industrial system survive ? The popular view is that
the change was accomplished and that the domestic system had
vanished before the end of the first third of the nineteenth
century. This is far from being correct, especially with regard
to Yorkshire and its textile industry. The migration to the
town and the factory was a much slower process than we sup-
pose it to have been, and was not complete at the middle of the
century. The cause of this slowness of decay was that the
factory system was a long time in gaining an all-round advantage
over the older method of production. It required many improve-
ments to make the eighteenth-century inventions really service-
able. The new looms could throw the shuttle from side to side
with much greater rapidity than the hand-loom had done. This
meant an increased strain upon the yarn which was used in the

1 Dyer, The Fleece, iii. 571. The adoption of machinery in workhouses
seem to have been more general than elsewhere. Espinasse, Lancashire
Worthies, p. 313, says that some of Kay's inventions were lost to the world
because of the riotous conduct of the operatives, and consigned to the work-
houses of Leeds and Bristol.

x THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE 357

shuttle, and therefore steps had to be taken for producing
a stronger fibre. The worsted yarn fibre was naturally stronger
than that of the woollen, and the power-loom therefore made
more rapid progress in the worsted industry than in the neigh-
bouring trade. And still the power-loom did not really capture
the worsted industry till 1836 to 1845, as the following figures
show :

Year.

No. of Worsted Power-looms in West Ridinq,

1836

2,768

1 84 1

11,45*

1843

16,87c)1

1845

19,121 2

By 1845 the worsted hand-loom was practically a thing of the
past, and the power-loom was now able to weave both plain and
fancy goods. Similarly, combing did not really become a machine
industry until the 'forties. The necessary machinery required
much adaptation and improvement before it could produce
finely combed wool. In 1838 the better qualities of wool ,
were combed by hand, and only the coarser grades done by
machinery. With the improvements made about 1840 hand-
combing quickly vanished.

In the woollen industry, progress was still more slow. Carding,
slabbing, and spinning passed into the mills between 1790 and
1825, ;U1(1 :lt the same time improved machinery was being
devised for cloth finishing. But weaving still remained a task
for the hand-loom ; the difficulty lay in the feebleness of the
yarn, which was too weak to allow any great speed in the passage
of the shuttle. This difficulty was especially marked where-
broad cloths were being woven, and when the power-loom was
first introduced it went at no greater pace than the hand-loom.
Hence the best pieces and the fancy woollen goods were woven
much better and equally quickly by the hand-loom, and it
required many improvements in both spinning and weaving
before the power-loom could replace its predecessor. Thus the
new-comer was scarcely known in the woollen industry until
about 1832, and made very little progress during the next
twenty years.3 In the 'titties we still find the cottage weaver
clinging with marvellous tenacity to the homestead and

1 l\, ports, 1S44, xxviii. 550. - Reports, 1S45, xxv. 477.

! Reports, 1S40, xxin. 527—90.

358 THE PROCESSES OF MANUFACTURE

hand-loom. Mr. Baines, in 1858, gave an analysis of the em-
ployees at Waterloo Mill, Puclsey, in which he showed that there
was no weaving whatever on the premises, whilst the cloth was
still sold ' in the balk ' or unfinished, and then dressed at Leeds.1

Number of hands engaged on the premises of the mill 136

(120 weavers
7 warpers
40 burlers

i.e. 167 worked in their own homes out of a total of 303

The factory was still the centre where the wool was carded
and spun, or the cloth milled and finished. The women and
children worked at the mill, but the male weavers remained
in the loom-shop at home. 'Some years ago ', declared Baines,
' it was supposed that the great factories, by the power of capital,
the power of machinery, and the saving of time, must entirely
destroy the old system of domestic and village manufacture.
But they have not materially affected that system.' Probably, in
this utterance, the wish was father to the thought, for the words
were spoken just as the twilight was descending on the old
panorama. After 1851, and the great display of textile machinery
at the exhibition of that year, the hand-loom steadily lost its
hold upon the woollen trade. The number of power-looms
increased rapidly, the building of mills and the institution of
steam plant became general, and weaving, the last of the pro-
cesses, eventually passed within the mill-gates. Old men tell of
the days when the loom stood in the homes of their childhood,
and a few survivals are still to be found. In the pattern-rooms
of our great mills, in a solitary cottage here and there on the
bleak stretches of the Pennines, on the ' Celtic Fringe ', and in
the corners of our museums the hand-loom and spinning-wheel
may still be seen. But they are the rare exceptions, reminders
of the once general rule. They have been swept into a back-
water, whilst the main stream of industry flows on, bearing on
its bosom the big factory and giant aggregation of capital,
beside which the cottage workshop and the small industrial
world we have been studying appear only as the most tiny of
t oy boats.

1 Baines, iS;.S, jn Paper before British Association at Leeds. The lecture-
is reprinted in Yorkshire, Fust and Present, vol. ii.

CHAPTER XI
MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND CLOTH HALLS

The eighteenth-century towns, especially the smaller ones,
functioned chiefly as trading centres. Such towns as Dent,
Bedale, Skipton, Cawood, Aberford, and the like spent the
greater part of the year in slumber, only awakening for the
annual fairs or the more frequent market-days. In purely
agricultural districts these periodical gatherings would be small
and comparatively unimportant ; but in the industrial areas,
where men had cloth to sell, and raw materials and provisions
to buy, fairs and markets were as important as they were
numerous.

So long as the Yorkshire trade in cloth was small, weekly

markets for the sale of pieces were also small, and the cloth

fairs, held periodically, once, twice, or thrice a year, were the most •

important centres for commerce in that commodity. In the

early seventeenth century there were fifteen places in the Riding

with charters for the holding of cloth fairs — Barnsley, Pontefract,

Ripon, Lee Fair, and others. Here the cloth-makers brought

their pieces on the appointed days, and met the merchants and

factors. But with the growth of the industry those places

which lay at the heart of the cloth district began to develop

important weekly markets. This was the case with Wakefield,

for during the middle years of the reign of Charles I that town

sought to add to its commercial prestige by instituting a weekly

cloth market. To this the inhabitants of the cloth-fair towns

objected, and in 1640 the inhabitants of Barnsley and the other

places sent a most urgent petition to Parliament, pleading that

the weekly cloth markel at Wakefield should be stopped, and

only the fifteen cloth fairs allowed as in times past.1 The

petitioners failed to obtain redress for their grievances, and the

weekly meeting at Wakefield became important, absorbing the

1 /lit MSS. Cumin., iv . ;<>. The following description of the (own was
yiven in 1'ijS : ' Wakefield now is the greatest market! and principal place
of resorte of all sorts of Clothiers. Drapers, and other traffickers for Cloath
in all these parts ' (D. S. />.. Cluis. I. xc. 54).

360 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

trade from neighbouring fairs and meeting the needs of the local
clothiers. One fair which still exists underwent a marked change
in consequence of the rise of the Wakefield market. The story
is best told in the words of the petition of 1656 :

' There is a certaine ffaire comonly called Lee ffaire yearly
kept at Baghill in ye said Parish [of West Ardsley] uppon two
severall daies within less than a month of each, in ye time off
Harvests Wch ffairre formerly stood in Woollen Cloth. But
since a Cloth Market hath beene setled in Wakefeild, there hath
not for these many yeares beene any Cloth brought to the said
ffairre. Soe that it is now utterly decayed and become a tumul-
tuous meeting off the idle and loose persons of ye Country,
where there is much Revelling and Drunkennesse, and hathe
beene noted these many yeares to be a meetinge where there is
usually more or lesse Bloodshed and some lives lost, and also
most labourers and seruants hereabouts take occasion thereby
to neglect ye Harvest. And as for the comodities brought
thither, they are (except some few poore horses) only a few
Pedling triffles, off wch ye Countrey may much Better, and with
as much Conveniency, be supplyed every market day at Leedes
or Wakefeild.' *

The petition was unsuccessful ; Lee Fair was neither sup-
pressed nor revived as a cloth market, and to this day it carries
on exchange in ' Pedling triffles ' and a few horses of doubtful
age and breed.

In a similar manner the Leeds market grew in size and impor-
tance, so that it became one of the seven wonders of the north,
which every tourist was bound to see. Leeds had grown to
be the commercial centre of the woollen area, and as such it
drew to itself the produce of a wide and busy field ; there were
broad cloths and narrow cloths, white cloths and coloured cloths,
and its market was therefore ' the life, not merely of the town
alone, but of these parts of England V2

In the seventeenth century the Leeds cloth market was held
on the narrow bridge which spanned the Aire at the bottom of
Briggate. Here it was open to the inclemencies of the weather,
and exposed to the mists and cold damp atmosphere which arose
from the river in the early morning. At the same time it was
a great obstacle to passers by, and to vehicles coming into Leeds

1 J). S. P., Interregnum, exxvii. 20. Petition of inhabitants of West
Ardsley to J.P.'sof West Riding -: Thoresby, Ducatus, p. 17.

xi CLOTH HALLS 361

from the south on market days. It was therefore removed in
June 1084, ' by order of the Mayor and Aldermen from off the
bridge to the broad street above, to prevent the inconveniency
from the eold air of the water in winter, and the trouble of carts
and carriages in summer'.1 Briggate thus became the cloth
market, and here sales took place every Tuesday and Saturday,
until the erection of the Cloth Halls moved the centre of gravity
elsewhere. Many eighteenth -century writers have described
tin- procedure of this open-air market, but none so well as Defoe,
whose account is vivid, and based on an intimate knowledge
of the method of exchange : ' The Cloth Market at Leeds ', says
Defoe, ' is chiefly to be admired as a prodigy of its kind, and
perhaps not to be equalled in the world. The market for serges
;it Exeter is indeed a very wonderful thing, and the money
returned very great ; but it is there only once a week whereas
here it is every Tuesday and Saturday . . . Early in the morning,
trestles are placed in two rows in the street, sometimes two rows
on a side, across which boards are laid, which make a kind of
temporary counter on either side from one end of the street to
the other. The clothiers come early in the morning with their
cloth, and as few bring more than one piece (the market days
being so trequent), they go into the inns and public houses with
it and there set it down.'- It requires a lively imagination to
picture the clothier setting out with, but often without, a horse,
in the very small hours of the morning, and tramping those
miles of execrable road to .Leeds. The risks of assault on the
highway were scarcely less real than the risks of coming to
griet in a quagmire, a ditch, or a deep cart -rut. When at last
Leeds was reached about five o'clock, the clothier would need
something substantial to banish his hunger, and so he made
his way to the inns which lined Briggate. Here he ordered
a, ' Clothier's twopennyworth ' or ' Brigg-shot ', which consisted
oi ' a pot of ale, a noggin ol pottage, and a trencher oi boiled or
roast beet for t wo pence '.:!

The stalls which were erected tor tin1 accommodation oi the

1 Thorcsby, Diarv, June 14, 1O84. - Defoe, op. cit., iii. 117.

;1 Thorcsby, Dunlins, p. 17, and Defoe, iii. no. Harley, Karl of Oxford
( 1 7 j ; ) . ventured to suggest that the fooil was very inferior and declared that
' however trilling the price may appear for mi manv ingredients, vet so far
as I ( ,m conjecture it 1^ a verv dear bargain ' [fortliitiii MSS., vi. 140— 1 ).

362 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

cloth were probably the property of the clothiers, or of some
Leeds man who allowed the clothiers to use them on payment
of a small fee. During the early years of the eighteenth century
the innkeepers, who were so generous in providing big meals
cheaply, began to attempt to get the stalls into their hands,
especially those which stood in front of their own establish-
ments. They then tried to compel .clothiers who wished to use
them either to patronize their inn profusely, or to pay an
excessive fee for stallage. Discontent arose, and eventually the
Corporation of Leeds had to take the matter in hand. In 1713
it issued the following declaration, which aimed at checking the
efforts of the innkeeper, and also at minimizing the incon-
veniences which arose from the market taking place at such an
early hour :

' Whereas there have beene severall complaints made to this
Court of Great disturbances which have happened in the Cloath
Market in Leeds Briggate (being a ffree Markett ffor all Sellers
and Buyers of Cloath Resorting Thither), by [the Innkeepers]
Ingrossing a pretended privilege of severall of the ffronts and
placing their Stooles, Stees and Trussells of wood . . . and
obleiging the Clothiers either to spend their Money profusely at
the Houses or Inns to which the said pretended privileges
belonged or to pay Extravagant rates for lyeing on theire
Cloath, as aforesaid. And not only soe, But by the unreasonable
time of Setting and Placeing the said Stooles, &c, which is
frequently begun about 11 or 12 at night to the great disturb-
ance of the Inhabitants lyeing neare. . . and to the great Hinder -
ance of such who have occasion to pass along that way. For
Remedy whereof, from Lady Day to Michaelmas no stall to
be set up before 4 in the morning, and from Michaelmas to
Lady Day not before 6 in the morning.'

Clothiers were not to set up their stalls before these hours,
and no one was to pay any fee for the privilege of holding a stall,
since all were to be equally free.1

At last the counters were erected, and, to continue Defoe's
description.

' about six o'clock in summer and seven in winter, the clothiers
all being come by that time, the market bell at the old chapel

1 Leeds Gen. Scss. Records, ii. (>yS. A few clays afterwards a number of
men were indicted for attempting to hinder the market by claiming
privileges for stalls, and by demanding fees.

xi CLOTH HALLS 363

by the bridge rings, upon which it would surprise a stranger to
see in how few minutes, without hurry, noise, or the least
disorder, the whole market is filled, and all the boards . . .
covered with cloth, as close as the pieces can lie longways, each
proprietor standing behind his own piece, who form a mercantile
regiment as it were, drawn up in a double line in as great order as
a military one. As soon as the bell has ceased ringing, the factors
and buyers enter the market, and walk up and down between
the rows as occasion directs. Some of them have their foreign
Utters of orders, with patterns sealed on them, in their hands,
the colours of which they match by holding them to the cloths
they think they agree to. When they have fixed upon their
cloth, they lean over to the clothier, and by a whisper in the
fewest words imaginable the price is stated. One asks and the
other bids ; they agree or disagree in a moment. The reason
for this prudent silence is owing to the clothiers standing so near
to one another, for it is not reasonable that one trader should
know another's traffick. If a merchant has bidden a clothier
a price, and he will not take it, he may follow him to his house,
and tell him that he has considered it, and is willing to let him
have it. But they are not to make any new agreement for it,
so as to remove the market from the street to the merchant's
house. In a little less than an hour all the business is done, in
less than half an hour you will perceive the cloth begin to move
off, the clothier taking it upon his shoulder to remove it to the
merchant's house. About 8.30 o'clock the market bell rings
again, upon which the buyers immediately disappear. The
cloth is all sold, or if any remains it is generally carried back-
to the inn. By nine the boards and trestles are removed, and
the streets are left at liberty for the market people of other
professions, linen drapers, shoemakers, hardwaremen, sellers of
wood vessels, wicker baskets, etc. . . . Thus you see 10 or 20,000
pounds' worth of cloth, and some times much more, bought and
sold in little more than an hour, the laws of the market being
the most strictly observed that I ever saw in any market in
England.'

When Hurley passed through Leeds in 1725 he witnessed
a meeting of the cloth market, marked by all the above features.
There were about 2,000 persons in the market, 'who might
have dealings for £30,000 worth ' all concluded in half an hour,
'and yet all carried on with such hush and silence as if they
hid all been bred in the school of Pythagoras. This they told us
was 1 very small market, manv of the neighbouring traders having
been prevented from coming in bv the floods and boisterousness

364 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

of the weather ; at other times they have dealings here in the
same space of time and with the same tranquillity for 50
to £60,000. Happy would it be for the family of the Moroses
could they procure wives educated under this system.' x Such
a market must have been an interesting sight. But the pic-
turesqueness and the sense of quickness and silence did not
prevent the market from suffering under many inconveniences.
It was still open to the inclemencies of the Yorkshire climate,
and also to the annoyance from street traffic. The former
might be endured (thanks perhaps to the ' Brigg-shot ') so long
as there was no rival afield which was providing greater facilities
in the way of market conditions. Thus the Briggatc market
was accepted as a natural institution, and as the only form of
market, until the fear of competition brought the Leeds worthies
to a realization of its faults. This awakening came at the end
of the first decade of the eighteenth century.

The first sign of trouble came from Hightown, a hamlet
situated almost in the very centre of the clothing district, about
equidistant from Leeds, Huddersfield, Halifax, and Wakefield.
Hightown was in especially close proximity to the white cloth
area, and would therefore be an admirable site for a white
cloth market. Early in 1709 Messrs. Green and Brooke, lords
of the manor of Hightown, petitioned Queen Anne for powers
to hold such a market every Monday, i. e. the day before the
Leeds market. In reply to this request, the sheriff of the county
was ordered to hold a court of inquiry, in order to discover
whether there was need for such an additional market, and its
possible effect on existing markets. After a great amount of
evidence had been taken, the special jury which had been
appointed to consider the matter decided ' that the erecting
a market at High Town for white woollen cloth would be to the
damage and prejudice of the sev'all markets of Leeds, Wakefield,
Halifax, and Huddersfield'. Undeterred by this adverse
decision, Green and Brooke renewed their petition, and evi-
dently made out a strong case in support of their request. This
importunity roused Leeds to strenuous opposition. The corpora-
tion, along with the leading clothiers and merchants, objected
most strongly, declaring that whilst 'a competent number ol
1 Tour of Harlcy, Earl of Oxford, 1725 (Portland MSS., vi. 140- 1).

xi CLOTH HALLS 365

Markets are for the benefit of trade and commerce, So the
unnecessary creation of new markets will divide, weaken, and
destroy trade, and render small towns a nuisance to the public,
as well as to one another \l

Hightown was defeated, but Wakefield, the second rival, was
more formidable. Wakefield had fought its way to the front,
and its cloth market was now firmly established. The opening
of the Aire and Calder Navigation had just given Wakefield
excellent facilities for communication with other parts, and the
town was becoming a most important commercial centre. The
cloths made around Wakefield were generally broad white
cloths, a type for which Leeds thought that it alone had the
market. There had been constant disputes between the two
places, chiefly with regard to tolls. The Leeds Corporation had
supported its citizens in their refusal to pay toll to Wakefield,
and intense commercial jealousy existed between the two market
centres.2 Leeds therefore was exceedingly annoyed when it
learned in 1710 that Wakefield had erected a cloth hall, in which
the pieces were to be sold instead of being exposed to the chances
of the weather out in the street. This step caused Leeds to
bestir itself, for if Wakefield was allowed to excel Leeds in its
facilities for exchange, it would soon detach a large number of
white-cloth manufacturers who were now coming to Leeds
from Batley, Ossett, Dewsbury, and other places in the Calder
valley. Leeds must checkmate the action of Wakefield by pro-
viding a similar hall, and so on August 14, 1710, Thoresby
'rode with the Mayor . . . and others to my lord Irwin's at
Temple Newsam, about the erection of a hall for white cloths
in Kirkgate, to prevent the damage to this town ... of one
lately erected at Wakefield, with design to engross the woollen
trade'.3 The excursion was most fruitful, for Irwin gave his
enthusiastic support, and provided the site for the hall. Mer-
chants and tradesmen contributed capital to the extent of
£1,000, and as a result of these efforts ' a stately hall for white
cloths ' was erected in Kirkgate, and opened in April 1711.

1 Petition to Karl of Newcastle. Copy in MSS. of White Cloth Hall. Also
Portland MSS., Hist. MSS. Comm., ii. 200.

- See Leeds ('<>>'p. Minifies, i. 240 and 24$. In 16S7 the Corporation granted
jC5° to one man ' for defending the right of the Parish from payment of toll
to Hull and Wakefield'. ■' Thoresbv's Diary, ii. 65-O.

366 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

The building was not large ; it was arranged round a quad-
rangular court, and its two storeys were filled with stalls, on
which cloths were laid on market days. Here camethe clothiers
from the white cloth area of the county, and here for one or two
hours every Tuesday afternoon the sales took place.1

But this first White Cloth Hall, glorying in its pillars and
arches, and its cupola, pointed and gilded, soon became too
small to answer the needs of the growing trade in undyed cloths.
By the middle of the century the accommodation was quite
inadequate, and in 1755 the second White Cloth Hall was opened.
This new erection was situated on a piece of land south of Leeds
Bridge, between Hunslet and Meadow Lane.2 The building
was much larger than its predecessor, and here for nearly twenty
years the market found a home. Those years, however, com-
prised a period of rapid growth, and by the early 'seventies it
had become obvious that still larger premises must be found if
Leeds was to maintain its control over the trade in white cloths.

In 1774 such a step became more and more imperative
because of the threatened rise of a rival, this time at Gomersal.
The marketing accommodation at Leeds was inadequate, and
many clothiers were doubtless unable to display their wares to
advantage. Therefore certain influential gentlemen residing in
and around Gomersal determined to take steps for the establish-
ment of a rival hall at Gomersal Hill Top, about seven miles
from Leeds. A piece of ground was given, and a considerable
sum of money promised to defray the cost of the building.
The leading clothiers of that very busy and flourishing area
threw themselves with zest into the project, and persuaded or
coerced their fellows to sign ' a bond obliging themselves not to
expose their cloths in any other place than Gomersall '. All this
roused the ire of Leeds ; the Cloth Hall trustees saw that the
establishment at Gomersal would deprive the old market of much
of its trade, whilst the Leeds merchants pictured to themselves
the seven miles journey which they would have to make if they
wished to draw upon the supplies of the Gomersal district. The
trustees therefore attempted to frighten the audacious upstarts ;

1 Thorcsby's Ducatus, Addenda, p. 248, and Diary, April 22, 171 1.

2 Jackson's Guide to Leeds (1889), p. 143. Also 'Notes and Queries',
Leeds Mercury Supplement, no. 449.

xi CLOTH HALLS 367

they threatened proceedings at law, and offered assistance,
pecuniary and legal, to those who would break the bond which
they had signed. These fulminations were discounted by the
open support which the Gomersal clothiers received from the
local gentry; nothing could be more encouraging than the
following letter, published in the newspapers of December 26,
1775 :
' Gentlemen,

' We, being fully desirous of promoting the Woollen Trade
in the West Riding of Yorkshire, think it expedient to signify
to you our entire approbation of your erection of a Mall at
Gomersall, in order to establish your market there, and we
recommend you to go on and complete your design with all
possible expedition, being clearly of opinion that it will be of
the greatest advantage to the industrious manufacturer, and
also to the white cloth trade in general. Therefore we are
determined to give all possible encouragement to so laudable
an undertaking.

(Signed) Sir George Armitage, Sir
Thomas Wentworth, R. H.
Beaumont, E. E. Savile, Sir
James Ibbetson,' and other
manufacturing or landed chief-
tains of the West Riding.1

Spurred on by such encouragement, the Gomersal clothiers
completed their project and established a hall in defiance of the
trustees at Leeds. In 1793 the British Directory remarks ' at
Gomershall the clothiers have erected a large brick building for
a Cloth Market, in hopes of bringing the merchants nearer home,
and saving expense thereby. It was of course encouraged by
the landowners, but it is doubtful whether it will answer.' -
As a matter of fact, this hall never did get a firm grip on the
trade, especially as improved means of communication made it
more easy to use the market at Leeds. But in its inception in
1774 it gave Leeds a real fright, and was partly responsible for
the taking of the next great step.

Whilst the trustees of the White Cloth Hall had been hurling
their threats at Gomersal, the merchants of Leeds had turned
their attention to more practical and satisfactory methods of
1 Leeds Mercury, December _'<>, 177:. ' Brit. Dir., iii. 3J5.

368 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

circumventing the new possible rival. This they did by providing
the necessary improved accommodation at Leeds, and the erec-
tion of the third White Cloth Hall was almost entirely due to the
initiative and energy of the merchants. This was only natural,
for the new building must be of considerable size, and its cost
would therefore be great. The merchants would benefit as much
as the clothiers by such a provision, and the wealthy wholesale
traders of Leeds were far more capable of raising £4,000 than
were the manufacturers of the district. Hence the impetus and
the necessary money came from the Dennisons, Bischoffs,
Fountains, Wormalds, Smithsons, and other important Leeds
merchant families.1

At a meeting of merchants held on September 10, 1774, it
was resolved ' That a Subscription be forthwith opened for
Erecting a Hall in Leeds, for the better accommodation of the
White Clothiers ', and ten days later a similar meeting of mer-
chants elicited promises to the extent of nearly £850. The
trustees of the White Cloth Hall were invited to choose a com-
mittee to confer with a committee of merchants, and in their
hands the scheme rapidly developed. An eloquent and persuasive
circular, the postscript of which hinted that subscriptions might
be of any amount from £10 to £50, was scattered broadcast to
Yorkshire and London merchants, landowners, and all who were
in the least interested in the welfare of Leeds. The response to
this invitation was most encouraging, donations ranging from
a guinea to £250 came from a great number of merchants, and
the Leeds Corporation added £100 to the fund. By November
the site had been decided upon. The building was to stand on
a piece of land situate in the Calls, and known as the Tenter
Ground. Viscount Irwin was the tenant for life of this land,
which was held from him by the Committee for Pious Uses, on
terms of copyhold, the revenue accruing to the Leeds Grammar

1 The greater part of the information contained in the subsequent pages
has been drawn from the MSS. of the White Cloth Hall Trustees, now in
the possession of Mr. II. Greenwood-Teale, Atlas Chambers, Leeds. The
writer wishes to acknowledge the courtesy and assistance which he received
at the hands of Mr. Greenwood-Teale. The collection of MSS. is quite in-
valuable, and is a veritable mine of information concerning the textile
industry of this period. For a more detailed history of the White Cloth Hall,
see an article by the present writer in the Thoresby Soc. publications, Miscel-
lanea (1913), vol. xxii, pt. ii.

xi CLOTH HALLS 369

School. The Committee of Merchants approached the copy-
holders, and in December 1774 an agreement was made whereby
the hind and tenements should be transferred for the sum of
£300. A private Act had to be obtained before such a sale
could be legally recognized, but Irwin quickly carried this
through Parliament, and in March 1775 the plans were decided
upon and estimates invited. With such great expedition was
the work carried out that the hall was opened on October 17,
1775, thirteen months after the issue of the appeal for subscrip-
tions— an undoubtedly remarkable achievement.

The building, part of which still remains, was much larger
than its predecessors. It was rectangular in shape, 99 yards by
70 yards, and was arranged round a quadrangle. The interior
was divided into five long streets, each with two rows of stands,
and contained in all 1,213 cloth-stands. These stalls could be
•leased for life by paying 2.s\ 6d. per annum or a lump sum of
£1 10s. ; and eventually it became possible to acquire the free-
hold of a stall by paying the £1 105. Such stalls were entirely
(he property <>f the clothier, who could sell them, let them to
other clothiers at a rent, or bequeath them to others at his
death. Stall-owners were also liable to an annual levy ranging
from bd. to is. ()</. to defray the cost of caretaking, sweeping,
cleaning, and repairs. Those who did not choose to purchase
or rent a stall could make use of the hall on payment of 3</. for
each cloth exposed for sale. With the boom in trade during
the next thirty years the value of the stalls increased rapidly,
so that stands which were purchased in 1775 for £1 10s. were
sold in 1806 for three to eight guineas, the price varying accord-
ing to the situation in the hall.1

The establishment of this big market was almost entirely due
to the enterprise of the merchants ol Leeds. They had sub-
scribed the necessary capital, had carried through the legal
proceedings, and now that the hall was erected they called
upon their fellows to promise 'not to purchase, by themselves
or bv their agents, any white cloth or coatings in any other
White Cloth Hall now erected, or to be erected within the West
Riding, except Hudderstield Market '.

The clothiers had plaved a comparatively insignificant part
1 A Walk through Leah (iSoh), p. u.

1 =;:;<>. 12 1; b

370 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

in all these transactions, and the whole Cloth Hall estate had
been placed in trust in the hands of Darcy Molyneux, Joseph
Fountain, and Robert Green, three of the most prominent
merchants concerned in the venture. Now that all the pre-
liminaries had been settled, and the new hall erected, prepara-
tions were made for handing over the establishment to the
clothiers, to be administered by them henceforth. In 1776,
therefore, negotiations took place, and at a joint meeting held
on October 21, 1776, the transfer was effected. The terms on
which the merchants surrendered their powers and possessions
were as follows : (1) That the clothiers should subscribe £1,000,
in order to pay off the deficit on the hall. The cost of land,
buildings, &c, had exceeded the amount of subscriptions by
£1,000, and the clothiers were therefore to saddle themselves
with that burden. This they did, and the money was at once
forthcoming. (2) That ' all persons who had exercised the
business of a broad white clothier, either for his own benefit, or
as a servant to others, for the space of rive years, should be
deemed as duly qualified to purchase Stalls '. This clause seems
to have been somewhat vague, and subsequently was understood
to imply a five years' apprenticeship, instead of one of seven
years.

On these conditions, along with one or two others of minor
importance, the deed ' drawn up and settled by two learned
Councel, learned in the Law ', was signed, and the hall passed
into the hands of the clothiers, or rather of their representatives,
the trustees. Of these there were seventeen, chosen from the
white cloth districts, and each representing a certain constituency.
The distribution in 1802 was as follows :

Mirfield and Hopton . . 2 Dewsbury, Soothill, Thorn-
Hartshead and Clifton-on- hill, and Ossett . . 2
Calder . . . .1 Alverthorpe . . .2
Cleckheaton, Wyke, Huns- Idle, Bradford, and Bowl-
worth, and Bierley. . 1 ing . . . .2
Liversedge . . .2 Kirkheaton . . .1
Heckmondwike . . 1 Batley and Morlcy . . 1
Birstall and Gomersal . 2

The trustees were elected for three years. At the end of that
period, or whenever a, vacancy occurred, a letter was sent to

xi CLOTH HALLS 371

sonic prominent clothier in the particular district, asking him
to convene ;i meeting of ' legal clothiers ', in order to nominate
and appoint ' a yongue man of the Most Respectabillity and
first rate Character ', to serve as trustee for that area. The
meeting was held, and the person responsible for the arrange-
ments then notified the trustees of the result: in a letter, of
which the following is a fair specimen, so far as spelling is
concerned :

' 3 Augst 1814.

1 Aat A metcn Call at Cleckheaton it was unanmiseley a
greaded to That Wialam yeates is a pounted Truste for the
districket for Cleckton, And so forth for the white Cloth Hall at
Leed.'

The trustees met annually, on the first Monday in June, and
cm other occasions when some special business called for their
attention. These annual meetings were often formal, and served
oidy as preludes to, and excuses for, the sumptuous banquets of
which we find detailed accounts in the cash books of the trustees.
At other times a great amount of business was transacted,
especially in the revision of by-laws, levying of dues, or altera-
tion of policy. ' Good order without oppression ' was the end
the trustees were to keep in view, and under their strict rule
the hall prospered during the first forty years of its existence.

Meanwhile, what of the coloured cloth market ? The bi-
weekly meeting in Briggate had been somewhat relieved by the
transference of the white cloth trade to the hall, and probably
the absence of a rival coloured market had kept the makers of
these cloths satistied with existing arrangements. There does
not seem to have been the least provision made for the sale
under cover of coloured cloths until the big hall was built in
what is now City Square.

I'1 1755 Leeds obtained an Improvement Act,1 which gave
permission to effect several alterations in the thoroughfares of
the borough, and to widen Briggate. This proposed disturbance
of the street in which the cloth market was held helped to drive
the coloured cloth-makers to the decision to build a. hall of their
own. They were further induced to take such a step by the
increased market fees which were charged in order to defray

1 Statute jN C,co. II, c. 41.
15 b 2

372 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

the cost of the street improvements. In 1756, therefore, the
coloured cloth community eagerly discussed the situation.
Local meetings were held, and general assemblies considered
the project.1 It was unanimously agreed to be desirable ' that
a proper piece of ground shall be purchased in Leeds, and a con-
venient Hall or Building . . . thereon erected . . . for the purpose
of lodging and exposing to sale of mixed broad woollen cloth '.
A committee of fifteen clothiers was chosen, drawn from the
various parts of the mixed cloth area ; the rank and file made
their contributions, varying from £2 10s. to £7 10s., and paid
the money into the hands of this executive, to be by them
applied ' in the buying a proper piece of ground in Leeds, and
in erecting thereon a Convenient Hall ... to the Intent that the
same shall be forever employed and made use of as a Common
Hall for the Purpose of Lodging and Exposing to Sale of Mixt
Broad Woollen Cloth, made and sold by the Mixt Broad Woollen
Clothiers residing in the West Riding '. Armed with these
powers, the trustees looked around for a site, and eventually
secured a piece of the ' Park ' which is now divided between
City Square and the Central Post Office. This land was part of
the estate of Richard Wilson, and in selling the site for £420
Wilson made many stipulations. He retained the mineral rights,
and demanded that if ever the buildings ceased to be utilized
as a market for broad coloured woollen cloths, or were used for
any other purpose whatever, both land and buildings should
revert to himself or his successors. Wilson also extracted the
promise that the buildings should not in any part exceed 24 feet
in height, that no windows should be made on the south-eastern
sick-, or stand out from the roof, without his express permission.
A cottage might be built for a caretaker, provided that 'the
occupier thereof shall be restrained from Keeping a Publick
House for selling of ale or any other liquor, and from exercising
. . . any Trade or Business on the Premises other than that of
a Weaver of Woollen Goods \2 Having promised to abide by all
these conditions, and paid their £420, the coloured Cloth Hall

1 The various deeds of transfer for the Coloured Cloth Hall are in the
hands ol the Leeds Corporation. The writer's best thanks are due to Sir Robert
Fox, Town Clerk, who kindly allowed him to examine the manuscripts.

- Meeds of Sale between Richard Wilson and Coloured Cloth Hall Trustees,
May 1 757 •

xi CLOTH HALLS 373

trustees received the site for their market, a fine piece of land
120 yards by 66 yards. Contracts were given out to local
builders and the work began at once, so that in 1756 the hall
was ready for the transaction of business.1 It was larger than
the White Cloth Hall of 1775, and its general arrangement will
be seen from the diagram below.2

CHEAPSIDE

UJ
Ld

QUEEN STREET

Rotunda

Court Yard

Caretakersi —
House I —

MARY LANE

CHANGE ALLEY

Each street was lined with stands, and there was accommoda-
tion for 1,770 stalls/1 Each stall was 22 inches in width, and
was the freehold property of the clothier, whose name was
painted on the front. The clothier seems to have received
a stall for every £2 10s. which he subscribed, but no one held
more than three. I laving paid this sum, no other charge was
made except an annual 6d. to defray general expenses. Towards
the end of the century the trade expanded considerably, and
there was a great demand for stalls. Hence those who wished
to sell could obtain from £8 to £15 per stall,'1 and in 1810 a second
storey was added to the north wing in order to provide a room
for the sale of certain kinds of ladies' dress goods. For permission
to make this extension the trustees paid Christopher Wilson
the sum of £250, and in return gained power to extend the hall
when necessary, to make windows wherever they pleased (even
on t he so ut h -eastern side), and to permit the sale of silks cot tons,

1 T.cedcs Intelligencer, April 19, 1757.

2 M.ivh.ill, <>/>. tit., i. 1 i(). Also Macpherson. .-intuils ■>! Commerce, iv .
app. iv ; also all maps of Penis alter 17(10.

1 History of /.,-, <is, 1707, p. <>.

1 ./ Walk through Leeds, iSoo, p. 10.

374 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

worsted yarn, or any other kind of textile commodities, in
addition to the orthodox coloured woollens.1 By these exten-
sions the number of stalls was increased, and in 1850 there were
over 2,500 stands for the sale of cloth. Those men who did
not own a stall were allowed to sell their cloth in the hall,
paying 6d. for each piece.

Some time after the building of the main block a small octagonal
structure was erected on the right-hand side of the gateway.
This building, known as the ' Exchange ' or ' Rotunda ', served
as the office and council chamber of the trustees, in whose hands
the management of the property lay. There were fifteen trustees,
one from each of the fifteen districts into which the coloured
cloth area was divided.2

Leeds (3 districts)

Rawdon and Horsforth

Idle and Eccleshill .

Arm ley .

Yeadon and Guiseley

Holbeck .

Bramley .

Like their neighbours of the White Cloth Hall, these trustees
were appointed every three years, and their powers of jurisdic-
tion were very large. The transfer of stalls from one owner
to another had to be registered by them ; they were to receive
the income of the hall and control expenditure. They had power
to draw up by-laws and ordinances, and levy fines on offenders.
They watched over the interests of the industry, and were
vigilant in enforcing the laws of the realm, whenever necessary.
Sitting in the ' Rotunda ', they ordered the general affairs of
the market, and acted as the fathers of the trade ; then at the
end of the three years they straightened up their accounts,
put all into order, and handed over books and property to the
newly elected trustees.

The use of both halls was strictly limited to those who had
served the ' full period of apprenticeship '.3 At first this implied
the seven years' term, but with the breakdown of apprentice-
ship in the latter part of the century the trustees bowed to the

1 Leeds Dir., 1817. Sec also Deeds, July 2, 1790, and August 9, 1810.

- Deeds, January 14, 1757.

;l See all descriptions of Halls, 1797— 1809.

• 3

Dewsbury and Batley

Ossett and Horbury .

Calverley and Farsley

Morley, Gildersome, and

Churwell

Pudsey and Stanningley

Hunslet .

xi CLOTH HALLS 375

force of circumstances, and in January 1797 reduced the seven
years to five.1 This rule was rigorously enforced, and doubtless
did much to maintain apprenticeship in the West Riding longer
than it would otherwise have survived. The majority of the
clothiers accepted the law, but there were many with cloth to
sell who had not served the full term of apprenticeship. These
men must find another home for their cloths, and thus there-
existed a market where the ' Irregulars ' sold their pieces. At
first this market was in Meadow Lane, opposite the White Cloth
Hall built in that part in 1755. Here, in the ' Potter's Field ',
was a big room in which these men deposited their cloths, and
here the merchants came as well as to the White and Coloured
Halls.2 In the early nineties this heretical market was moved
to the ground floor of the Music Hall in Albion Street, where
the cloths of the unapprenticed found a resting-place until they
were sold. This third Cloth Hall caused great annoyance to
the trustees of the orthodox markets, and many efforts were
made to crush it. It became notorious as the home of the free,
and was christened the 'Tom Paine Hall' in honour of that
apostle of individual liberty.3 In 1803 the White Hall trustees
determined to suppress this disreputable rival by a great stroke
of policy. The Tom Paine Hall had been providing two markets
per week, namely Tuesday and Saturday, whilst the White Cloth
Hall had only a Tuesday market. The Saturday meeting was
very popular, and was undoubtedly damaging the supremacy
of the White Cloth Hall. In June 1803, therefore, the trustees
asked for the opinion of their fellow clothiers as to the ' pro-
priety or impropriety of holding a Saturday market in the
aforesaid Cloth Hall', and the decision was in favour of a bi-
weekly market. Two years later the trustees agreed ' that the
Manufacturers of the White Cloth who are in the habit of
Manufacturing White Cloth only and attend the Opposition
Market in Albion Street shall be permitted to come into the
White Cloth I hill on condition that they be unanimous to come
unitedly, and not be instrumental in forming an Opposition or
Division at any time '. These two steps had a serious effect on
the rival hall, and the suspension of the Apprenticeship Laws
about the same time helped to remove the raison d'etre of the

1 1S00 Reports, iii. 13. - Ibid., p. joo. ;' Ibid., pp. OO and Joi.

376 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

Tom Paine market. In 1809 the number of men selling cloths
there was only 260, and with the absolute abolition of the
apprenticeship legislation all distinctions passed away, so that
in 1817 this opposition cloth market was in the hands of wine
and spirit merchants.1

The procedure of sale in the halls was very similar to that of
the open-air market already described. On the mornings of
market-days the clothiers brought their pieces to the halls.
The horses, on the backs of which many clothiers brought their
wares, were not to be left standing about in the Cloth Hall yard.
Any horse found in the yard half an hour after the commence-
ment of the market brought upon its master a fine of is. ;
hostlers must come and take all horses away, but boys were
forbidden to perform this duty ' as Mischiefs frequently happen
from their wantonly galloping the Horses in the street '.2 The
Mixed Cloth Hall opened first, but the early rising habits
cultivated by the street market had been abandoned. The
removal of the market indoors meant a postponement of the
market hour in order to get adequate natural light. Therefore
the opening hours of the Coloured Hall were 8.30 in summer,
9.0 in spring and autumn, and 9.30 in winter. At these hours
the bell in the cupola was rung, after which the buyers paced
the ' streets ' and inspected the cloths laid across the stalls.
There was little noisy higgling, for both sides seemed to possess
well-defined ideas as to how much they were prepared to give
or take. The bargain was struck, and the piece carried off to
the merchant's head-quarters. Meanwhile time had been flying,
and at the end of an hour the bell rang again to inform the
loiterers that they had now only a quarter of an hour's grace.
When that quarter had elapsed, the bell rang once more for five
minutes, by which time all transactions must have come to an
end, or be abandoned. Any merchant or buyer of cloth who
was found inside the gates of the hall yard when the bell ceased
was fined 5.9., with an additional fine of 5.?. for every five minutes
he still loitered. When the .Mixed Cloth Hall had closed, that
for white cloths was opened. The laws of sale were almost
identical with those of the Coloured Hall, and all transactions
must be carrier] through within an equally short space oi time.

1 Leeds Dir., 1S17, p. 20. - Mixed Cloth Hall Orders, 1707.

xi CLOTH HALLS 377

Simplicity, dispatch, and absence of noisy bartering, such are
the impressions one receives from all contemporary accounts of
these markets ; but this simplicity was no hindrance to the
discharge of great quantities of business. £20,000 to £30,000
worth of cloth changed hands in a busy market-day at the
Coloured I lall alone, and during the hey-day of these halls an
incredibly large volume of trade was carried on in that hour
and twenty minutes.

In all this marketing the trustees kept strict watch over the
halls and the stall-holders. In the early years of the trade no
white clothier might have the use of more than two stalls, and
no man was allowed to expose his wares on the stall of another
clothier. Similarly, any person who offered for sale goods made
by a clothier not free of the hall met with severe punishment.
If a clothier fell into arrears with his yearly rent or his con-
tributions to the upkeep of the hall, his stall was considered
forfeit, and put up to auction, many stalls changing hands in
this manner. The moral character of stall-holders was also
placed under supervision. Any clothier guilty of felony, or
convicted under the Worsted Acts, was deprived of the privilege
of using the hall ; and at a special meeting in 1846 it was
resolved that two men, 'having been convicted of Vagrancy
under highly flagrant circumstances, leaving no doubt ot their
dishonest intentions, shall no longer be allowed to frequent this
hall or expose any goods for sale therein '.]

One of the strangest rules of the White Cloth Hall was that
which forbade stall-holders to expose any of their wares at any
other market in Leeds. This rule referred not only to the Tom
Paine I hill, but also to the Coloured Cloth Hall.2 Such a stipula-
tion did not impose any very great hardship so long as the
clothiers confined their attention to white cloths, but by 1800
many of them were adding another string to their bow by
making coloured fabrics as well as whites, and in some cases
were deserting the white cloth manufacture entirely. But their
trustees forbade them to trade in the Coloured Hall, and so
many were in a. dilemma. In 1810, therefore, the trustees

1 All these aspects of regulation are to he found in the Orders issued by
the trustees.

- e.». 1N10, clothier lined ;.-. ' lor exposing his cloth to sate in this and the
Mixt Hall at the Same time '.

378 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

recognized the changed circumstances by allowing the sale of
coloured cloths and fancy goods in a room which had recently
been added to the White Cloth Hall, and in 1828 the whole
of one of the ' streets ' in the building was devoted to the sale
of such fabrics. The coloured goods invaded the market, and ,
the White Cloth Hall became eventually a market for mixed
cloths rather than whites.

The cloth halls were justly the pride of the city, alike in their
size and the extent of their business. Distinguished visitors
were taken to witness the working of the markets and observe
the processes of sale. When the King of Denmark passed through
Leeds in September 1768 1 he was not allowed to depart before
he had been taken to see the sights of the Mixed Hall, and
certain Austrian Archdukes honoured the halls with their
presence in 1815. The buildings were also centres of social and
political life before the days when the Town Hall, the Coliseum,
and similar places had been erected. On December 4, 1786,
Mr. Lunardi made a ' balloon ascent from the area of the White
Cloth Hall amidst the plaudits of 30,000 spectators '.2 In 1777
a suite of elegant assembly rooms was built over a part of the
same hall, and opened on June 9 of that year ' with a minuet
by Lady Effingham and Sir George Savile, Bart., when upwards
of 220 of the nobility and gentry were present. . . . The appear-
ance of the ladies and gentlemen was more brilliant than was
ever remembered '.;i Throughout the nineteenth century the
hall yards were the scenes of many diversions provided by
enterprising persons for the amusement of the citizens. Balloon
ascents and displays of fireworks were very frequent ; pig-
shows, horticultural exhibitions, circuses, &c, all found a home
within the gates of the Cloth Hall yards, and the trustees drew
no small revenue from these sources. At the same time these
quadrangles formed admirable sites for open-air political demon-
strations. The Coloured Cloth Hall yard was generally chosen,
because of its spaciousness, and because the steps on the north-
eastern side provided a suitable rostrum. Here every question
of political moment was advocated to the vast crowds which
flocked to listen. Catholic emancipation, the abolition of slavery,

1 Mayhall, op. cit., under date 176S.

2 Yorkshire Magazine, 1786, ]>. \y<>. ■' Sec Lads Mercury, that date.

xi CLOTH HALLS 379

Free Trade, Parliamentary reform, household suffrage, educa-
tion, ike, all were championed from the steps of the Cloth Hall
yard. Here Wilberforce and Brougham delivered weighty utter-
ances, here Cobden denounced the Crimean War,1 and here at
the last great meeting, in 1881, Mr. Gladstone held a gigantic
audience spellbound with one of his orations on foreign and
colonial policy.2

The Cloth Halls of Leeds were by no means the only ones in
Yorkshire, nor were they even the first in the county. Bcntley,
in 1708, speaks of a ' large and spacious hall ', erected by Lord v
Irwin at Halifax, ' where the weavers and buyers do weekly
meet. . . . The sales are so great that the lord's collector often
gets as much as thirty to forty shillings at the rate of a penny
per piece '.:{ These were undyed pieces, which were sold in
a building provided by the lord of the manor, who received a toll
on each cloth. The hall was opened by the ringing of a bell,
and, in order to prevent forestalling, a penalty of 39s. \\d. was
levied on any person who even asked the price of a piece of
cloth before the bell rang, the fines being distributed amongst
the poor of the town in which the offender lived.4 As the Halifax
industry expanded this hall became too small, and much cloth,
especially coloured cloth, had to seek a market in the Butchers'
Shambles. At a meeting of manufacturers in April 1774 it was
agreed that ' a Hall, erected in some convenient place in the
town, . . . would be of great public utility'.0 This resolution
was speedily acted upon, and a scheme for a big building drawn
up. The site was offered as a gift: by Mr. Caygill, and, after
a long and bitter dispute amongst the manufacturers, finally
accepted.6 The hall was completed by December 1778, and
opened on January 2, 1779, amid great, jubilation and a display
of fireworks." The building was erected on the slope of a hill,
and therefore contained three storeys in the lower part and
two <»n the higher ground. It was built around a quadrangle,
measured 112 yards by 100 yards, and cost nearly £10,000.

1 Leeds Mercury Supplement, May 3, 1879.

- Morley's Life of Gladstone, iii. 59-61.

'■' Halifax and its Gibbet Lau< placed in a Xew Light, by Henry Bcntley, p. 9.

1 Halifax and its Gibbet Law placed in a True Light, by S. Midgley (1761),

pp. 0-10. « Leeds Mcrcurv, April 5, 1774.

H Yorkshire. Ci>iners, pp. 207—10-

7 Leeds Mercury, December ?<>, 1771. Sec advertisements. i77(>to T77S.

3»o MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

It differed from the Leeds halls in that it did not consist of
streets of stalls. Instead of that arrangement, there were 315
closets or apartments. Each of these rooms was quite separate
and private. They were taken up by clothiers for about £28
each, and here the pieces of cloth were kept, only to be brought
out for the weekly market, which was held from ten to twelve
every Saturday morning. Instead of merely owning a stall, the
Halifax clothier had a private room, in which his unsold stuffs
could be left until next market-day.

During the last twenty years of the century the Halifax Hall
prospered greatly. In 1787 only 22 rooms were unoccupied ;
the remainder were in the hands of men who hailed from Halifax,
and also from the wide expanse which lay north and west of the
town, Burnley, Bingley, Colne, Haworth, Keighley, Pendle,
Skipton, &c, as well as Bradford and other places to the east.
From this widely scattered area came woollens and worsteds,
and in 1805 cotton goods were admitted. [Merchants from
Leeds, Hull, and York, and middlemen who bought for foreign
patrons came to the Halifax market, and a very large trade was
carried on, until the growth of Bradford and the decay of this sys-
tem of exchange deprived the hall of its trade. It sank from
its former usage about the middle of the nineteenth century.

Bradford was eomparativelv late in obtaining a Piece Hall.1 /

This was because the worsted manufacturers were on a more

capitalistic basis than their woollen confreres] there were fewer

of them, their individual stocks were larger, and also, from the

beginning, there was a great amount of direct dealing with the

merchant or the consumer, and much working to order, without

the cloth passing through the open market. Still there did

exist a worsted market in Bradford, and as the industry expanded

this meeting of merchants and makers became more important.

The arrangements for the market were very inconvenient,

especially to the merchants. Those worsted makers who lived

in Bradford had piece rooms at their own houses, but those

who came from the outlying parts had cubicles in a large room

at the White Lion Inn, in Kirkgate, where they exposed their

1 Housman, Topographical Description of . . . the Western /'ail of the West
Riding (iSoo), p. 193, stated that it was reckoned that £50,000 worth ot
cloths were exposed for sale at one time. The building slil! stands, and is
used by various traders.

xi CLOTH HALLS 381

goods for sale on market day, and locked up what they did not
sell till the following week. Such a system was most unsatis-
factory. The market was scattered about in the piece rooms <>f
the clothiers and in the room at the White Lion, and thus there
\v;is ;i great waste of time in passing from one place to another.
The growing industry was seriously handicapped by such
inadequate market provision. Meetings were held, at which it
was decided to erect a hall, and in 1773 the building was opened.1
The hall was on the same principle as the later Halifax Hall,
and contained at first 100 apartments, each with a show board
in front of it, on which the cloth was placed during the hours
of sale. But this first building soon became too small, and in
1780 an extension was opened, containing accommodation for
another 158 holders. The hall was essentially for the sale of
worsted, but provision was made by which yarn could be sold
at the conclusion of the cloth market. The market commenced
at ten o'clock each Thursday morning with the ringing of
a bell. Every person who sold goods either before that hour
or after 11.30, when the market closed, was fined 55. Further,
if any person was found exposing goods for sale which were not
his own property or the property of some fellow occupier, he
was severely punished. Any manufacturer behaving himself in
a rude or disorderly manner, so as to give public offence, was
expelled from the hall and deprived of participation in its
privileges. The establishment flourished during the early part
of the nineteenth century, but by 1850 trading transactions
were generally carried on in other quarters.2

There were other Cloth Halls at Wakefield, Hudderslield, and
Colne. Though ('nine lay on the Lancashire side of the border,
it ivd very largely on the industry of the Yorkshire slopes,
Craven, and Upper Wharfedale. Eventually its trade was
absorbed by Bradford, and the little town lost most of its
commercial importance. :J Hudderslield had obtained a charter
for a market in 1O71, and the cloth was exposed for sale on the

1 Sit advertisements, Lent* Mrrairv, 177.1-3. Also Old History of Bradford,
{*77'')- P- 77- Also Bradford Antiquary, i. 1^5, for article on the Bradford
Piece Hall.

- Rules and Orders to he ohserved by the Merchants, Buyers of C.oods,
and Occupiers of Stands in the Manufacturers' Hall in Bradford ' ; poster in
Bradford Reference Library. ;i James, op. cit., p. '>.;-".

382 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

walls of the churchyard. The town made great progress during
the eighteenth century, and a hall became necessary. The need
was supplied by the ehief Huddersfield family, when in 1766 /
a large circular building was erected at the expense of Sir John
Ramsden. It was enlarged in 1780, and about 600 manu-
facturers brought their cloths here to be sold. The hall was the
property of the Ramsden family, who administered the affairs
of the market without the assistance or interference of trustees.
No stipulations were made as to apprenticeship, and any one
might use the hall, provided he paid a certain toll on each
cloth.1 Yorkshiremenfrom the Pennine valleys sold their wares
there, and it was quite a common sight to see clothiers from
the neighbouring parts of Cheshire, Derbyshire, and Lancashire
offering their goods for sale at the Huddersfield market.2

As for Wakefield, we have already seen the fear caused in
the breast of Leeds by the erection of a Cloth Hall at Wakefield
in 1710. This hall met the requirements of the local clothiers
for half a century, but in 1766 the ' Tammy Hall ' was erected
for the sale of that type of worsted, and here a considerable "
trade was carried on every Friday.3

Such was the method of marketing the cloth. From the hand-
looms of the scattered cottages came the pieces, rough and
unfinished. In the covered market buyer and seller met, and
within strictly denned limits of time concluded their bargain.
We have observed in some detail the character of the seller.
Who was the buyer ? It now becomes necessary to analyse
more closely the composition of the mass of purchasers which
thronged the halls and cloth markets. First, there was the
small buyer, the tailor or shopkeeper, who purchased one or
two pieces for retailing in his own shop. There was also the
pedlar, getting in his small stock of wares, prior to making his
regular and extensive itinerary. But these men were in the great
minority, and were insignificant when compared with the larger
purchasers, who were the most important figures in these market

1 Sykcs, Huddersfield and its Vicinity, pp. 210, 246, and 279.

2 See Mayhall, op. cit., i. 146. Also Sykes, op. cit. Also Reports, 1806,
iii. 221. Also Allen, History of the Comity of York.

3 Housman, op. cit., -p. 183 ; Allen, v. 400. The Tammy Hall had fallen into
disuse by 1830 Mayhall, i. 145. See Leeds newspapers, April 1765 ; Leeds
Mercury, December 5, 1775.

xi CLOTH HALLS 383

transactions. These purchasers fall under two headings, mer-
chants and agents. The merchants might be engaged in either /
home or foreign trade. There was a large class of home mer-
chants who bought in the Leeds market in order to sell wholesale
throughout England. Defoe gives an admirable description of
this body of men. After pointing out that the Leeds goods
are everywhere utilized ' for clothing the ordinary people who
cannot go to the price of the line cloths made in the West of
England ', he states ' there are for this purpose a set of travelling
merchants in Leeds who go all over England with droves of
pack-horses to all the fairs and market towns over the whole-
island, I think I may say none excepted. Here they supply not
the common people by retail, which would denominate them
pedlars indeed, but they supply the shops by wholesale and
whole pieces, and not only so, but give large credit, to show
that they are really travelling merchants, and as such they sell
.1 very largo quantity of goods. It is ordinary for one of these
men to carry £1,000 value of cloth with him at a time, and
having sold it at the fairs or towns where they go, to send their
horses back for as much more, and this very often in the summer,
for they choose to travel in the summer, and perhaps towards
the winter, though as little in winter as they can, because of the
badness of the roads ' }

Next, there came the foreign merchant, who traded with
various parts of Europe, the Mediterranean, and North America.
The pioneer companies had broken down, and there was now a great
measure of freedom for merchants, which enabled many men to
enter into foreign trade who might have been excluded under the
regulations of the Merchant Adventurers and Eastland Merchants.

Along with the merchant there was the factor or agent, the
middleman, a very important figure in the organization of the
cloth trade. The factor purchased cloth for merchants whose
head-quarters might be in Yorkshire, London, some other part
of England, or abroad. In the Yorkshire newspapers of the
eighteenth century there are numerous advertisements similar
1 1 1 t he tollowing :

(Leeiles Intelligencer, fuly 10th, 1782). ' To Manufacturers
and Others. A person ;it this Time wants to engage with an

1 I )(•)()(•, op. n't., iii. in;.

384 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

agent, who has a competent Knowledge in the different Articles,
manufactured at or near Leedes, to purchase goods on the best
Terms : whose character must be unexceptionable, as Two or
Three Thousand Pounds will be in his Hands for that Purpose.
A commission equal to the Attention in this Business will be
allowed : any Person capable of executing the above properly
addressing a line for X Z, No. 16, Lombard Str., London, (Post
Paid), will be duly regarded.'

In like manner, merchants residing in Holland, Hamburg, and
other parts of Europe retained the services of factors, through
whom they made large purchases in the markets of the West
Riding. Concerning factors Defoe remarks that they ' are not
only many in number, but some are very considerable in their
dealings, and correspond with the farthest provinces in Germany',1
and he gives an instance of a factor who purchased kerseys in
Halifax market to the extent of £60,000 annually, all of which
cloths were then dispatched to the middleman's patrons residing
in Holland and Hamburg.2

Such a man was Joseph Holroyd, of Soyland.:J He was

a factor engaged in purchasing cloths for English and foreign

clients. Amongst his customers were a few London merchants,

but the greater part of his trade was with Dutchmen, resident

in Rotterdam and Amsterdam, e.g. John d'Orville, Livinus de

Dorpere, Ludovicus de Wulf, Peter Deynoote, Hermanus Struys,

and others. He kept these men well informed as to the state of

the market, sending a list of current prices every fortnight or

three weeks, and in 1706 he paid a visit to Holland, strengthening

his position with old patrons, and seeking new ones. From them

he received standing instructions to purchase a certain number

of cloths annually, or obtained isolated orders from time to

time. He then purchased the necessary pieces from the clothiers

of the 1 lalifax area, dispatched them to his masters, and received

for his services a commission, generally amounting to 1 .1 per cent.

The financial arrangements were carried on through the medium

of bills of exchange, and in the course of a year Holroyd seems

to have had a turnover of at least £30,000. Acting as middleman

was no easy task, and Holroyd often found himself between two

1 I )efoe, op. cit. (1748 edition), iii. 120. - [bid. (1724 edition), iii. 10O.

:1 Sec Letter Hooks of Joseph Holroyd and Sam Hill, edited by the present
writer (Halifax, 1914), passim.

xi CLOTH HALLS 385

millstones. On the one hand the patron fixed a maximum
price, and ordered the factor to pay no more than say 305. for
a certain kind of kersey. On the other hand the clothiers had
their minimum price of say 325. for the same type of cloth, and
firmly refused to pass below .that figure. Holroyd therefore
frequently found himself in a dilemma, and when he ventured
to exceed the maximum allowed by his master he called on his
head the most scathing vituperation. Nor was this the only
kind of difficulty. Cloths were often delayed by bad weather,
which prevented the pieces, hung on the tenters, from drying,
and so many cloths were still unready long after the invoice
had been dispatched and the ships had sailed. Further, shipping
at the beginning of the eighteenth century was still unsafe,
unless accompanied by a convoy, and even the presence of pro-
tecting vessels did not safeguard the cloth ships from stormy
seas in winter. Shipping was therefore still limited ; it was
unwise to go without a convoy, and it was courting disaster to
set sail in winter time. During the winter months the market
was asleep, and the factor had to be content with laying in
a store of cloths ready for the spring sailings. But in spite of
these difficulties the factor was an indispensable part of the
commercial machine, and this class of middlemen became both
numerous and wealthy during the century.

These were the men who made the swift bargains with the
clothiers in the halls. When the purchaser decided to take
a cloth, he agreed to a. price based on a hasty examination of
the quality of the piece and determined by the length and breadth
as stated on the leaden seal fixed to the end of the cloth. The
clothier then carried his fabric to the merchant's home or ware-
house, where it was carefully measured and examined, deductions
being mack' for any deficiency in length or flaw in quality.
Then the clothier received the whole or a part of the revised
price ; if he did not obtain the full amount, he took a bill of
credit, but the smaller clothiers preferred the cash payment, as
they could not afford to build up a store of credit notes.1 If
the clothier had two pieces for sale, he brought one to the hall,
and usually the merchant who purchased this one sent him to
fetch t he second.

1 Defoe, op. cit., iii. 1 10 ; also Reports, iScr, vi. 4cSo.

1526.12 c c

386 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

The cloth hall system of marketing cloth was especially suit-
able for an industry carried on by a host of small manufacturers.
So long as the makers of cloth were many, and their individual
output small, it was highly desirable in the interests of clothier
and merchant alike that a public market of this type should be
organized, so that exchange could take place regularly and
frequently, with the maximum of advantage to both sides.
Therefore, so long as the small clothier survived, so long did the
cloth halls continue to offer him a ground on which to meet the
merchant or factor. But during the eighteenth century other/
methods of exchange were growing up which destroyed the!
need for a public market, and eventually superseded the cloth
halls.

In the first place, there came to be more working to order. v
A merchant or factor desired a number of cloths of a certain
quality and size. He would give his specifications to some
clothier, who then set to work to produce the required number
of cloths according to the data supplied by the purchaser. Or,
on the other hand, the clothier brought one cloth to the market ;
it attracted the attention of some merchant, who purchased it,
and gave an order for more cloths of the same kind. These
subsequent pieces never came into the market, and eventually
the clothier would be so busily employed in working to order
that he had no further need of the cloth market. In the worsted
industry an enormous amount of trade was carried on directly v
and privately between merchants and clothiers. The manu-
facturer was generally a large producer, and could take up big
orders. Thus the London merchants frequently advertised in
the Yorkshire papers for worsted manufacturers who were willing
and able to supply them direct with regular stocks of worsted
goods, or for agents who would get together these supplies for
them. Witness the two following advertisements, which are
typical descriptions of the arrangements by which the halls
were being superseded.

{Leedes Intelligencer, Nov. 12, 1782). ' Tammies, Shalloons,
and Callimaneoes. Wanted a quantity of the above goods to
be delivered in London weekly. — Any person capable of supply-
ing the Same, whether as agent or manufacturer, on the most
moderate terms should write to J. B., London Bridge Coffee
House.'

xi CLOTH HALLS .587

(Same issue). * Wanted to settle a Correspondence in the
North of England with a person of repute, capable of supplying
with a quantity of Shalloons and Tammies and other articles,
in the Grease, weekly or monthly, on the most moderate Terms.
As the person addressing this wants a considerable quantity of
these articles, he wishes that none but responsible characters
will apply. [Address London].

' N.B. The Advertiser has no objection to treat with a Person
as Agent.'

In these two advertisements we see the nature of the tendency
which had become more and more marked during the eighteenth
century, namely the desire on the part of the absentee mer-
chants to make sure of a large and steady supply of the kind
of goods which they required. If possible, that supply was to
be obtained direct from the purchaser, and in the worsted
industry the predominance of large manufacturers made this
direct connexion between producer and merchant possible. In
the woollen industry, with its multitude of small masters, the
merchant could not trouble to enter into contracts with a great
number of small manufacturers, so he left that work to the
factor ; the latter, being in the industrial field, could make the
necessary agreements, and get together his large supplies for
the merchant by giving orders to the small clothiers around him.

That these methods were being practised long before the
introduction of the factory system is seen clearly in the letters
of Holroyd and Hill. Holroyd, as a factor, was buying many
cloths in Halifax market in 1706. But he also secured great
quantities of wares which had never been near the Cloth Hall.
He used to call on the clothiers in their houses or workshops,
and there bought pieces which they had ready, or gave them
orders to make a certain number of cloths for him according to
some definite specifications, and tor some fixed price. From His
correspondence we gather the impression that t his private buving
was more important than his purchasing in the market. Sam
Mill was a clothier, actually engaged in the manufacture of
kerseys, bays, and shalloons, and working on a fairly large
scale. The greater part of his wares were made in accordance
with the orders of his patrons, merchants of London and I lolland.
From these men he received isolated demands, or was com-
missioned to send a certain number of pieces each month or

C c 1

388 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

each year. In one of his letters he states that most gentlemen
he serves have agreed to take a certain quantity each year,
and fix the months in which they require them, or the number
they require each month ; in another epistle he .says to one of
his best foreign customers, ' I shall, be very glad [to know] what
Kerseys you think you'll want this Year, yl I may forbeare
engageing too far, and leave myself able to serve you with what
you want '.1 The price at which the cloths were sold when
ready varied according to the prevailing market rate, and so
merchants received their goods at market price, without having
to go into the market to secure them. Hill had connexions
with a great number of merchants, and was so well supplied
with orders at the time the letters were written that he had no
time to spare to supply new customers, much less place any
cloths on the public market. In his experiments in worsted-
making he solicited his patrons to take a few of his shalloons
and try to dispose of them ; but this branch of his work was
small compared with the amount of woollen cloths which he
made to order.

The clothiers with whom Holroyd dealt were on the whole
a sturdy set of fellows, who retained much of their independence
in the face of the encroachment of the factor and the system of
working to order. In 1706 the public market was still the great
centre of exchange, and the producers were largely free from the
thraldom of the mercantile class. Thirty years later Hill's
strength of character enabled him to stand erect and independent,
in spite of the fact that he was the servant of a number of
merchants. But in the rise of these new methods of marketing
there was a possibility that the merchants would gain control
over the manufacturers and the latter become in name and in
fact the servants of the wholesale dealers. This possibility
became a reality before the end of the century, when many
merchants gained absolute control over production by becoming
manufacturers themselves. Merchant and maker became united
in the same person, the gulf was bridged, and the wholesale
seller of cloths began to employ weavers and spinners to manu-
facture his pieces. This development was probably most marked
in the worsted industry, where a man would employ wool-
1 See Letter Books of Joseph Holroyd and Sam Hill, nos. 1 10 and 1 13.

xi CLOTH HALLS 389

combers, spinners, and weavers, and sell the yarn or the pieces
himself. In the woollen industry the absorption was slower, y
and did not become a predominant feature of industrial organiza-
tion until after the Industrial Revolution. But in the years
from 1790 onwards there were constant complaints from the
domestic clothiers that the merchants were becoming manu-
facturers, and so were ruining the small independent men.1 In
1794 a Bill was submitted to the House of Commons, to give
the Cloth Hall trustees power to make by-laws with a view to
preventing this trespass on the part of the merchants. The Bill
was dropped,2 and the merchants gradually gained a firmer hold
on the industry. The large woollen merchant who lived in
Yorkshire was by this time a strange mixture. He had looms
in his own establishment, and employed other weavers who
worked in their own homes ; he gave orders to independent
clothiers to make cloth for him according to specification ; at
the same time he visited the cloth halls, and bought in the open
market. Thus he drew his pieces from three sources of supply,
and whilst he could not yet afford to dispense with the cloth
market, he was obtaining an increasing proportion of his wares
through private channels.3

The inevitable consequences of these developments were not
fully apparent until well into the nineteenth century, though even
before 1820 there was a diminution in the number of stand- /
holders in the cloth halls, and many stalls were vacant. So
much was this the case that, when in 1818 the Leeds Corporation
sought to acquire the White Cloth Hall to serve as a cattle
market, the trustees of that hall gave the suggestion very
serious consideration. They were willing to abandon the build-
ing, provided the white clothiers could be given accommodation
in tlu- Mixed Cloth Hall. The trustees of the latter market were
approached, and offered 900 stands, but on such exorbitant
terms that the negotiations were abandoned. During the next
thirty years the importance of the halls steadily declined.
True, clothiers still came there with their wares, but these men
were gi;ints compared with tin- 3,000 men who had found

1 Reports, oSoO.iii. \(i. - House of Commons Journals, xlix. 27 5 e"t scq.

:1 p.f,e Mr. I. Atkinson, of Huddersticld, merchant (lie ports, iSoO, iii. 220).
For tin- story of the decline of the Leeds White (loth Hall, see Thoresby
Soc. publications, im ; ; article on White Cloth Hall, by present writer.

390 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

a market there in the palmy days of the eighteenth century.
The Coloured Cloth Hall contained its 2,526 stalls, which were
held by only 680 persons, who possessed any number from two '
up to forty, and were in many cases quite large manufacturers.
The White Cloth Hall had changed in character, by reason of
the growing practice of making dyed in place of white cloths,
and more coloured fabrics were sold there than whites. In
1848 some of its 1,237 stands were unoccupied, and the rest
were registered in the names of 456 owners. Of these, 256 no
longer frequented the market, and many clothiers owned as
many as 20 or 25 stands. A stall could now be purchased for
less than 10.?., and when any stands were put up for sale by
auction, because of the arrears of the owner, they seldom brought
in more than 55. or 6s.

By the middle of the century the growth of warehouses and
the other changes in the methods of marketing cloth were
cutting the ground from under the feet of the cloth halls. Still
the halls survived, and a few merchants and manufacturers were
to be found there on market days. The White Cloth Hall,
standing in the Calls, presented a barrier to the extension of the
North I^astcrn Railway into the heart of Leeds, and in 1868
the railway company was obliged to build a new hall before it
could demolish part of the old establishment. The new building,
erected in King Street at a cost of about £20,000, was never
fully occupied, and before 1890 the cloth market there had J
lapsed. The building occupied a valuable site in the business
heart of the town, and in 1896 therefore the whole concern was *'
wound up. In that year purchasers were found for the estate,
and the trustees received a cheque for £40,000. After providing
an annuity for the hall-keeper, the money was shared out to all
stall-holders, and worked out at about £30 per stall, a figure
eminently satisfactory to those who had purchased the same
for a few shillings. The building was demolished shortly after-
wards, and a palatial hotel now occupies the site. The old hall
of 1775, however, still survives, behind the Corn Exchange —
a broken relic, low, squat, and dirty, with the cupola still aloft
over what was once the gateway. The railway ploughs through
the middle, and the building is divided up into warehouses, in
which are kepi all manner of commodities — except cloth. Few

xi CLOTH HALLS 391

people who pass that way are aware that this grimy building
was once the scene of great activity and vast exchange, and
only by the name of the street do we realize that here was
formerly one of the two great valves by which the produce of
the West Riding was passed through the arteries of commerce
of the world.

The fate of the Coloured Cloth Hall was even more complete,
for the whole of the old building was swept away, and no vestige
remains. The hall bulged out into what is now City Square,
and the meeting of many ways at that point caused chronie
congestion of traffic. In the 'eighties many complaints were
made concerning the thoroughfare at this point, and the Yorkshire
Post echoed the opinion of many when, in 1888, it declared that
Leeds was ' choked in its very centre by a congestion of un-
sightly buildings which would not have been tolerated for
a year in boroughs of tar less pretensions '. The municipal
authorities wished to acquire part of the site, in order to effect
street improvements, whilst the postal authorities were in search
of a piece of land on which they could erect the Central Post
Office. From 1870 onwards, therefore, the Corporation made
several attempts to purchase the whole Cloth Hall estate. For
a time they encountered opposition from those who still used
the market, and who thought that the closing of the hall would
be ' a taking and destruction of their property, which would
be a hurt to trade, and a most unnecessary and unjust inter-
ference with their property, rights, and interests '. Gradually
the trustees adopted a more conciliatory attitude, and were
willing to get rid oi an institution which had ceased to have any
commercial importance. In 1885 the ' Leeds Coloured Cloth
Hall Art ' gave the trustees power to sell the site and buildings,
and negotiations were opened with tin' Corporation. These
proceedings were impeded by the question ol the price to be
paid by the borough. Eventually terms were arranged, and on
April 1, 1889, the representatives of both parties met, and the '■
necessary documents were signed. For the sum of £66,000 the
Corporation received about two acres oi land and the whole of
the buildings, with absolute power to treat the property as it
thought best. After the transaction of this business, and after
the Town Clerk had handed over the cheque for £66,000, the

392 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

trustees entertained the Corporation to luncheon, at which the
chairman of the trustees handed round copies of a black-edged
card, inscribed as follows :

In Memoriam.

Mixed Cloth Hall,

Better Known as the

Coloured Cloth Hall, Leeds.

Erected 1758. Fatum exitus 1889.

That was almost the end of the story. The money received
was divided between the stall-holders and the reversioners, heirs
of Richard Wilson, who had sold the land in 1756. Evidently
the reversioners claimed the lion's share of the spoils, for the
clothiers received only £4 155. for each stand they owned, which
cannot explain the destination of more than £12,000 out of the
£66,000. As to the building, the Corporation began to demolish
it at once, in order to make the necessary road improvements ;
part of the estate was then handed over to the Postmaster-
General, and on it the present Central Post Office was erected.1

We have wandered far away from the eighteenth century and
its methods of marketing ; but the story of these cloth halls is
interesting, and it seemed desirable to devote a few words to
the decline of the public markets. We must now get back to
our proper period, and pick up the thread where we dropped it,
with the cloth delivered by its maker at the house of the mer-
chant or factor.

The piece had now to be finished, and, in the case of white
cloths, to be dyed. There had been a great improvement in
the art of cloth-finishing since the days of Cockayne's experi-
ment. The sojourn of Englishmen in Holland and the- immigra-
tion of Dutch workers and merchants to England did something
to raise the standard of English dyeing ; London and Coventry-
became noted as dyeing and finishing centres, and ' Coventry
true blue ' was soon a classic amongst colours. In the north,
improvement was equally rapid. In 1678-9 Thoresby went to

1 For many facts concerning the later history of the Coloured Cloth Hall
the writer is indebted to Mr. Milner, solicitor, Albion Street, Leeds, who
kindly placed at his disposal a number of documents concerning the winding
up of the hall. The various deeds of transfer are in the possession of the
Corporation, but there is reason to fear that the minute books, accounts,
and all the other valuable papers which must have accumulated in the course
of over a century have been destroyed. See also Leeds Newspapers, 18S9—90.

xi CLOTH HALLS 393

Holland to learn the art of fulling, dyeing, and finishing of cloth,
as practised there,1 and this trip was part of the recognized
scheme of training. During the eighteenth century, therefore,
the finishing of cloths at home was a general feature of the trade,
and few pieces went abroad to receive their final treatment.
Within Leeds itself, and also scattered up and down the county,
establishments were to be found at work, dyeing, preparing
dyeing materials, raising the nap on cloth, shearing, dressing,
and performing all the processes necessary for the completion
of the perfect piece. These finishing mills might be the property
of some independent master who was neither clothier nor mer-
chant, and who performed the work for merchants, receiving
a fixed rate per piece ; but it was now a very common arrange-
ment for merchants to possess their own finishing establish-
ments, and so free themselves from dependence on another man.

The processes of finishing were primitive and the results far
from superfine. Approximation to the required colour in dyeing
seems to have been all that could be obtained, and any new tint
was discovered rather by accident than as a result of scientific
research. The nap was raised by means of teazles, and then the
shearing, which was done in order to remove the inequalities of
the nap surface, was performed with hand-shears, which were
generally large, heavy, and cumbrous. The piece was then
again tcntered to its final dimensions and left to dry.

A piece of cloth stretched on its tenter frame was a great
temptation to those persons whose honesty was not above
suspicion, and clothiers and finishers were much disquieted in
consequence of the ease with which cloth could be stolen whilst
left out in the open. A newspaper letter dated November 28,
1774, complains of 'the frequent and almost daily robberies
committed in this parish [Halifax], and that stealing pieces
from the tenters is almost daily practised, by which the persons
[employed] in that necessary branch of business are greatly
distressed. . . . They cannot take off their goods every night
without doing them visible damage, and so are forced either to
watch them all night in the cold, or run the dreadful hazard of
losing in a single hour the profits of the labours of many months '.'*

1 Thoresby's Diary, July 4. 1078, and onwards.

- Ixtpotts, iSoO, 111, p. <>. ;! Leeds Mercury, November 28, 1774.

394 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

The danger was not confined to the bleak uplands around
Halifax ; witness the following notices from the Leedes Intelli-
gencer .

December 31, 1754 : ' In the night betwixt the 26th and the
27th, five yards of cloth were cut off the tenters of Mr. John
Darnton, dresser to Sir Henry Ibbetson, Bart.'

January 7, 1755 : ' Last Saturday night two yards of cloth
were cut from the tenters of Robert Wainman, dresser to Mr.
Blaydcs.'

January 7, 1755 : ' In the night of the 1st instant, five yards
of colou'd cloth were cut off the tenters of Joseph Tate, dresser
to Mr. Bischoff.'

And so throughout the century, especially during winter
and times of bad trade, the purloining of cloth went on. The
writer of the letter quoted above may have meant that whole
pieces were spirited away, but the risk attendant upon such
a proceeding would be very great, and in the towns the prowler
was evidently content with his four or five yards, which could
be easily carried away and hidden. The offence was one of
respectable antiquity, and early Halifax offenders received
summary treatment. Here the cloth-stealer, along with other
kinds of thieves, was a common figure in the sixteenth century,
and it was the custom to condemn any one convicted of this v
offence to be put to death at once by being guillotined. The
framework for this instrument of death stood on a large square
stone, which was recently unearthed ; the axe-head was released
by pulling out a wedge or catch, and fell down a groove in
a manner so well known to the French at a later day. This
custom of beheading thieves had survived in Halifax alone, long y
after it had fallen into disuse in other parts of the country. Up
to the middle of the seventeenth century the Gibbet Law was
no mere dead letter, the machine no antique ornament; the
names of men and women alike appear in the list of victims,
and this practice earned for Halifax a place of honour in the
Beggars' Litany.

From Hell, Hull, and Halifax,
Good Lord, deliver us ! '

1 For a discussion of the legal and other aspects of the Halifax Gibbet,
sec the article on that subject by Mr. J. Lister, in Ling Roth, Yorkshire
Coiners. Also any history of Halifax.

xi CLOTH HALLS 395

This grim method of upholding the eighth commandment was
not generally adopted, and was abandoned in Halifax after
about 1650, cloth thieves being punished like other culprits by 7
imprisonment or transportation. In 1742 legislation made
a special effort to eradicate the evil. In an Act passed in this
year it was pointed out that ' clothiers and others concerned
in the woollen manufacture are under a necessity of letting
their cloth or other woollen goods remain upon the rack or
tenters, as also of suffering their wool to lie exposed in the night
time, in order the better to dry and prepare the same ; whereby
their said goods are more frequently liable to be stolen by wicked
and evil-designing persons who are encouraged in their wicked-
ness by the difficulty of proving the identity of the goods
stolen V The statute therefore gave clothiers power to enlist
the services of the justices of the peace in the search for stolen
wares. The magistrates were to grant power to search the
premises of any suspected person, and if the search revealed
the existence of any fabrics for which the suspect could not
give a satisfactory explanation, the culprit was liable to a term
of imprisonment for the first two offences, and transportation
on the third conviction. Here was another of those many Acts
which make little difference to the world they wish to reform.
The Act was drawn up, but no machinery was provided to
enforce; its clauses with any stringency. The whole of Leeds
was guarded by ten constables ; 2 there was practically no
lighting, and a general deadly stillness brooded over the tenter-
close by night. We fail entirely to realize the thick darkness
and loneliness of an eighteenth-century town ; the marvellous
feature is not that any one should have escaped, but that any
should be caught. It was such an easy task stealing in those
days : such a difficult task trying to prevent it, or detect the
thief.

At last the cloth was ready for dispatch. It was handed over
to the merchants or factors who were to take it to other parts
of Kngland, or was given into the hands of the carriers and
shippers, who would convey it to its destination at home or
abroad. And so the material takes to the road once more, alter
the main" peregrinations in its progress from raw wool to finished
1 1 ; (I,,, II, t- .•,-. ' Directory of I.o-ds, 1707.

396 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

cloth. In sketching these numerous wanderings we have had
no time to stay and consider the nature of the. roads or water-
ways along which the wool and cloth were carried. Let us there-
fore conclude this chapter with a short survey of the condition
of the means of communication in Yorkshire during the eigh-
teenth century. In an economic organization such as we have
been studying, it is difficult to over-estimate the importance of
the means of communication. On their excellence depends the
quick and easy transit of materials, raw or finished, from place
to place ; by their unkempt condition, every aspect of industry
is 'sore let and hindered'. A bad main road or a shallow rapid
river may be as effectual a check to the transfer of produce as
the strictest legal prohibition, or the most rigorous system of
police.

All records 1 contribute to prove that the roads of the north
country had, in the early part of the eighteenth century, plumbed
the uttermost depths of disrepair. Tudor legislation, with its
demand for statute labour on the highways, had been almost
ineffective, and such work as was done upon the roads was of
a perfunctory character, leaving the last state as bad as the
first. Thus, in spite of the constant efforts of the local justices,
the roads of England in 1700 were nearly all bad. Thoresby's
Diary is illuminating on this topic. Now he loses his way between
Doncaster and York ; 2 at another time the roads are impassable
by reason of the floods, and he is compelled to ride across fields
with the water up to his saddle skirts ; 3 again he finds the
northern roads a frozen quagmire, ' full of snow, and which was
worse, on a continuous ice almost, the melted snow being frozen
again, that made .it dangerous and very troublesome, so that
I was more fatigued with this last twenty miles than with all
the journey besides.''1 Defoe bears out these statements in
his remarks on many Yorkshire highways, e. g. ' the roads to
Halifax used to be very bad, and except at the west end, almost
inaccessible '.5

From about 1727 onwards came the turnpike era, and some

1 The records of the J.P.'s for the West and North Riding are full of orders
concerning the repair of roads. For the whole history of roads during modern
times see S. and B. Webb, The Story of the King's Highway (1013).

2 Thoresby, Diary, August 5, 1712. :l Ibid., May 17, 1605.

4 Ibid., February 17, 1709. •'• Defoe, op. cit., 1702 edition, iii. 143.

xi CLOTH HALLS 397

of the highways were taken in hand by the turnpike trusts. But
the general improvement was very slight, even on the main
thoroughfares, whilst the parish roads remained in their ' state
of nature \l The most entertaining pages of Arthur Young
are those in which he hurls his fierce indictments against the
northern highways. Perhaps he exaggerated at times, and his
attacks on backward rural economy inspired a similar tirade
against the roads of these counties. But his general statements
are borne out by other writers, and make one wonder how travel
of any kind was possible. Young speaks of roads which are
' execrably bad ', ' very stony and full of holes ' ; the highway
through Wakefield was so bad ' that it ought to be indicted ',
and the main road between Wakefield and Leeds was ' stony
.tnd ill-made ', in spite of the fact that it was a turnpike. The
road to Askrig was ' only fit for a goat to travel ', and the way
to Darlington was along a track 'sufficient to dislocate one's
bones '.

On the other hand, some roads were just as good. All in the
Vale of York and in the Last Riding attained the standard of
' excellent ', whilst on the estates of the more progressive
gentleman-farmers an almost perfect network of roads was to
be found. But, on the whole, the verdict was bad. Later
writers 4 support this general contention, and from a survey
of the whole evidence we obtain a vivid picture of the chief
faults which were to be found on most of the land routes.
Firstly, there was a lack of definition about the less frequented
roads. Many went over commons or through wooded districts,
and there were few hedges or fences to mark out the bounds of
the highway. The number of confusing cross-roads was legion,
and there was scarcely any provision of finger-posts or mile-
stones until about the middle of the eighteenth century. Hence
we have Thoresby losing himself in his own county ; 5 we have
a road from Pickering to Whitby on which no traveller dared
to venture without a guide ; 6 we hear of people lost on the
Pennines, not knowing which cart track was His Majesty's

1 Bigland, op. cit., p. 320. - Young, Northern Tour, i. 132.

:i See Young's section on Roads, in Northern Tour, iv. 574-7.
1 Other observers who make remarks on the Yorkshire roads are Marshall
(17NS), Housman (1800), Daves (1805), Cooke (1812), Bigland (1812).
"' Thoresby, Diarv, August 3, 17 12. 6 Bigland, op. cit., p. $zd.

398 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

highway ; * and it is recorded that he was thought a wise man
who could find his way through the Forest of Knaresborough
without expert assistance. The road itself was generally narrow.
If it ran through wooded regions, hedges or trees hung over both
sides, not only shutting out the light but interfering directly
with the progress of travellers, especially those on horseback.2
The road surface might be either concave or convex, according
to the amount and nature of the repairs which it received. In
the former case, water stood in pools during the wet seasons,
froze in winter, and perpetuated a quagmire during the greater
part of the year. When material had been piled on to the
middle of the road, all traffic, heavy or light, stuck to this
central elevation, making wheel ruts and horse paths, from
which no one cared to stray for fear of toppling over into the
ditches.3

Much of the inefficiency of the roads was due to the manner
in which they were repaired. No one as yet knew the art of
road-making, and there was a general ignorance as to the best
methods of preparing and maintaining a durable road surface.
The use of ' metal ' was still unknown, and any material which
happened to be at hand was used, regardless of its suitability.
Marshall4 and Cooke5 complain of the practice in vogue in
parts of the East Riding of spreading gravel over soft clay soil,
which became hard and firm when dry, but in winter sank into
the mire, and only accentuated the heaviness of the path.
They also remark on the use of earth,6 obtained from the ditches ;
such a mad practice could have only one result, in adding
to the quantity of mud through which the traveller had to
wade. In the West Riding freestone7 was used, being near at
hand and cheap ; but this stone quickly broke up under the
pressure of the constant traffic on the arterial roads, and became
little better than mud and sand. The roads about Sheffield
were re-surfaced by using the cinders and refuse from the
forges.8

1 Housman, op. (it., pp. 138-40.

'- Marshall, Rural Economy of Yorkshire, i. 192.

:i Whitaker, Loidis and Elmctc, i. 186-7. 4 Marshall, op. cit., i. 180-1.

5 Cooke, Topogr. Description of Yorkshire (1812), p. 89.

" Marshall, op. cit., i. 186. "• Housman, op. at., p. 140.

H Daycs, op. cit., p. 18.

xi CLOTH HALLS .599

One redeeming feature was to be found on some roads in the
provision of a eauseway or flagged footpatli down the middle or
side of the road. These ' causeys ' were used alike by pedestrians
and horse traffic, ' a praetice only to be excused by the peculiar
badness of the main road '-1 Along them came the string of
pack-horses, the merchant on his way from place to place, and
the clothier carrying his raw materials or pieces. The paths
were often rough and broken." The heavy use to which they
were put rendered them irregular in surface : there were frequent
breaks in the causeway, and from the slipperiness of the stones
in winter and the irregularity of the surface there was often
as much danger to the night traveller as upon the road itself.

Another saving grace enjoyed by Yorkshire was its supply
of bridges. Defoe constantly refers to the abundance of large
stone bridges at Ilarewood, Ripon, Doncaster, Sheffield, and
elsewhere.'1 Between these great erections and the narrow
single-arched pack-horse bridges came every variety of pro-
vision for crossing the numerous streams. Stone was cheap in
the West Riding, and so the supply of bridges was at least
equal to that in any other part of the kingdom.

Up to the time of the turnpikes the roads were repaired by
statute labour, the inhabitants of each neighbourhood working
a certain number of days yearly on the roads under the super-
vision of the surveyor of the highways. This system, which
looked excellent on paper, seems in practice to have been a com-
plete failure. The labour was evaded as much as possible, or
done in a most perfunctory manner, leaving the road scarcely
.my better for the treatment.

With the growt h of the turnpike movement there was a gradual
though slow improvement in the means of land transit. From
about 1740 onwards Turnpike Acts showered on Yorkshire, and
by 1760 that network of roads, so well known to motorists and
cyclists to-day, had been woven. The early efforts, however,
did not remove the grievances of which travellers complained,
and supplementary Acts had to confess in their preambles
that the turnpikes already established were 'still in a ruinous

1 Housnian, <>/). fit., p. 14, and Cooke, ><p>. cit., p. (tz.

- Sec Xnrth Riding Scss. Rcc, vols, vii-ix, passim. Also Housnian, <>/>. cit.,
p. i'-,,.

:; Defoe, ->/>. cit., iii. 122, and passim. At Ripon there was a bridge with
seven arches.

400 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

condition, very dangerous to passengers, and in the winter season
almost impassable '-1 Young's wrath was often aroused against
the main turnpikes, whilst Bigland and other writers of the
early nineteenth century lamented the wretched surface con-
ditions which still existed on most of the popular highways.
The reasons are not difficult to find. The turnpikes were in
the hands of large bodies of trustees, including lords, gentry,
clergy, merchants, &c, men from almost every walk of life.
These men were not paid for their services, and could not be
expected to give full, serious, or expert attention to the welfare
of the road. Their interest was only general, and their atten-
dance at meetings so casual that nine was the quorum usually
fixed by the Acts as being necessary for the transaction of
business. Such a loose central body was of little value, and
much of the real work must have been left to the surveyors
and toll-collectors. But these men were often quite ignorant
of the best principles of road-making ; they had no thorough
plan for constructing a good permanent way, and, even if they
had, there was no supply of proper material available. The
surveyor had no guiding principles to direct him in his work.
He had no notion of winding a road up a hill, but confronted
the summit, and attempted to go straight over the crest rather
than round it.2 Further, the lack of suitable material was
a great impediment, and the surveyor therefore used such stone
as was nearest to hand, regardless of its qualities for road
surface purposes. It required a Blind Jaek of Knaresborough,
a Telford, or a Macadam to reveal the economy of getting good
material, even though the expense might seem to transgress the
bounds of common sense. Hence it was not until the nineteenth
century that the revolution in highway communication became
at all complete, and this was just at a time when improvements
in the steam engine were making the railway an accomplished
fact.

Along roads such as we have seen above, progress was neces-
sarily slow, and means of transit were primitive. Wagons were
seldom used in the hilly districts,3 and in the Vale of York

1 e.g. 24 (ico. II, c. 22, Act for improving Sclby to Leeds road.

- ' The engineers of those days used a corkscrew oft enough, but they had
not learnt a lesson in roadmakin^ from it ' (Sykes, Huddersfield and its
Vicinity, p. z()2). 3 Young, op. cit., ii. 113.

xi CLOTH HALLS 401

and the agricultural areas haulage was done largely by oxen,
which were more sure-footed than horses on the muddy roads
and slippery hill-slopes.1 For heavy and more extended transit,
however, the horse was the favourite animal, and it was largely
by means of the horse alone that land carriage was effected in
the clothing areas, until improvements made possible the use
of carts, wagons, coaches, and other wheeled vehicles. The
string of pack-horses was to be seen on every road : they were
the carriers of raw material, finished goods, food-stuffs, books,
letters, and even passengers. The goods were packed up in
hampers or bags, which were slung across the backs of the
horses ; letters and travellers were handed over into the custody
of the carriers, and away went the long procession over the rough
road to its many destinations. These beasts of burden did not
need a well-paved broad highway ; the mere country lane or
narrow bridle path sufficed. If there should be a ' causey ',
the horses stuck tenaciously to it, and many a dogged encounter
took place when two such packs met. The horses could cross
fords, and make use of the frail pack-horse bridges which would
instantly have collapsed under the weight of a cart or wagon.
The first horse carried a bell attached to its collar, the tinkling
of which was of no small value on dark nights. In every town
was the ' Pack Horse Inn ', with extensive stables in which the
horses were housed when night came down.2 All sizes of con-
tingents, from the large pack of thirty or forty horses to the
solitary steed of the small manufacturer, were to be seen moving
to and from market, laden with produce or with the food for
future labour. % In winter ', says Whitaker, ' the distant markets
never ceased to be frequented. On horseback, before daybreak
and long after nightfall, the hardy sons of trade pursued their
object with the spirit and intrepidity ot a fox-chase, and the
boldest ol their country neighbours had no reason to despise
their horsemanship or their courage. Sloughs, darkness, and
broken causeways certainly presented a field of action no less
perilous than hedges and five-barred gates.' :i

Nor were the sloughs and broken causeways or the over-

1 Ibid.. 1. 163, and Marshall, op. cit., i. 2(>o et seq.

* One urn at Huddersfield had accommodation for 100 horses (Sykes, p. -47).

3 Whitaker, op. cit., p. Si.

1526.12 d d

402 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND chap.

flowing river the only dangers. To the ne'er-do-well, or the
man who was ' down on his luck ', there was something terribly-
tempting in the thought of the dark night, the lonely road, and
the solitary traveller returning from market with his money in
his pocket, or his ' £1,000 of cloth ' on the backs of his horses.
The eighteenth-century newspapers are therefore full of accounts
of highway robberies, in which unfortunate clothiers or mer-
chants were compelled to stand and deliver.1 Woe betide the
man who made attempt at resistance ; there was short shrift
for him, and many entries bear witness to the revolting cruelty
with which the sword was used, the pistol fired, and the hapless
traveller left a mangled wreck by the wayside. Few men,
therefore, set out on a journey unprepared for what the fate of
the road and the fortune of night might bring their way.

Whilst land transit was bad up to about 1775 or 1800, internal
water communication was little better. In their natural con-
dition, the many rivers which flowed through the clothing area
were of little use. The upper waters were generally too shallow
or rapid ; their banks had not been strengthened, and every
severe storm or prolonged rain brought extensive floods, which
washed away bridges and spread ruin and disaster over the
adjacent lands.2 On the lower levels the streams wound along
with serpentine grace ; the course was shallow, and the water
choked with weeds, stones, or overhanging trees, with small
waterfalls and weirs occurring in places. Navigation along such
streams was impossible except with small craft and for short
distances, and any really extensive use of the rivers could only
be made by drastic removal of these impediments.

The canal did not appear in Yorkshire until about 1770, but
during the reign of William III steps were taken to render the ,y
Aire and Calder navigable.3 The improvement of the facilities
afforded by these two streams brought about a large increase

1 e.g. Leedes Intelligencer, November 12, 1754 : ' On Tuesday last, betwixt
the hours of 5 and 6, as one Craven, a cloth maker, who lives at Horbury,
was returning from Leedes Market, he was stopped on Rothwell Hague by
two men on horseback, one of which brandishing a sword before his lace and
demanding his money took from him 2 gns. in gold and is. (id. in silver.'

2 Snyth and West Riding Sess. Rcc, passim ; Bigland, op. cil., p. Si. Also
Mayhall for frequent accounts of floods.

3 Statute IO-II Will. Ill, c. 19, granted power to improve navigation of
these rivers.

xi CLOTH HALLS 403

in the amount of river traffic ; Wakefield and Leeds benefited
greatly, whilst the extension of the Calder navigation to Halifax
in 1740,1 and to Sowerby Bridge in 1758-60, brought that
important kersey-making area into water communication with
the sea.2 All this was a great asset to the textile industry.
The cost of carriage was reduced, coal, iron, and building
materials were obtained more cheaply and quickly ; wool,
logwood, and oil were brought up-stream ; an easy outlet was
afforded by which cloth, &c, could be sent down to Hull, and
thence to home and foreign markets. The increased facilities
for obtaining food supplies were no less valuable, and this led
to the establishment of large depots for food-stuffs, partly at
Leeds, but especially at Wakefield, which now became a still
more important market for wool, corn, coal, and all the various
commodities needed by the Riding.

Next came the canal era. As early as 1764 3 plans were being
drawn up for a scheme of canals in the county, and John Hustler
urged the need for a waterway which would link up the Irish
Sea and the Humber mouth. Meetings were held in 1766, 4 and
the scheme gradually matured. By 1770 all preliminaries had v
been settled, an Act of Parliament obtained,0 and the work of
excavation begun. Progress was fairly rapid at first, and by
1777 thirty-three miles, from Leeds to beyond Skipton, were
open for trade, whilst a similar length had been made on the
Lancashire side. But the cost had already exceeded £300,000,
whereas the estimated cost of the whole undertaking had been
only £260,000. Lack of funds and differences of opinion con-
cerning the route lor the remaining fifty miles caused a suspen-
sion of operations, but in 1790 work was resumed, and the canal
eventually completed in 1816, at a cost of nearly one and
a quarter millions.6

This waterway was the most important of the northern
canals. Bradford was linked up to it by a short canal opened

1 Defoe (later editions), iii. 122, 140.

- 31 Geo. II, c. 72. Destroyed l>v floods, but repaired in 1 7'n j.

3 The )'t>yk Courtint had taken up the idea in 1704. Also pamphlet written
by Hustler. See admirable article by Killick, on the ' Karly Historv of the
Leeds and Liverpool Canal ', in the Bradford Antiquary, vol. iii.

1 1. iiilcs Intelligencer, July 2, 17O6. '• 10 Geo. Ill, c. 114.

s Priestley, History of Inland Communication (1831), p. 424.

' Ibid., p. 42J.

D(l Z

404 MERCHANTS, MARKETS, AND CLOTH HALLS

in 1774,1 and three other waterways provided continuous
passage between Yorkshire and the counties west of the Pen-
nines.2 All these routes helped in the development of commerce
in the county, and assisted in the rapid expansion of the industry
during the subsequent half century. By 1830 Yorkshire manu-
facturers and merchants had at their disposal an admirable-
system of highways and waterways, but the next thirty years
were to witness the provision of a network of railways which
destroyed much of the commercial importance of road and
canal. This wealth of means of transit presents a marked con-
trast to the position of the clothier and merchant a century
previous. There is much to admire in the picture of these
eighteenth-century Yorkshiremen, toiling away amid all manner
of difficulties, fighting the storms and floundering in the mud.
That weekly journey of the clothier to market, or the regular
itinerary of the merchant, was no easy task, and these men
were ready to endure much and to risk much in the pursuit of
their trade.

1 Old History of Bradford (1776), pp. 13-14.

- These routes were (1) canal from Calder and Hebble Navigation over to
Rochdale ; (2) Trent and Mersey Canal ; (3) canal from Calder to Hudders-
field, thence over Pennines to Oldham, where a canal had been made to
Ashton and Manchester. The Pennine canal was made in 1794.

CHAPTER XII

THE STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN THE
EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

In chapters iv and vii we have seen the comparative failure
of all attempts to regulate effectively the cloth industry. Tudor
legislation, which fixed lengths, breadths, and weights, had been
of little avail to check frauds and deceits ; the ulnager had
disappeared in the early part of the eighteenth century ; finally,
the Stuart corporations had failed entirely to maintain high
standards of workmanship, and were either dead or in a state
of impotence by the accession of Anne.

These persistent failures did not dissuade the Government
from attempting once more to establish efficient machinery of
supervision, and the statute book of the eighteenth century is
loaded with legislation which aimed at producing a higher moral
tone in industrial life. Some of this legislation affected all parts
of the country, but the reputation of the Yorkshire industry
was as lamentable as its importance was great, and many acts
were passed during the first three quarters of the eighteenth
century to deal with the West Riding alone.

The Act of 1623 which had been operative throughout the
seventeenth century had fixed definite lengths, breadths, and
weights for various kinds of cloths. This legislation, reinforced
by the ordinances of companies and corporations, had survived
to some extent up to the end of the seventeenth century ; but
by that time it had become patent that the Stuart machinery
had broken down, and that new regulations must be made in
the light of changed conditions. Excessive tentering and stretch-
ing of cloth was still as common as ever, and the old maximum
legal sizes had long since been exceeded, so that, as Thoresby *
pointed out, the Northern Dozens might now be of any length
up to (>o yards. Some of this length was fictitious, being due
to the extent to which the cloth had been tentered ; there was
,1 lead tag on the end of each cloth stating the inllal ed dimensions
1 Thoresby, Ducatus, p. 7s.

406 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

of the piece, but when the merchant bought the cloth and took
it to be finished he found that it shrank when immersed in
water.

The complaints concerning these cloths grew very loud in
1708, when petitions were sent to the House of Commons, asking
for strong statutory interference.1 A Bill, backed by Thoresby 2
and many of the leading inhabitants of the Riding, was placed
before Parliament and rushed through all its stages, becoming
law in 1708, as ' an Act for the better ascertaining the lengths
and breadths of Woollen Cloths made in the County of York '.3
Briefly, this Act fixed minimum breadths and maximum lengths ;
broad cloths were to be at least 5! quarters in breadth, and
whole broad cloths not more than 46 yards in length. These
measurements were to be the limits of the cloth when it was
thoroughly wet and had therefore shrunk to its minimum size.
Hence the fuller, when he had the cloth immersed, was to measure
the piece, and stamp its dimensions on a seal of lead, which was
then riveted to the end of the fabric. He was to charge the
clothier a penny for this work and for the seal, and if any fuller
neglected to perform his duty he was liable to a fine of 20s.
Then, with the real minimum size of the cloth stated on the seal,
it would not be wise for the clothier to stretch it unduly, since
the merchant would be able to gauge the real value of the cloth
from the seal affixed by the fuller. But, lest any one should still
blindly persist in stretching more than 4 inches per yard of
breadth, or more than 1 yard in 20 yards of length, offenders
were declared to be liable to heavy fines, half of which went to
the informer and half to the poor of the parish in which the
culprit lived. One last clause is of interest. Parliament had
realized that it was of little use issuing legislation against
clothiers, if that legislation was to be administered by justices
of the peace who were themselves clothiers or men actually
interested in the trade. Therefore any indictments for the
infringement of this Act were to be brought only before justices
who were neither merchants nor makers of woollens.

This Act, with its demand that the fuller would stamp the

1 See Petition from Huddersfield, House of Commons' Journals, xvi. 142.
- Thoresby's Diary, January 1709.

:; 7 Anne, c. 13. This Act went through its Committee stage in one day,
without any amendment (Stowe i\ISS. 748, f. -<.>).

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 407

cloth, might have been effective had there been any adequate
provision to ensure that the fullers were really doing their duty.
But this was not the case ; the system of searching by officials
elected at the Quarter Sessions had fallen into abeyance, and,
whilst there was some attempt to enforce legislation in Leeds,
the fullers who were dotted up and down the country had little
to fear from the vigilance of searchers. Hence the fuller stamped
the cloth according to the wishes of the clothier, rather than in
accord with its true dimensions when in the water. The old
evils therefore continued, and in April 1723 the justices at the
Pontefract Quarter Sessions appointed a committee to inquire
into the frauds prevalent in the Riding.1 This committee,
which consisted of gentlemen, merchants, and clothiers, found
that the laws were defective, and therefore appealed to Parlia-
ment for more effective legislation to prevent such misdoings.
There was much opposition to such measures, on the ground
that all statutes of this type had been futile and useless and
that the Government ought not to attempt to interfere further
with the trade.2 In these inquiries before the justices and before
Parliament a quaint story was circulated, apparently for the
first time,3 and it so struck the imagination of those who heard
it that it passed into the ranks of the local legends, and was
reproduced as authentic on many subsequent occasions. The
story came from a merchant engaged in the trade with Russia,
who had supplied Yorkshire cloths to the Russian army. The
rough heavy fabrics in which he dealt were admirably suited to
military wear, and many Leeds clothiers and merchants were
engaged in supplying the needs of the Russian and other armies.
But the cloth was all more or less deceptive, excessively stretched,
and certain to shrink on its first encounter with water. It
appears that the Russian army had just obtained a new uniform,
and the whole of the troops, clad in these new garments made of
Yorkshire cloth, turned out one fine day to be reviewed by their
sovereign. Just as the regiments were lined up, ready for
inspection, the sky became cloudy and a short, sharp shower
of rain came down, wetting the new apparel. The effect was

1 Houxr of Commons' Journals, xx. 365.

- [hid., p. 423 ; also 240 ct sec).

1 A.M. MSS. 33344, f. 19 : ' The Case of the Yorkshire Clothiers ' (1730 ?1

4o8 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

almost instantaneous, for the foul Yorkshire eloth at once
shrank very considerably, so that the garments went all awry.
The sleeves became too short, and the pockets crept up towards
the men's arm-pits. This episode brought so much discredit
upon English fabrics that the Russian Government imposed
heavy duties on all further importations, and set to work to
manufacture its own pieces. The story was evidently raked up
again about 1760 ; 1 it was repeated in 1790, when one finds it
recited at great length, and with many embellishments for the
benefit of French readers, in the Monitear of July 1790. 2 It
seems to have appeared again in 1816, and is finally told in
a volume entitled Data and Postulates, published in 1852. Here
the narrative is admirably expanded, garnished, decorated with
great wealth of detail, and recounted with real literary exu-
berance.

But to return to the committee of 1723. The objections urged
against further legislation were overriden and a comprehensive
statute issued in 1725. This Act3 really attempted to establish
proper regulations, and also to set up machinery of supervision
to ensure that the Act was efficiently administered ; but it
concerned itself with broad cloths only, and for some years to
come narrow cloths were left untouched.

The provisions of this Act were briefly as follows :

1. The clothier was to weave or sew his name and address at
the end of all his pieces, under pain of being fined £5.

2. Maximum lengths and minimum breadths were fixed for
cloths, and these dimensions were to be complied with by pieces
when they had been thoroughly washed, scoured, and fully
milled. A fine of 205. was imposed on every yard by which
a cloth exceeded the stipulated length.

3. The fuller was again commandeered to attest the quantity
of the cloth. Every fuller was required to take an oath before
the justices that he would well and truly measure all cloths
before they left his hands, and fix at each end of every piece
a seal of lead, on which were stamped his own name and the

1 lieports 1806, iii. t,jt,.

- Moniteur, no. i c> i , Samedi, 10 juillet 170°, v. jj. Despatch ' tie Leeds,
le sept juin '. For the full story see Tricks of the Trade, by the present writer,
Thoresby So< ., vol. xxii, pt. iii (1914).

3 Statute 1 1 Geo. I, c. 24.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 409

size of the piece. He was then to enter in a register full par-
ticulars of each broad cloth which he milled, and, finally, he was
to charge the clothier 2d., one penny of which went to the
Treasurer of the West Riding, the remaining penny being his
own recompense for his trouble, as well as a payment for the
seals. If he failed in these duties, or made out the seals falsely,
he was liable to a fine of £5.

4. Thanks to the above provision it was hoped that frauds
might vanish at once, and confidence be restored to the buyers
of Yorkshire cloths. But in case the merchant, having purchased
any piece, felt dubious as to the accuracy of the statements made
on the seal, he could, within six days of purchase, have the cloth
immersed, in the presence of the clothier ; if, after four hours'
immersion, the measurements differed from those recorded on
the seal, the merchant could demand a reduction of one-sixth of
the price of the piece, the clothier being allowed to compensate him-
self for this loss by claiming the same amount from the fuller.

5. Finally, in the finishing of cloth by the dresser, all parts of
the cloth were to be finished and dressed evenly, 'not only at the
sides and edges next to the list (as hath of late years been
the custom) but also in the middle from end to end '. After
which the cloth-dresser was to add a seal containing his name
at the end of each piece.

Thus labelled by clothier, fuller, and finisher, it was hoped
that the cloth would at last be of good repute. But most of
these provisions were similar to those of previous enactments,
and so it might be expected that the pious aspirations which
brought them into being would have ended in smoke, as in
previous attempts. Such, however, was not to be the fate of
this Act, for its most important feature was the stress laid upon
the provision of machinery to enforce these regulations. Each
year the justices of the peace were to choose as many men of
good character as they thought necessary, to be searchers for
the following year, and were to pay these men a salary not
exceeding £15 per annum, this money being taken out of the
pennies forwarded by the fullers to the Treasurer of the West
Riding. Thus the clothiers, in paying their id. per cloth, pro-
vided id. towards the salaries of the inspectors who were to
make them honest men. These searchers were given full power

410 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

to enter any mill where cloth was being fulled, and, if they
wished, to measure any cloth found there. Also they might
examine the register of cloth kept by the fuller, and had power
to bring any offender to justice. Lastly, they might enter any
house, shop, outhouse, tenter ground, or warehouse, to search
for any cloth which infringed the various clauses of the Act ;
any person resisting them was fined £10, and any fraud dis-
covered meant a penalty of £5.

This Act, renewed in 1733 and 1741,1 remained in force until
1764 or 1765. Each April the justices of the peace at Pontefract
Quarter Sessions 2 appointed a number of broad cloth searchers
for the following year, and gave to each of these men a special
district to supervise. The number appointed was generally
between 11 and 15, and each inspector received a salary of £12
to £14. The renewal of the Act in 1741 allowed 3d. to be charged
on each cloth, 2d. of which came to the Treasurer. Hence, with
a growing industry, and with more than doubled revenue, the
small band of searchers could be made into a legion,3 scattered
further afield, and more able to give attention to the outlying
mills. For the broad cloth area 25 searchers were appointed,
with salaries varying from £5 to £15. Eight searchers, with
salaries of £1 to £3, were appointed to supervise those parts of
the narrow cloth area where some few broad cloths were milled
(i.e. around Halifax), and six men were given the sole duty of
inspecting the tenters of the whole district, in order to see that
cloth hung out on these frames fulfilled the legal demands. In
fact, the total salaries paid amounted to about £360 annually.
The men were to examine the pieces and test the accuracy of the
seals, they were to see that the fuller kept his register properly,
and, by haunting their district as much as possible, were to strive
to uphold honesty according to the tenor of the cloth laws.

These Acts were confined to the broad cloth industry only,
and therefore applied almost entirely to the area within a radius
of 10 miles south and west of Leeds. Meanwhile, the narrow
cloths, the kerseys, &c, manufactured around Halifax, Hudders-

1 Statute 7 Ceo. II, c. 25, and 14 Geo. II, c. 35.

2 See Quarter Scss. Records, annually, eighteenth century, e.g. 1733, three
searchers for Wakefield, two for Dewsbury, six for Leeds, two for Birstal,
two for Yeadon, one for Arthington, two for Livcrsedge and Calder.

'■'■ Quarter Scss. Order Book, I', p. 245.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 411

field, and the Calder valley generally were escaping scot free,
because the laws concerning them had fallen into abeyance.
There was no appointment of narrow cloth searchers at the
Quarter Sessions, and the clothiers therefore tentered and
stretched their pieces to suit their own pleasure. This must now
be stopped, and the statute of 1738 brought the narrow cloth
industry under a control similar to that of the broad cloth trade.
This Act profited by the failings demonstrated in the administra-
tion of the sister Act, and more efficient rules were drawn up
than were in force in the broad cloth industry. In the first
place, the statute abandoned all attempts to fix standards of
length and breadth, and allowed clothiers to make pieces of
any dimensions they pleased. This was a great concession, and
probably did much to remedy fraudulent work, for if legal
standards were demanded any cloth which did not approximate
to such dimensions could be made to do so by a little extra
tentering. Therefore the relinquishing of fixed measurements
removed one of the prime causes of over-stretching. Secondly,
the weaver was to set his initials at the head of his pieces, and
every piece was to be measured by the fuller and also by the
searcher. The fuller put a seal at one end, containing his name
and the length and breadth, as measured by him ; the searcher
put a seal at the other end, stating the dimensions as he found
them. Then fuller and searcher entered full particulars of
each piece in books which they both kept for that purpose, and
only when the piece had been sealed by the searcher could it
depart from the mill. This was a great advance on the arrange-
ment for the broad cloth industry, in which the searcher did not
seal the pieces, but examined only those which happened to be
in the mill when he called. Here in the narrow cloth mills
every piece had to be searched by him, and any cloth which left
the premises before obtaining his approval brought upon its
owner or upon the fuller a fine of £5.

Such onerous duties on the part of the searcher necessitated
his being in constant attendance at the mills, and therefore the
area allotted to each man was small. In 1738 twenty-two
searchers l were chosen ; some of them had jurisdiction over one

1 The searchers were men of fjood character and repute, men who had
served an apprenticeship to the trade of making narrow cloths, and were

412 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

mill, at a salary of £2, whilst others supervised four mills, a task
which involved a considerable amount of walking, and were
therefore paid about £14 per annum. With such limited areas,
the searchers were ordered to ' attend at the several mills, tenter
grounds, and places under their charges twice every day at
least, i.e. once in the morning and once in the afternoon '. In
this way the fullers of the Holm and Calder rivers and the
various becks of the Pennine district were watched. The
clothier brought his piece ; it was fulled and scoured, measured
and sealed by fuller and searcher, and only then could it depart.
On taking it away, the clothier had to pay 2d. to the fuller,
1 \d. of which went to the Treasurer of the West Riding to defray
the cost of inspection.

As far as we can gather, these Acts were administered with
a large amount of earnestness, and were probably as successful
in achieving their aim as any such Acts ever were. The Act of
1725, regulating the broad cloth industry, met with considerable
opposition at first. Clothiers refused to pay the fines inflicted
upon them, and in many cases the justices of the peace reversed
decisions which had been made previously. These difficulties,
however, were gradually overcome, and the clauses of the Act
more generally obeyed. In 1756 there were 48 broad cloth
searchers x and 31 for narrow cloths.2 But that these men
rigorously administered the full and strict letter of the law it is
impossible to suppose. They were men who did the work of
searching as a by-occupation, and so their duties would be
neglected when the pressure of other business was at all great.
This was especially the case with the narrow cloth searchers,
who were expected to break off their ordinary occupations twice
a day, in order to go and examine cloths at the mill or mills
under their charge. Fullers therefore often had reason to
complain that pieces were delayed in their hands, awaiting the
tardy visit of the searchers,3 and in 1743 a surveyor was appointed
to travel round the Riding and see that the searchers carried

therefore generally clothiers who took up the searching as an extra means
of livelihood (11 Geo. II, c. 28). Alehouse-keepers or those in charge of
' tipling houses ' could not become searchers (Quarter Sess. Order Books,
Y, p. 61. Also U, pp. 07—9, and passim).

1 Order Books, Y, p. 172. 2 Ibid., p. 60.

3 e.g. complaint that searchers are neglecting duty (Order Books, U, p. 235).

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 413

out their duties with promptitude.1 By the sixties the Aets
had broken down, especially in this respect, and one witness ^
giving evidence in 1765 declared that ' the searchers very seldom
attend at the mill, but leave the miller to stamp [the cloth] him-
self, because the salaries allowed them are not adequate '.'-
Thus many cloths were milled without the searcher ever seeing
them ; the fuller registered only those cloths which the
searcher saw, and many were therefore never registered at all.
Hence the figures published annually as to the number of cloths
milled in the West Riding were probably always too low.

Further, the searchers were often men who had been brought
up in the cloth industry, and who knew all its needs and its
difficulties. Such men would not be likely to enforce too zealously ^
laws which affected themselves as well as their fellows, and so
doubtless there was much harmless collusion between searcher,
clothier, and fuller, by which the arm of the law was tacitly
evaded.

Lastly, the conditions of the broad cloth Acts almost com-
pelled some faking and excessive tentering of the pieces. The
law set up certain standards for these cloths ; the broad fabric
must not be less than 5J quarters (i.e. 1 yard 13! inches) in
width. Now when a clothier took a piece to the fuller he did
not know exactly how much the cloth was likely to decrease
in width when immersed in water. The shrinkage depended
upon the nature of the wool, the fineness of the spinning, the
quality of the weaving, ,&c. Hence when the cloth had been
watered, it might be of, adequate width, or it might be too
narrow. In the latter case, there would be a hurried conversa-
tion between the clothier and the fuller, and the stamping of
a false breadth on the seal ; and when the cloth was taken home
it would be stretched until it attained the standard width. Thus
tlii' establishment of ;i standard encouraged the excessive tenter-
ing ol cloths ; as one witness declared, ' if there was not any
standard, cloth would come into the market better both in
breadth and quality, as the cloth would be truly stamped, which
would be a means of preventing the clothiers stretching the

1 Ibid. Y, p. 144.

2 House of Commons' Journal*, \\x 2(13. Evidence before Select Committee
on West Riding Cloth Laws.

414 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

cloth as much as they do at present, because when it is under
the standard they stretch it in order to avoid the penalties V

A comparison of the two Acts shows that, whilst the narrow
cloths were allowed the greater liberty, the provision made for
the searching of these cloths was much more thorough than was
that for the broads. Hence, whilst the narrow cloth Act re-
mained in force so long as cloths were inspected and sealed, the
broad cloth Act had fallen into disuse by the sixties of the
eighteenth century. In those parts of the Riding where it had
been enforced trade had left the local fulling mills and migrated
to more easy-going districts, or fled across the boundaries,
taking the pieces to be finished in those counties to which the
Act did not extend. Even so early as 1731 the Yorkshire
justices asked that the broad cloth Act might be extended to
the neighbouring Ridings and counties, so as to equalize com-
petitive conditions,2 and in 1765 it was stated that much York-
shire cloth was taken to be finished in Lancashire, because that
county was outside the scope of the searchers' jurisdiction.
During 1764-5 many petitions came from the West Riding,
asking for a thorough renovation of the broad cloth laws, and
for a readjustment to meet the real needs of the situation.
A Select Committee of the House of Commons inquired into the
matter, and eventually the Act of 1765 was passed, ' for repeal-
ing several laws relating to the manufacture of woollen cloth in
the County of York, and also so much of several other laws as
prescribes particular standards of width and length to such
woollen cloths, and for substituting other regulations of the
cloth trade within the West Riding . . . for preventing frauds
in certifying the contents of the cloth, and for preserving the
credit of the said manufacture at foreign markets'.3 An ambi-
tious title for a very full and complicated Act.

This statute was about the last of its kind, and it certainly
wound up the series in a blaze of legislative and administrative
glory. The Act repealed all its predecessors, which had been
' found by experience not to be effectual for the preventing the
frauds, abuses and deceits ' practised in the broad cloth industry.
This meant the abolition of all legal standards of dimensions,

1 House of Commons' Journal, xxx. 2O3.

- Ouarter Scss. Order Books, S, p. 189. 3 5 Geo. Ill, c. 51.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 415

and cloth henceforth might be of any length, breadth, or weight.
Further, the justices of the peace, who must not be dealers in
cloth or occupiers of fulling-mills, were ordered to choose
annually a sufficient number of searchers, men of good character,
who followed or had been brought up in the trade. These
officials were to be the measurers and sealers of all broad fabrics.
Henceforth the fuller did not seal and stamp the cloth ; that
task was taken out of his hands, and given entirely to the
searcher. Every piece had to pass under his inspection, and no
cloth could leave the mill until he had stamped upon its seal
the correct length and breadth. When the seal had been affixed
and the necessary fee paid, the clothier might take away his
piece, and, after measuring it to see that the first seal was correct,
could tenter it as he pleased. Also the clothier was compelled
to weave or sew into one end his name and address in full.
This last clause was responsible for a number of amusing cases
during the first twelve months that the Act was in operation,
for many clothiers innocently and ignorantly used abbreviations,
or mis-spelt their names and addresses ; some worthy informer,
on the alert to earn an informer's share of the fines, dragged
these men before the court, where they were convicted ' for
false spelling or abbreviating their names and place of abode '.
Therefore in the following year an amending Act was passed,
one of the clauses of which allowed the clothiers ' to use some
common or known usual abbreviation '.

The measuring and sealing of cloths was now placed entirely
in the charge of the searchers. This Act was remarkable for
the variety of officials which it created. The searchers did the
actual scaling at the mill, but in addition there were inspectors,
whose duty lay in visiting the workshops, tenters, warehouses,
&c, where cloths were tentered and dressed, to see that all
cloths were sealed and not excessively stretched. Finally
there were supervisors, inspectors-in-chief, who went round to
both tulling-mills and dressing establishments, to ensure that
searchers and inspectors were discharging their duties.

With this threefold provision of officers, with the liberty to
make cloths of any dimensions, with the insistence upon each
cloth being sealed by the searcher, and with a superior officer
to detect any carelessness or sloth on the part of the searchers,

416 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

it might be expected that at last the machinery of supervision
had reached perfection, and would work harmoniously and
efficiently for ever. Each July at the Bradford Quarter Sessions *■
the officers were chosen for the following year, and their salaries
fixed. In 1777 there were 46 searchers with salaries up to £24
each, 17 inspectors with stipends up to £25, and 4 supervisors
who received up to £80 each. For a time these men did their
work with the exemplary thoroughness attributed to new
brooms, and a witness in 1806 remarked that ' when the Act
was first obtained we saw them [the inspectors] once, twice, or
some times three times a day examining our tenters Y2 The
searchers' work was discharged the most effectively, because it
involved the collecting of the fees out of which all the officers
were paid. But gradually there came a decline in the vigour
with which the Act was administered, and the evidence given
in 1806 indicated that the machinery was practically at a stand-
still by that date. One witness remarked that the stamping
was being done in a slipshod manner, and the inspectors very
seldom troubled to examine tenters. ' I suppose ', he stated,
' they like to do their business with as little trouble as possible,
and unless we send for them we never see them. We go on with
our own business without the inspector. We think we know
how to stretch the cloth better than him. We do not trouble
our heads about it, unless sometimes, when we are apprehensive
of a dispute between us and the clothiers, and then we send for
him.'3 Another Yorkshireman stated 'I have no means of
knowing what the searcher does, but if they do their business
no better than the inspector and supervisor does, they do it
very ill indeed. ... I think we do not see [the inspectors] twice
in a year, unless we send for them.' 4 The searcher had become
equally useless as a check on tentering or as an authority on the
length of a piece. His task was now chiefly to collect the fees,
and keep the register of the number of cloths ; and as a longer
cloth meant a larger fee, there would be no very scrupulous
measurement of the pieces. Thus the merchants who gave
evidence were unanimous in their disregard of the statement of
dimensions made on the searcher's seal. ' In no instance do

1 Quarter Sess. Records, Bradford, July 1777 ; Order Books, FF, p. 9.

- Reports, 1806, iii. 157. 3 Ibid., p. 155. 4 Ibid., pp. 155-7-

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 417

they depend upon the stamper's mark \1 declared one man, and
others pointed out that they never took any notice of the seal,
but always had the cloth measured in their own warehouse,
before payment was made.2 Finally, many merchants agreed
that the cloths which they bought unsealed from other counties
were often superior in quality to those which were purchased
sealed in the West Riding ; and the conclusion was that the
system should either be abandoned entirely, or enforced strictly,
in which latter case it might perhaps be beneficial.3 In 182 1
a committee inquired into the working of these cloth laws. It
found that they were not in the least fulfilling the purposes for
which they were promulgated, and therefore advised the dis-
continuance of all such provisions.4 Parliament acted upon
these suggestions, repealed all the acts which had been framed
in the previous century, and the whole system of searching at
once lapsed.

The disappearance of the searcher marks the end of centuries
of attempts to regulate the quality of cloth. From the Assize
of Measures (1197), and probably before that time, down to the
early part of last century the State had been concerned with
cloth, either as a source of revenue, or as an important com-
modity of commerce, or both. It had struggled to bring cloths
to a few standard sizes, so as to simplify the assessment of
taxation. It had attempted to fix legal dimensions, to forbid
or limit processes and the application of utensils, in its desire to
maintain a high quality in English cloths. In these efforts it
had been baffled by the growing variety of fabrics, by the
fundamental qualities of the materials, by the commercial
necessities of cloth-makers and dealers, and by the dispersed
nature of the industry. In our own days attempts to regulate
the conditions of labour by Factory Acts, Trade Boards, &c,
are subject to grave limitations and difficulties in enforcing the
law. These difficulties would be infinitely greater if we essayed
to regulate, not conditions of labour, but quality of goods.
Therefore the task of supervising a scattered industry, working
on unscientific lines in days of deficient communications, must
have been almost superhuman. The State adopted the best

1 Ibid., p. [55. J Ibid., pp. 1 54, 1S3, at.

•' Ibid., p. 155. ' Ibid., os-i, vi. 437 ct seq.

418 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

line of attack by placing the administration of the statutes in
the hands of local authorities ; but this had its many dis-
advantages, and so all attempts to interfere with the quality of
the goods which the clothier offered for sale were entirely
abandoned. The policy of laissez-faire triumphed, and the sole
guide in all future transactions was caveat emptor.

The Worsted Committee

One other aspect of industrial regulation remains to be con-
sidered, and here we come in contact with an institution
established in the eighteenth century, which, after many
vicissitudes, still exists in a state of comparative health and y
vigour. The Worsted Committee was inaugurated in order to
safeguard the interests of the worsted master in the domestic
system of the eighteenth century ; and, though the domestic system
has vanished, the officers of that committee still continue the work
of preventing frauds and embezzlements on the part of employees.

The domestic system lent itself easily to those practices
which arise from lack of supervision. When raw materials were
handed out to a workman, and work was done out of sight of
the master, it was not difficult for the employee to practise any
number of fraudulent tricks on his employer. Embezzlement
of material, exchange of poor wool for good, the wetting of wool
in order to make it weigh heavier, imperfect or inaccurate
spinning, &c, all these things might be practised with a fair
chance of success, since the eye of the master or foreman was
not ever on the workman. Further, when a master gave out
work to be done he often had to wait a long time before he got
back the material. The employee worked when he felt disposed,
and often neglected work entrusted to him, with the result that
the weavers and those dependent upon combers and spinners
were often unemployed, by reason of the laziness of those who
were preparing the yarn.

These difficulties, though not absent from the woollen industry,
were very present to the worsted clothiers of the West Riding.
Here there was a stronger capitalistic organization on the one
hand, and a keen sense of solidarity of labour on the other. If
the master (hired to punish an offending workman, either for
fraud or neglect, he generally called upon his head the wrath of

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 419

the labouring classes in his locality, and might suffer severely
for his temerity.

To protect employers, the State had long been attempting to
prevent workpeople from making free with their masters' goods.
As early as 1610 all spinsters ' embezilling or detaining any wooll '
were sentenced either to make full satisfaction, be whipped, or
put in the stocks by the constables.1 Nearly a century later 2
legislation made another effort, when an Act of 1702 declared
that 'frauds are daily committed by persons employed in woollen,
linen, cotton, and iron manufactures, by embezzling materials
with which they are entrusted ', and heavy penalties were laid
down for such offences. This Act was occasionally amended/'
and at times actually enforced, as for instance in August 1764,
when ' Lydia Longbottom, of Bingley, was publickly whipt
thro' the market at Wakefield, for reeling false and short yarn
. . . the town bailiff carrying a reel before her '.4

But this constant issue of legislation was of little avail,
because there was no provision for the actual administration of
the law, other than through the ordinary channels of justice.
If a constable found an instance of embezzlement or the like,
he might take the culprit before the court, or if a master detected
one of his employees he might follow the same course. The
constable, however, had abundance of other matters which
needed his attention, and could give very little time to running
down fraudulent workpeople ; and the master shrank from
putting the law into operation, because he feared the reprisals
of his workfolk. Hence, the isolated master was baffled, and
the law of no effect. During the seventies the situation became
critical. ' Woolcombers embezzled their masters' yarn, spinners
reeled false or short yarn, and in case a master tried to put the
law into force such a combination existed amongst his work-
people that he could obtain no blacklegs, and his own person
and property were endangered.'*' Against this organized labour
the individual master was powerless. Therefore it needed some
similar orga.niz.it ion amongst the masters, some fearless, united,
and permanent institution, which would boldly search out and

1 Statute 7 Jas. I, e. 7. J i Anne, stat. ii. c. jj.

1 1 ;(''<<). II, c. N ; jj Geo. 11, c. _• 7 ; [4 Geo. Ill, c. 44.
' LccdiS Intelligencer, August 17, 1704. '" James, op. cit., pp. 202-3.

E e 2

420 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

bring to court all cases of fraud, and so ensure that the Acts
were more than mere dead letters. This need for an employers'
union or association rapidly became more and more apparent,
and in about 1775 an informal organization was established, j
which gathered contributions from voluntary subscribers, and
used these funds to employ inspectors who were to safeguard
the interests of the worsted masters. This initial step was
attended with success, and the employers began to seek further
powers, and to gain legal sanction for their association. Eloquent
petitions informed Parliament of the grievous state of affairs
in the West Riding : the worsted clothiers showed that the laws
were entirely neglected and overlooked, and that the only
remedy lay in establishing a committee of masters and a per-
manent inspectorate, to see that the statutory provisions
were enforced.1 The representations of the Yorkshiremen were
strengthened by similar statements from the masters of Lanca-
shire and Cheshire, counties in which large quantities of raw
wool were combed and spun ; and thus the North put forward
a very strong case. Parliament acceded to the request, and the
Worsted Act of 1777 established on a legal basis that organiza- /
tion of masters which still exists as the Worsted Committee
of the Counties of York, Lancaster, and Chester.2 Once the
northern masters had obtained their weapon of defence, those
in other parts of the country sought similar protection. In
1784 Suffolk was granted power to establish a committee ; 3 in
the following year the worsted masters of Bedfordshire, Hunt-
ingdon, Northampton, Leicestershire, Rutland, Lincolnshire,
and the Isle of Ely formed a similar organization,4 and in
1790 Norfolk and Norwich set up a Worsted Committee.5 Thus
the State recognized four bodies similar in many respects to V
the corporations of the seventeenth century, the aim of which
was to promote the welfare of the masters, and to provide
special machinery for the administration of a certain type of
legislation. When these institutions were erected, three out of
the four districts were already losing their textile industries, so
that the northern Worsted Committee was really the only one
to achieve any importance.

1 Utilise of Commons Journals, xxxvi, 85, et scq. - 17 Geo. Ill, c. 11.

* 24 Geo. Ill, c. 3. 4 25 Geo. Ill, c. 40. "' 31 Geo. Ill, c. 56.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 421

The preamble to the Worsted Act states the reason lor the
establishment of the committee. It refers to the various laws
passed against embezzlement and falsehood in the preparation
of yarn, but states that ' the good purpose of the laws has been
greatly frustrated, from the manufacturers . . . being unwilling
to expose themselves singly to the loss attending the resent-
ment of the spinners and workpeople by prosecuting them for
offences against the said Acts ; . . . and this important branch
of the woollen manufacture will be greatly prejudiced thereby,
unless the manufacturers are enabled jointly to carry these laws
into effectual execution, which cannot be done without the aid
of Parliament '. Therefore it was ordered that a general meeting
of the manufacturers of combing wool, worsted yarn, and worsted
goods in the counties of York, Lancaster, and Chester should
be held immediately at Halifax, due notice having been given
in all the local newspapers. At this meeting the committee was
to be elected, composed as follows : The Yorkshire manu-
facturers were to elect 18 representatives, whilst those of
Lancashire and Cheshire jointly were to choose 9 persons.
These 27 men were to constitute the committee by which the
WOrsted Acts were to be enforced. They were to meet quarterly,
in order to report progress and discuss policy. Above all, they
were to watch over the work of the worsted inspectors. These
officials, of whom there must be at least two, were to be nomi-
nated by the committee, and recommended to the justices of
the peace, who at quarter sessions licensed them to act in
accordance with the powers granted by the statute. The
inspectors were then given definite areas, and each in his respec-
tive district was ' to use all due diligence and industry for the
convicting and bringing to justice of all offenders '. They were
from time to time to inspect the reels of spinners, and whenever
they found any breach of law were to lodge information against
the offender, and carry on the prosecution of the culprit.

hurt her, one of the most fruitful centres of fraud would be
the home or storehouse of those agents who received the wool,
and then gave it out to be spun. These distributors of the raw
material might practise many deceits and embezzlements, and
it was necessary, therefore, that the inspectors should have
power to keep them under supervision. The statute granted

422 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

that the inspectors could demand entrance, at all reasonable
times, into the dwelling-house, shop, or outhouse of any agent
or other person employed to put wool out to be spun, to inspect
the yarn in the stock of such agent, and to bring to justice any
who offended in such particulars. Any inspector failing in his
duty, or guilty of screening an offender, was to be discharged
from his office, and placed for a month in the House of Correc-
tion. For the guidance of these inspectors, the Act then stated
the nature of offences and their consequent penalties. A standard
for reeling was fixed and a scale of punishment laid down for
false reeling, for embezzling or disposing of materials entrusted
to a person to be spun, and for the refusal by agents to allow
inspectors to examine their stock. A further Act in the same
year1 revised all the previous statutes concerning misdemeanours,
and gave the inspectors further grounds for action. Persons
found buying or receiving goods which they knew to be stolen,
and persons pawning or selling such materials were to be severely
punished. If the inspectors or any one else suspected a person
of having in his possession goods which he ought not to have,
they were to make complaint to the justices of the peace, who
then granted a warrant for the search of the premises of the
suspect. The search took place, and if any suspicious goods
were found the accused was taken before the justices. If he
could not give a satisfactory account as to how he came by
the same, he was deemed guilty, and punished, although no
evidence had been given to show who was the owner of such
materials. The onus probandi lay with the defendant. The
goods found in his possession spoke against him, and he was
a guilty man until he proved himself innocent.

Lastly, this Act gave the master increased power over his
workmen, even though the latter did not work under the em-
ployer's roof. An Act of 1749 had allowed a man twenty-one
days in which to complete and return work entrusted to him.2
This period of time had proved unsatisfactory, and was obviously
too long. Therefore the Act of 1777 reduced it to eight days,
and declared that any workmen who did not return the material,
properly worked up, within that time would be liable to the
same punishment as for purloining and embezzling. Masters
1 17 Geo. Ill, c. 56. 2 22 Geo. II, c. 27.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 423

were granted power of entrance into the shops and outhouses of
any persons employed by them, in order to sec that their work
was being done properly ; and finally, protection was granted
to the tools, dye-stuffs, &c, which masters gave out to their
employees. Thus the sphere of interference was very large, and
the master, or the Worsted Committee inspector as his repre-
sentative, was given wide powers of supervision in order to
enforce the law.

The Worsted Committee, therefore, was to be an organization
of masters, protecting materials in the hands of the domestic
workers, and the inspectors were to act as an industrial police
force, sanctioned by law, and licensed by the justices of the
peace. But such a task needed a comparatively large number
of inspectors ; it needed money. Whence were the funds to be
obtained ? Before the passing of the Act, the salaries of one or
two inspectors had been provided by voluntary subscriptions,
but now, with a salaries bill of about £400 per annum, the
worsted clothiers could not be expected to contribute so large
a sum. There was nothing in the Act to allow the committee
to levy contributions, and so the revenue must come from
another source. There was at this time a duty on all soap used
in England ; it amounted to i\d. per pound on all imported
soap, and \d. per pound on English soap,1 and had been levied
all through the eighteenth century. Such a tax would have
been a heavy burden on the textile industry, where large quan-
tities of soap were used in washing, scouring, and cleaning the
wool before it was worked up. One pound of soap was required
for every ten pounds of wool, and thus the accumulated duty
on a year's work would be a considerable sum and a heavy
imposition on the industry. A drawback, amounting to one-
third the duty, was therefore granted on all soap used for textile
purposes ; 2 from time to time the clothier made a statement
as to the amount of soap he had utilized in cleaning wool, and
then received back one-third of the duty which he had paid on
that quantity of soap. All masters who prepared their wool
lor weaving were affected by this drawback, but .it the same
time all were to benefit bv the activities of the worsted inspectors.

' Statutes hi Anne, c. i<) : i _' Anne, stat. ii.. c. 9.
1 l<> Anne, c. K), i; 2>).

424 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

Therefore let the cost of the police system be defrayed out of
the drawback which the clothiers received. This was the arrange-
ment established by the Worsted Act. When a clothier was
receiving his drawback, twopence out of each shilling was
deducted from it, and these twopenny levies were forwarded
to the Treasurer of the West Riding, who then provided the
necessary money for salaries. Thus by an impost on the soap
drawback the Worsted Committee was to be financed.

Granted these powers, the worsted masters promptly set to
work to erect the machinery for the protection of their interests.
The general meeting was held at the Talbot Inn, Halifax, on
June 9, 1777, and the 27 members of the committee were chosen,
representing the various parts of the three counties. Thus six
committeemen were chosen by the Halifax area, four by those
attending the Bradford market, two by Leeds, one by Ripon
and North Yorkshire, wThilst the Lancashire and Cheshire
members were distributed in similar manner. The names of
these first committeemen are those of famous cloth-making
or cloth-selling families — Holden, Currer, Fielden, Garnett,
Clapham, &c. Mr. John Hustler, the energetic Bradfordian,
who had been largely responsible for the institution of the
committee, became the first chairman.1

The first committee was chosen by a general meeting of all
the worsted manufacturers of the three counties. But with
that election the share of the ordinary clothier in the manage-
ment of the committee practically ended. At times the com-
mittee would call a general meeting to support or oppose some
piece of prospective legislation ; the deduction from his draw-
back reminded the clothier of the existence of the committee,
whilst the periodical visits of the inspector and reports of prose-
cutions kept the activities of the Worsted Committee well in
the public eye. But as to the policy or government of the body
the rank and file could say nothing ; the committee was in
practice, if not in theory, a close oligarchy. If it mismanaged
affairs and neglected its duty, the general body of clothiers
could meet and depose it from office, electing a new committee

1 The information for this section has been obtained from the Minute
Books of the Worsted Committee, in the hands of Messrs. Mumford &
Johnson, solicitors, Bradford, to whom the writer wishes to express his
gratitude.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 425

in its place. But such things never happened, and the com-
mittee remained autocratic and all-powerful. Its first members
were elected for life, or for so long as they engaged in industry,
and on the retirement or death of a member the committee
elected his successor. If a member retired from business or
absented himself from the quarterly meetings of the committee
for the space of a year, he was deemed to have vacated his
position * and another person chosen to take his place. The
committee met four times a year, three of which assemblies were
in Yorkshire, the remaining one in Lancashire or Cheshire.
Hence the committee met most frequently at Bradford and

1 lalifax, though Leeds, Luddenden, Hebden Bridge, Wakefield,
Keighley, Liverpool, Manchester, Burnley, and Colne were
amongst the meeting-places of the quarterly council. Mileage
and other expenses were allowed to all who attended the meetings.2
Any one guilty of unpunctuality was fined is. for each hour
he was late, and 2s. 6d. if he failed to put in an appearance ; 3
in 1782 it was ordered ' that no person, after having his name
entered as present, shall absent himself from the business of the
Committee for the space of fifteen minutes, betwixt 11 and

2 o'clock, without leave of the Chairman or the Committee first
obtained, under the penalty of receiving no money, either for
his day's attendance, or for his Expenses'.4

The chief task of the committee was the appointment and
control of its inspectors. At its first meeting the worsted area
was divided into six districts, of which four were in Yorkshire.
For each of these an inspector was appointed at a salary of £50,
to be paid out of the soap money, whilst the seventh official
was appointed to ' make a general inspection and give his
Assistance and Information to the other six Inspectors \° The
payment to these men was sufficiently large to provide them
with an adequate livelihood, and so they were forbidden to take
up any other work. As the initial order declared, ' The Inspectors

1 September 27, 1770: 'Mr. Richard Mrown, one of this Committee having
declined being a Manufacturer, and wilfully absented himself from the
quarterly meetings of tins Committee for the space of one year ', his place
was therefore Idled.

- 1 os. (id. per day and ~s. '></. for travelling were the grants made to those
who attended the meetings. See Minutes, September 2 ,. i7's-'.

J Minutes, July 22, 1778. ' September 2 3, 1 7 >v J .

1 June 2$, 1777.

426 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

shall devote their whole time in that Employ, and shall not be
concerned or employed in any other Business whatsoever, and
... no part of the Family of such Inspectors shall be employed
as putters out of Wool to spin '. These inspectors were not
technically appointed by the committee ; the committee's
business was to find suitable men, and to recommend them to
the justices of the peace, who then formally licensed them.1
This was the result of the curious status of the committee. It
was a body established by law, constituted of master manu-
facturers, and administering laws by the motive of self-interest
far more efficiently than they could have been operated through
the ordinary channels. Hence that strange alliance between
a sectional industrial society and the regular machinery of
justice. The inspector, when appointed, became subject to the
control of the committee, and held his post so long as he gave
satisfaction to his master. Each inspector was placed under
the special tutelage of a member of the committee, to whom he
had to submit weekly reports, and from whom he obtained orders
and supplies of money. If he neglected his duty, this member
brought the offence before the whole committee. Some inspec-
tors held their posts for the whole of their lives, as in the case
of William Shepherd, who served the committee from 1785 until
his death in 1828. Others held office only a very short period,
being dismissed quickly for neglect of duty, drunkenness, mis-
behaviour, screening offenders, mismanaging financial matters,
or for ' being incapable of keeping proper accounts ' after being
repeatedly instructed in the art of book-keeping. -

With such equipment, the Worsted Committee set to work to
enforce the laws against fraud, theft, and general industrial
immorality amongst the workpeople. The first inspectors were
approved at the July Quarter Sessions, 1777, and soon the West
Riding began to be inundated with handbills and newspaper
announcements. The wicked world was immediately to be
cleansed and purged by the committee and its seven stalwart
inspectors. Witness the stern fearlessness behind the following

1 Quarter Sessions Hooks, FF, p. 0.

- Minutes, June 23, 1783. Also September 24, 1792 : ' It appearing
to this meeting that Henry Parkinson, an inspector, lias Misbehaved in his
office, by being negligent, and particularly being in liquor when he .attended
the justices at Otley ', therefore he was discharged.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 427

manifesto, which appeared in the Leeds Mercury of August 19,
1777:

' The Committee of manufacturers of combing wool have
nominated [seven persons here named] to be inspectors for pre-
venting frauds and abuses committed by persons employed in
the manufactures of combing wool, worsted yarn, etc., . . . and
do hereby give notice, by virtue of an Act passed last Session,
and forewarn all spinners who shall be guilty of reeling false or
upon false reel that they will be prosecuted and punished by
the said inspectors, as the law directs, without any favour or
partiality. They likewise give notice to all agents or persons
hired or employed to put out wool to be spun into worsted, that
by the said Act such agents are liable to pay a penalty of five
shillings for every parcel of yarn made up which is short weight,
and which is false or short reeled, unless they produce and do
give in evidence what person was the reeler of such yarn, so that
he or she may be lawfully convicted ; for which purpose it will
be expected that the putters-out ticket their yarn.'

The committee set to work in earnest, but its early efforts
were not all crowned with success. In the first place, there was
trouble with the inspectors, who did not always discharge their
duties with the desired efficiency, or prove themselves burning
enthusiasts. Of the seven inspectors appointed in 1777, three
had been discharged and two had resigned before the summer
of 1779, and the committee had much difficulty in securing satis-
factory men. The inspectors were paid their wages, but were
granted nothing towards their expenses. Hence, when they dis-
covered a culprit, they had to defray their own costs, and
reimburse themselves by the share of the tine which came to
them as informers. Thus the inspector's task was at times most
unenviable, for he had all the expense of bringing an offender
to court, and then had to depend on winning his case in order
to regain the money outlaid. In such circumstances it was
only natural that he should overlook the offences of those who
would be unable to pay the fines, and devote his attention to
the more wealthy artisans and agents. This miscarriage of
justice became notorious in 1784, whereupon the committee
declared that the ' Inspectors neglect to prosecute embezzlers
and buyers of embezzled materials when they think they can
receive no advantage, and that they are ton eager in prosecuting
such persons as they think will pay the pecuniary penalties

428 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

inflicted for such offence '.* It was therefore ordered that the
committee should in future defray the expense of all prosecu-
tions, and that all money received by inspectors in their capacity
as informers should be handed over at once to the treasurer of
the committee, to be distributed to various charitable organiza-
tions. Thus a big incentive to favouritism and partiality was
removed, and the committee thereby did much to ' render the
Inspectors more respectable and independent prosecutors '.2
Gradually satisfactory men were found, the number of dis-
charges became smaller, and the inspectorate reached a state
approaching efficiency.

The second obstacle with which the committee had to deal
was the ignorance, apathy, or actual hostility of the magistrates.
The worsted industry covered a wide area, in much of which
agriculture was the predominant industry, and the production
of yarn merely a by-occupation. In these parts the justices
could not be expected to be conversant with all the details of
complicated textile legislation. Many cases which were brought
forward by the inspectors were dismissed by magistrates who
did not know the nature of the Worsted Acts, and the com-
mittee was constantly printing digests of the law, handbills, &c,
or sending deputations3 to explain to these benighted justices
the wonders of the statutes. But knowledge, when it came, did
not convince the local authorities of the error of their ways.
Doubtless they objected to being taught their duty by an upstart
industrial organization, and did not intend to obey the behests
of John Hustler and his minions. Hence the minutes of the
committee are sprinkled with instances of conflicts between the
committee and the justices of the peace who presided over the
more outlying districts. In the heart of the worsted area
justice was served out in full measure, but in the agricultural
regions the magistrates were always ready to snap their fingers
at the fussy cloth-makers. Thus in December 1777 the Recorder
of Pontefraet, along with other justices, complained that the
inspectors were being too severe in their prosecution of the
spinners, and asked for greater leniency towards offenders.4 In

1 -Minutes, April 6, 1784. 2 Ibid.

3 e.g. the chairman, the clerk, and another member were sent in June
1770 to explain the Act to two justices of the peace in Bedale.

4 Minutes, January 5, 177S.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 429

the following year some Lancashire magistrates refused to hear
the evidence of an inspector, and discharged the defendant,
much to the disgust of the committee who at once entered upon
a dignified correspondence with the offending justices. The
committee stated that ' they was hurt at the Conduct of the
Justices, . . . that they would give up the matter for this time,
and hoped for the future that the justices ' would administer
the Act properly.1 The Mayor of Doncaster was the most
stubborn opponent of the committee, and the two were per-
petually at war. In September 1784 2 the committee threatened
King's Bench proceedings against him, for refusing to hear
certain cases of false reeling. In the same year he allowed
women to escape from the district without having paid their
lines, at which the committee wrote that they ' think them-
selves very ungentilly Treated, and demand a Specific Answer
from himself for such extraordinary behaviour '.

What happened to the mayor we do not know, for the matter
is not mentioned again ; but the whole attitude of these country
magistrates is seen at its best in the action of the justices of
Richmond in 1801. On this occasion, the inspector had brought
certain women, charged with unduly neglecting their work,
before the magistrates. Still, ' although the offence was com-
pletely proved before the Magistrates, they refused to convict
[the women], alledging that the Act of Parliament was arbitrary
and not fit to be put into execution '. The inspector asked for
reasons, but the magistrates declined to give any ; thereupon
the committee, donning its best style of injured dignity, declared
that ' the justices . . . must do their duty in administering the
law. ... It is no excuse for a Magistrate to say that the Law is
arbitrary and therefore nut fit to be executed, . . . and the
magistrates' decision has caused considerable surprise and
regret.' If, therefore, the justices still refuse to give adequate
reason for their contempt of the law, ' the Committee feel them-
selves under the disagreeable necessity . . . to direct an informa-
tion to be tiled against the magistrates, or to take such steps as
counsel shall advise '.:i And there, so far as the minute books

1 Ibid., January 4, 1770, and March j<>, 1770.
- Ibid., St-ptcnibiT z~ , I7>s4 ; January },, 1785.
' Ibid., Juno jj, 1S01 .

430 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

are concerned, the matter seems to have ended. Still, in spite
of these obstacles, the Worsted Committee undoubtedly suc-
ceeded in a great measure in achieving the aims which it sought
to attain. The constant circulation of handbills and the advertise-
ments in the local papers made people aware of the main features
of the Act, and the inspectors often succeeded in finding many
cases of deceit. If one turns to almost any copy of the Leeds
newspapers from 1777 to the end of the century, one encounters
instances of prosecutions. For instance, the following,1 in
a little over a month :

January 10, 1782 : Four women of Wakefield and one of West
Ardsley were fined 5s. each for reeling false or short yarn.

January 28, 1782 : Mary Leach, of Cullingworth, was fined
£20 for receiving a quantity of purloined or embezzled worsted
yarn.

February 19, 1782 : Twenty-five women indicted for reeling
false and short yarn. One was fined 405., this being a second
offence, and a man for a third offence was ordered to be ' com-
mitted to the House of Correction for one month, and to be
publickly whipt at Colnc upon a Market Day.

It is surprising to find so many women figuring in the lists,
but this is due to the fact that spinning and reeling were done
chiefly by women, who also acted as distributing agents, receiving
the wool from the clothier, and handing it out to be spun by
neighbours. Such agents were compelled to examine all yarn
returned to them, and to take note of any which was falsely
worked. If they failed in this, they themselves were liable to
a fine, and thus we find a certain woman at Heptonstall fined
105. for refusing to discover who reeled two pounds of short
yarn.2 All these cases were brought before the justices by the
worsted inspectors, and the courts were regularly employed
attending to such offences.

Another aspect of the Worsted Acts was also given attention —
namely, the punishment for neglect of work. Eight days were
allowed for the fulfilment of any task entrusted to an employee.
If at the end of that time the material was not returned, the
employer informed the inspector, who at once called on the
offender, or sent him an official note, and instituted proceedings
unless the goods were at once returned to their owner. The

1 Lccdcs Intelligencer, under these dates. - Ibid., January 8, 1782.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 431

punishment for this offence was incarceration, and many culprits,
chiefly women, were committed to the House of Correction for
a month, under conviction of having neglected the performance
of their duties for eight days. This preponderance of female
culprits makes one wonder if the men were especially law-
abiding, or if the ' solidarity of labour ' which had frightened
the masters at an earlier date was also instrumental in causing
the inspectors to wink at male offenders, whilst taking advantage
of the disorganization of the women to pounce upon female
transgressors. There is no conclusive answer to this query, but,
from a perusal of the offences recorded in the newspapers, one
certainly gets the impression that the law was invoked against
women and very seldom against men.

The Worsted Committee was established to discharge the
above definite functions and administer the Worsted Acts ;
but the committee consisted of a number of influential and
energetic cloth magnates, and therefore it was only natural that
it should concern itself with the whole of the wide field of
economic life. Anything which affected the worsted industry
was a lit and proper subject for the committee's attention.
Hence we find in its minute books brief references to the many
economic movements which were on foot at this time, and few
matters of importance escaped the committee's notice, fn the
first place, it is gratifying to find that whilst the committee
was primarily an association of employers, bent on administer-
ing laws favourable to masters, it did not neglect the interests
of the workmen. Various laws during the century forbade the
payment of wages in truck, and the committee frequently issued
notices drawing the attention of masters to this provision.
Occasionally an inspector brought a master before the courts
for paying a workman in goods instead of in money,1 and when,
in times of depression, work and wages were scarce, the com-
mittee did its best to ensure that truck payments should, it
possible, be prevented.2 In its treatment of its inspectors, the
committee strikes at least one happy note when, in 1796, ' on
account ot the present temporarilv high price <>l provisions and

1 v. a. September 2~, 17S4, when Win. Smith of Leeds, dyer, was convicted
ot having p. ud in truck.

- April i.\ 180J, 1,000 handbill- issued concerning truck.

432 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

other necessaries of life ', it was resolved ' that the Salaries of
the Inspectors be advanced £5 per annum in addition of their
present salaries of £50 ', this to continue so long as the com-
mittee thought proper and necessary.1 But, whilst safeguarding
the workmen from truck, the committee also attempted to
suppress combinations of labour such as might induce the
employees to seek higher wages for themselves. The committee
itself might be regarded in its general nature as a masters'
union, instituted for the protection and advancement of the
employers' welfare. But at the same time any workmen's
union was forbidden by law, and although some kind of organiza- ^
tion certainly did exist, the Worsted Committee did its best to
stamp out all such unions of labour. In 1791 it prosecuted
certain Halifax wool-combers 2 for having conspired to raise
their wages, and in the following year it expressed the opinion
that friendly societies, if allowed to grow up, would ' have a pre-
judiciall tendency by enabling the members thereof to form
illegal Combinations '.3 Thus, though the committee sought the
welfare of man as well as master, the journeyman must not
attempt to better himself by corporate action. He must refrain
from union with his fellows, and be content with the individual
bargaining and free contract between himself and his master.

.Secondly, the committee paid special attention to all matters
concerning the wool supply. When the Lincolnshire wool-
growers sought permission to export their surplus wool, the
Worsted Committee was loud in its objections, and spent eighty
guineas in opposing the application.4 In 1787 similar support
was given to the Act strengthening the prohibition on the
exportation of wool, and one hundred guineas were taken from
the funds to meet the cost of procuring that statute. Then,
when the Act was actually passed, the committee flooded York-
shire with notices quoting its clauses, and joined with the Leeds
Cloth Halls trustees in prosecuting Mr. Hainsworth, the Leeds
merchant, who attempted to smuggle wool abroad. In fact,
during this and later agitations, the committee spent vast
sums of money on the anti-smuggling crusade.5 At the same
time, the exportation of machinery and cloth-making imple-

1 June 20, 1796. - Minutes, January 3, 1791. 3 Ibid., April 2, 1792.

4 See .Minutes, 1781-2. 5 Ibid., all 1789.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 433

ments was closely watched, and the activities of the committee
were largely responsible for obtaining the Act of 1780-1 which \
prevented the exportation of utensils used in the woollen manu- I
facture.1 When this Act was passed offenders were brought to
justice by the committee for attempting to export the actual
implements or plans of the same.2 Wherever any project was
being discussed the voice of the Worsted Committee was heard,
and in all parliamentary and legal matters which touched the
welfare of the Yorkshire cloth trade the employers' committee
would fearlessly put forward its own point of view.

Thirdly, the committee attempted to foster the mechanical
arts, and to encourage all inventions which might conduce to
the welfare of the industry. When a local inventor had materia-
lized some new idea, he would show it to the Worsted Committee,
and if it was regarded as being a valuable discovery the inventor
would be rewarded — under conditions. Thus, in 1779, a certain
Mr. Mordaunt reported to the committee that he had discovered
a more expeditious way of spinning wool ; but the invention
does not seem to have gained the approval of the committee,
for we hear nothing further about it. In 1785, however, an
important innovation was brought before the committee. This
consisted of an improved method of washing wool, which would
perform that task more quickly and thoroughly than the older
methods were able to do. The inventor, James Hartley, who
lived near Gisburn, offered to give a demonstration to the com-
mittee, and disclose the details fully to them if they cared to
pay for the knowledge. A deputation of six was ordered to wait
upon Hartley, examine his process, and make a report to a special
meeting of the members. The verdict expressed was entirely
favourable ; the deputation thought Hartley's discovery a great
improvement on existing methods, and declared that it would
be of public utility. The committee therefore decided to give
Hartley £100, on condition that he revealed every detail of his
improved process to them; and in June 1785 the last instal-
ment was paid, Hartley having satisfactorily surrendered his

1 Minutes, September 24, 1781.

2 Ibid., also September 23, i~i>}. In February 1787 the committee resolved
that ' the permitting any tools or implements used in the woollen manufai hire
to be exported will be very detrimental and highly injurious to the Trade ot
the Kingdom '.

1526.12 F f

434 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

discovery to the committee.1 Thus, in the advancement of
technological knowledge, the Worsted Committee kept an open
eye and an open purse for those who made some contribution
towards industrial skill.

Lastly, the committee figured in some small degree as a philan-
thropic agency, supporting the cause of charity and education.
As we noted above, the inspectors received the informer's share
of all fines levied upon their victims, but the Worsted Committee
insisted that these moneys should be immediately handed over
to itself. This order was made in April 1784, and at once
informer's money began to flow into the special fund set aside
for it. Here it remained until a substantial sum had accumulated,
when it was distributed to local philanthropic or educational
institutions. The chief places to receive support were the
General Infirmaries of Leeds and Manchester, which in 1787,
for instance, received contributions of twenty guineas and ten
guineas respectively.2 In fact, by 1796 the committee had paid
such sums into the coffers of these hospitals that it claimed the
right to recommend patients for admission, and the members
of the committee were informed that if they were desirous of
recommending any ' distressed objects ', they were to write to
the Clerk of the Committee, and obtain the necessary formal
approval from him.3 At the same time, occasional grants were
made in support of local Sunday schools. In 1791 the sum of
£4 us. 3d. was handed over to the Sunday schools of Northow-
ram, near Halifax,4 and in the following year the sum of £10,
received by an inspector as informer's money, was given to a very
deserving school in another part of the Riding.0

Such were the varied activities of the Worsted Committee.
They touched almost every side of economic and political life,
and no issue relevant to the industrial welfare of the county
was allowed to pass unattended. Existing legislation was
enforced on masters and men alike, suggested laws were sup-
ported or opposed, and new ideas in textile procedure were
welcomed. In its character the committee contained something
of a seventeenth-century corporation, something of a chamber
of commerce, something of an employers' federation or union :

1 Minutes, January to June 1785. - Minutes, December 31, 1787.

; Ibid., Marc)) 21, 1796, and June i;>)7-

' Ibid., September 20, (791. '- Ibid., June 20, 1792.

•xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 435

in the methods of its officers it bore some resemblanco to the
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. It was
a strange institution, and perhaps the strangest thing about it is
the fact that it still exists. The Worsted Committee is now
a comparatively flourishing body, which administers those
clauses of the eighteenth-century Worsted Acts which are still
operative. Between the prosperous condition of the eighteenth
century and that of to-day there is a long story of many narrow
escapes from extinction, into which we cannot enter at any
length ; but let us briefly note the outstanding events in the
committee's history during the last century.

The raison d'etre of the Worsted Committee lay in the domestic 1
system of industry, by which goods were worked up free from
constant or detailed supervision. So long as the preparation of
yarn was carried on in the cottages, so long would it be necessary
for the inspectors to go round, attempting to check frauds and
thefts amongst the workpeople. But, when spinning machinery
began to be congregated in factories, and spinning became
a factory process, the merchant could more effectually watch his
spinners, and guard against wrongdoing. When this took place,
the worsted inspector was deprived of the chief of his functions,
for it had been in the spinning and reeling of yarn that his police
duties were most necessary. When wool was not sent out to
agents to be distributed by them, it was no longer possible to
defraud the owner by substituting inferior wool, and when all
the spinning and reeling was performed on standard machines
under the eye of an overlooker it was difficult for the operative
to transgress as in former days. This change took place in the
last years of the eighteenth and the early years of the nineteenth
centuries, and with it came a contemporaneous decline in the
demands on the energies of the inspectors. In September 1801
the committee derided that 'from the very great decrease of
spinning at home' five inspectors would be sufficient to carry
out the duties of the committee, and therefore discharged two
ot its staff.1 In 1804 the number was reduced to tour,'- and in
1807 the committee ordered ' that in consequence of the resigna-
tion of John Sutcliffe, Inspector, and of the great decrease of
hand-spinning, that there is no occasion for a succession, but

1 Minutes, Septtuiln-r js. iSm. - Ibid., M.uvh v., 1S04.

F 1 Z

436 STATE AND INDUSTRIAL MORALITY IN chap.

that a new division of the districts be made out ', and the
number of inspectors thus came down to three.1

With this reduced staff the committee continued its activities
for the next half century. It still drew its income from the
drawback on soap, and, with the expansion of the West Riding
industry, the amount of this drawback increased rapidly. The
committee was quite wealthy, and at times was at a loss how to
dispose of its funds. In 1820 2 the mileage grant for committee-
men was raised from 6d. to 2s. per mile, and in 1821 3 it was
ordered that ' each member of the Committee be paid the sum
of two guineas for his attendance at each meeting, exclusive of
travelling expenses '. At the same time, whilst any slackness
on the part of inspectors was severely penalized, faithful servants
were treated most generously, with pensions on their retirement,
and grants to their widows on their deaths. Thus in 1849 an
aged inspector was given twenty guineas on his retirement,4
and in the previous year, on the death of another inspector,
' after a painful and expensive illness ', the committee resolved
that ' a gratuity of thirty guineas be paid to his widow, as
a mark of approbation '.5

This wealth, however, was not to continue much longer.
Throughout the early part of the nineteenth century chancellors
of the exchequer had tried to abolish the drawback on soap.
On such occasions the Worsted Committee made strong protests,
which usually resulted in the continuance of the exemption, and
therefore of the committee's income. With the reform of the
financial system during the 'forties and 'fifties it was inevitable
that the soap duty should be removed, and the step was eventu-
ally taken by Mr. Gladstone in 1853. 6 This cut off the com-
mittee's source of revenue at one blow, and left the members in
a state of perplexity. The committee at once began to take
stock of its position, dismissed three inspectors, and appointed
a sub-committee to inquire into the financial situation and give
advice as to the future. The sub-committee urged that the
efficiency of the committee should be maintained as long as the
funds lasted. Economies were to be effected by stopping all
mileage and attendance allowance, by retaining only one in-

1 Minutes, September 28, 1807. - Ibid., June 18, 1820.

3 Ibid., September 24, 1821. ' Ibid., September 24, 1849.

5 Ibid., September 25, 1848. li Ibid., June 20, 1853.

xii THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 437

spcctor, by reducing the clerk's salary from £40 to £20, and
by drastically curtailing the printing bill.1 This report was
accepted, and the committee lived on. But it was a precarious
existence ; in place of the 18 or 20 members who had attended
the meetings prior to 1853, the attendance now fell to ten, six,
four, two, and at times the secretary was the only person to
make an appearance.2 The funds of the committee were
invested in canal shares, scarcely a profitable source of income.
All efforts on the part of the surviving members failed to enlist
the interest and financial support of the worsted masters, and
for nearly twenty years the outlook for the organization was
very gloomy, so much so that at times it seemed almost desir-
able to commit suicide. After 1870 the energetic appeals of the
committee brought about a revival of interest. Manufacturers
began to see that the growth of factory production had not
entirely removed the possibilities of fraud and theft, and that
there was still need for a police organization such as the Worsted
Committee. Subscriptions began to trickle in, and from that
time onward the committee received considerable support. In
1889 an attempt to repeal the Worsted Acts was defeated, thanks
to the strong opposition of the committee. Hence the organiza-
tion still lives. It receives subscriptions from about 360 firms,
chiefly located around Bradford, Halifax, and Kcighley, and
meets quarterly to transact any business which may require
attention. Its two inspectors discharge the same duties as did
their predecessors over a century ago. They seek out cases of
purloining, embezzling, stealing, pawning, or selling of yarn,
and bring to punishment those who buy such stolen material
as well as those who sell. They visit railway warehouses, and
try to identify unclaimed worsted materials which may be lying
there ; and in every possible way they strive to protect the
masters from theft and loss. The number of the offences which
they discover is not very great, and, to an outsider, scarcely
seems to justify the continuance ol the institution. But evidently
the heads of the worsted industry hold a different opinion, and
si. the committee, having emerged from the shadow ot the
'sixties, will probably continue its existence until the perfect
man is evolved, on which distant day lawyers, magistrates,
and worsted inspectors may find their occupations gone.

1 Minutes, September jo, iS;;. - Ibid. See list of attendances, 1S53— ~i>.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

i. MANUSCRIPTS

Record Office

State Papers, Henry VIII to Edward VI.

Domestic State Papers, Mary to William III.

Entry Books, especially temp. Chas. II. Also Docquet Books.

Order Books of Council of State, especially Interregnum and Chas. II.

Treasury Papers and Books, Stuart period.

Home Office Papers, especially 1700-60.

Ancient Petitions, especially nos. 5371, 7485, 7486, 10673, and 11890.

Exchequer Depositions by Commission, 161 3, 1638, and 1676. For detailed

references, see footnotes to Chapter VI.
Ulnage Accounts, in Exchequer MSS. (Exch. K.R. Accounts, bundles 339-47).
Patent Rolls.
Close Rolls.

British Museum

Cotton MSS., especially Titus, B. i, f. 279 ; Galba, E. i, ff. 284-6, 320-2, 399.
Harleian MSS., especially 306, ff. 26-8 ; 433, ff. 159 b and 187 b; 1327,

ff . 7 & 9 b.
Stowe MSS., especially 354, ff. 63-5 ; 554, f. 45 ; 746, ff. no, 128, 136, 138 ;

748, f. 79.
Sloane MSS., especially 817, f. 21.

Lansdowne MSS., especially Burghley Papers, no, f. 65.
Coke MSS., especially i, f. 465.

Additional MSS., especially 21427 passim (Baynes Correspondence, vol. xi) ;
also 15873, f. 70; 32863, ff. 259-60; 33344, ff. 1963 et seq. ; 34324,
ff. 8-10, 14, 201, 203, 213 ; 34727, f. 29; 35670, ff. 146 et seq. ; 36996,^58.

Yorkshire MSS.

West Riding Sessions Records. These commence at 1638, and continue
from that date in an unbroken series. There are about fifty volumes
of Order Books, recording the orders made by the justices of the peace ;
also there are a similar number of Indictment Books, beginning 1637,
and written in Latin until 1732, the Commonwealth period alone excepted.
The Sessions Rolls, which begin with 1669, are fragmentary at first. All
these manuscripts are in the charge of Mr. Yibart Dixon, Clerk of the
Peace, County Hall, Wakefield, who kindly allowed me to examine them
at my leisure.

Leeds Corporation MSS. These consist of the Minute Book of the Corpora-
tion from 1 66 1 to the present day. The Corporation also has in its
possession the various deeds of transfer concerning the Coloured Cloth
Hall. All are housed in the Town Hall, Leeds.

Leeds Sessions Records. These are Order Books similar to those of the West
Riding, and cover part of the seventeenth and the whole of the eighteenth
century. They are in the custody of the Clerk of the Peace, Mr. Leake,
Basinghall Street, Leeds.

York Municipal Records. The stock of manuscripts in the Gildhall, York,
is enormous, but access to these papers is very difficult. There are a few

BIBLIOGRAPHY 439

volumes containing ordinances (1607 and 1020) and accounts (three
vols.) of the Weavers' Company : also various articles of agreement
between York and weavers who came there to teach the poor the textile
trade in the seventeenth century (1655 and 1698); the Corporation
Minute I tanks (House Books) contain frequent references to textile
work, many transcripts of which Dr. M. Sellers kindly placed at my
disposal.
Leeds White Cloth Hall MSS. These comprise a large collection of letters,
minute books, posters, account books, Blue Books, &c, relating to the
white cloth trade and its market during the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. They are in the keeping of Mr. H. Greenwood-Teale, Atlas
Chambers, Leeds.
Worsted Committee MSS. A number of minute books, dated from 1777 to
the present day : in the charge of Messrs. Mum ford and Johnson,
solicitors, Bradford.
Bradford Manor Court Rolls, Edward III to Henry V. A transcription

(four vols.) is in the Bradford Reference Library.
Letter Books of Joseph Holroyd and Sam Hill, 1706 and 1738. These two
fragments are in the Bankfield Museum, Halifax ; extracts from them
have been published, edited by the present writer (Bankfield Museum
Notes, Second Series, no. 3. King, Halifax, 19 14).
Isolated MSS., such as apprenticeship indentures, inventories, wills, deeds,
account books, letters, &c, are to be found in many places. Mr. J. Lister
of Halifax kindly lent me transcripts of many such documents, or the
actual documents themselves : others are in the Thoresby Society Library,
including one or two important petitions (in Cookson MSS.), figures
concerning the population of Leeds, a list of Leeds aldermen in the
seventeenth century ; the poem quoted in Chapter X is in manuscript
form in the Leeds Reference Library, and the Bradford Reference
Library has in its possession a number of stray manuscripts relating to the
local industry.

2. PRINTED RECORDS

Statutes of the Realm : also Statutes at Large.

Rymer's Foedera (original edition in 20 vols., and also Record edition).

Ordinances of the Privy Council, 155S to 1003.

House of Commons Journals.

Rotuli Parliamentorum (Record Commission).

House of Lords Journals.

Historical Manuscripts Commission, especially the following volumes :

Beverley Corporation, Dartmouth, Graham, House of Lords, Kenyon,
Kendal Corporation, Middleton, Portland, Salisbury, Stewart ; also
Order Book of the Justices of the North Riding (vol. ix of Report).
Rolls Scries, especially the following :

Chron. Mclsae (Meaux Abbey).

Chronicle of Symeon of Durham.

Chronica, Roger de Hovcden.

Chronica Maiora, Matthew Paris.

Liber Custumarum, in Munimenta Gildhallac.

Materials for a History of Henry VII.

Registrum Palatinum Dunelm.
Surtees Society publications generally. The most valuable for our subject are :

Vols, 2, 38, 112, 116, 121. Sorth Country Wills and Inventories.

Vol. 3. Townclcy Mysteries.

Vols. 4, 30, 45, ; 3, -1.), inn, Testamenta EJioraccnsia .

440 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Vol. 17. Life and Correspondence of Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York.

Vol. 33. Best, H. Rural Economy of Yorkshire in 1641.

Vol. 49. Kirkby's Inquest, 1284-5.

Vol. 65. Yorkshire Diaries (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries).

Vol. 77 . Priestley Memoirs, in North Country Diaries.

Vols. 91—2. Report of Chantry Commissioners on Chantries, Gilds, <£rc, in

the County of York.
Vols. 93 and 101. Extracts from the Records of the Merchant Adventurers

of Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Vol. 94. Pedes Finium Ebor' , regnante Iohanne (1199-1214).
Vols. 96 and 102. Register of the Freemen of York, 1272-1759.
Vols. 118 and 124. North Country Diaries (1630-1790).
Vol. 120. York Memorandum Book, vol. i. Vol. ii not yet to hand in

Australia.

Yorkshire Archaeological and Topographical Society : Record Series.

Vol. 3. West Riding Sessions Records, 1597-1602.

Vols. 4, 6, 11, 14, 19, &c. Yorkshire Wills and Registers of Wills.

Vols. 12, 23, 31, ~}>7- Inquisitions (thirteenth and fourteenth centuries).

Vols. 15, 16, 21, 25. Fay Subsidies (thirteenth and fourteenth centuries).

Vol. 44. Assize Roll, temp. Henry III.

Vols. 29 and 36. Court Rolls of the Manor of Wakefield, 1 272-1 327.

Poll Tax Returns for the West Riding, ed. Lister, have also been published

by the same Society.
Poll Tax Returns for East Riding, in Yorkshire Archaeol. Journal, vol. xx.

Thoresby Society publications, passim ; especially the following vols. :

Vols. 1, 3, 7, 10, 13, 20, 23, 25. Feeds Parish Church Registers, 1 572-1757.
Vols. 2, 4, 9, 11, 15, 22. Miscellanea, containing reprints of occasional

manuscripts referring to the local textile trade.
Vol. 6. Calverley Charters.
Vol. 8. Coucher Book of Kirkstall Abbey.
Vols. 1, 19, 22, 24, contain numbers of Leeds and District wills.

Various volumes.

Acts and Ordinances of the Eastland Merchants, ed. M. Sellers, Camden

Society, 3rd series, vol. 11.
Bland, Brown, and Tawney. English Economic History, Select Documents

(I9I4)-
Booke of Entries of the Pontefract Corporation, 1653-1726 (1882).
Cartwright, J.J. Chapters in the History of Yorkshire, being a collection of

original letters, papers, £yc, illustrating the state of that county in the reigns

of Elizabeth, James I, and Charles I (Wakefield, 1872).
Clay, J. W. Halifax Wills {fourteenth to sixteenth centuries), 2 vols., n.d.
Davies. Extracts from the Municipal Records of York (1843).
English History Source Books, no. 1, ed. by Wallis (Bell, 1913).
Farrer. Early Yorkshire Charters, vol. i (1914).
Hamilton, A. H. A. Quarter Sessions Records, from Queen Elizabeth to

Queen Anne (1878).
Hundred Rolls (Record Commission).

Leach, Beverley Town Documents (Selden Soc, vol. xiv).
Fife of Marmaduke Rawdon (Camden Soc, vol. lxxxv).
Little Red Book of Bristol (2 vols., 1900).
North Hiding Quarter Sessions Records, ed. J. C. Atkinson, 9 vols. (1883

et seq.).
Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I (Kecord Commission).
Pipe Polls. 5-29 lien. II (Pipe Lolls Society).

BIBLIOGRAPHY 441

Survey of Manor of Bradford, 15 Ed. Ill (in Bradford Antiquarian, vol. ii,

PP- 137-8).
Thoresby's Diary, 1677-1724, ed. by Hunter, 2 vols. (1830).
Toulmin Smith, L. York Mystery Plays (1885).

3. PARLIAMENTARY REPORTS

Reports on Smuggling of Wool, 1786. General Collected Reports, vol. xxxviii,

nos. 82-5, 87.
Report of the Committee on the petitions of the woolcombers. House of

Commons Journals, xlix. 322.
Report of House of Lords Inquiry concerning the Wool Trade, 1800. Copy

in Leeds Reference Library.
Report of Select Committee on petitions of merchants and manufacturers

in the wootlen manufacture of Yorkshire. Reports, 1802-3, v°b v-
Report of Select Committee appointed to consider the state of the woollen

manufacture in England, 1806. Reports, 1806, vol. iii.
Report of Committee on Cloth Stamping Laws, 1821. Reports, 1821, vol. vi.
Census Reports, 1831, 1841, 185 1.
Reports, various, on condition of hand-loom weavers. Reports, 1835, xiii ;

1839, xlii ; 1840, xxiii and xxiv.
Factory Inspectors' Reports, 1840-5.

Poor Law Commission, 1834. Reports, 1834, xxvii and xxviii.
Health of Towns Commission, 1845. Reports, 1845, xviii. The Yorkshire

section was printed separately ; a copy is in the Bradford Reference

Library.

4. CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE

(a) General

Aikin. England Delineated (1809) ; England Described (1818).

Anderson. History of Commerce (1764).

Annals of Agriculture (1 790-1 804).

Annual Register.

British Directory, 1790-3, 5 vols.

Britannia Linguens, or a Discourse of Trade (1680).

Camden. Britannia (1789 edition).

Campbell, R. The London Tradesman (1757).

Carter, \V. England's Interest by Trade Asserted (1671).

Chamberlayne. The State of England (1737).

Child, Sir Josiah. A New Discourse of Trade (1720 ?).

Chronicon Rusticum Commcrciale, or Memoirs of Wool ; a series of extracts

from seventeenth and eighteenth-century pamphlets by various writers,

dealing chiefly with the wool and cloth trade ; compiled by J. Smith,

2 vols. (1747).
Defoe, Tour through Great Britain, many editions, 1724, 1748, 17(12, 3 vols.

Complete Tradesman (1737 ?), 1841 edition, 2 vols.

Dodsley's Road Book (1756).

Dyer. The Fleece (1757) (English Poets Series).

Eden. State of the Poor (1797). 3 vols.

Fiennes, Celia. Through England on a Side-Saddle in the Time of William

and Mary (Intro, by Hon. Mrs. Griffiths, 1888).
Fuller, T. Church History of Britain (1655 and 1845 editions).

Worthies of England (nSii edition), 2 vols.

«Gee. Trade and Navigation of England Considered ( 1 7 3 < > ) -
Gentleman's Magazine, 1731 onwards.

442 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Haynes, J. Great Britain's Glory (17 15).

A view of the present state of the clothing trade in England (1706).

Laurence. The Duty of a Steward to his Lord (1727).
Lelancl. The Itinerary of John Leland (1745 edition), 7 vols.
Luccock. Observations on British Wool (1800).
— Macpherson. Annals of Commerce (1805), 4 vols.
May, J . A Declaration of the Estate of Clothing now used within this Realm

(1613).
Observations on British Woolland the Manufacture of it, by a Northamptonshire

Manufacturer (1738).
Pamphlets on Wool, in Brit. Mus., 712. g. 16. Contains all the important
pamphlets of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially The
Golden Fleece, by W. S., gentleman (1656) ; The Weavers' True Case,
by a practical weaver (1720) ; England's Glory by Foreign Trade, by
a true lover of his country (1669).
Pennant. Tour through Scotland (1770), 3 vols.

Pococke. The Travels thro' England of Richard Pococke, 1750 and following
years (Camden Soc. publications, vols. 42-4).
~ Radcliffe. Origin of Power-Loom Weaving (1828).
Smith, Adam. Wealth of Nations (Routledge edition, 1903).
Wheeler. A Treatise of Commerce (1601).
Young, A. A Six Months' Tour through the North of England (1771), 4 vols.

A Farmer's Tour through the East of England (1771), 4 vols.

Travels through France (1794 edition), 2 vols.

(b) Local

A Cordial Drop, being the substance of a conversation between a master and

journeyman in a large manufacturing town in Yorkshire, 1792 ? (Brit. Mus.

554. g. 31 (2)).
A History of Leeds, compiled from various authors by Wright (1797).
A Walk through Leeds (1806).
Bentley. Halifax and its Gibbet Law (1708).
Bigland. Topographical and Historical Description of the County of York

(1812).
Boothroyd. History of Pontefract (1807).
Bray. Sketch of a Tour into Derbyshire and Yorkshire {1777).
Charnock. Essay on Farming of the West Riding (Royal. Soc. Journal, ix).
Cooke. Topographical Description of Yorkshire (181 2).
Dayes. An Excursion through the Principal Parts of Derbyshire and Yorkshire

(1805).
Description of Leeds, printed by Dodsley (London, 1764. Transcript in Leeds

Reference Library).
Drake. Eboracum (1737).

Gent. The Antient and Modern History of the Famous City of York (1730).
Hadley. A New History of Kingston-upon-Hull (1788).

Housman. Topographical Description of ... a Part of the West Riding (1800).
Langdale. Topographical Dictionary of Yorkshire (1822).
Leedes Intelligencer, 1754 onwards.
Leeds Directories, numerous from 1797 onwards ; especially 1797, 1798, 1809,

1817.
Leeds Guides, various dates, especially 1806, 1808.
Leeds Mercury ; files from 1737 onwards in Leeds Reference Library ; see

extracts from 1721-37 in Thoresbv Soc. publications, xxii and xxiv.
Marshall. Rural Economy of Yorkshire (1788), 2 vols.
Matters of Interest, a volume of odds and ends, 1720-1850, in Leeds Reference

Library.

(

BIBLIOGRAPHY 443

Maude. Verbeia, or Wharf cdalc ; ;i poem descriptive of that p;irt of Yorkshire

(1782).
Midgley. Halifax and its Gibbet Law placed in a true light (1701).
Northern Star, or Yorkshire Magazine, 3 vols., 1817-18.
Plain Reasons addressed to the People of Great Britain against the intended

Petition to Parliament for leave to export wool, 1782.
Poulson. Beverlac (1820), 2 vols.
The Case of the Narrow Clothiers and other Woollen Manufacturers in the West

Riding <>( the County of York, 1732 ; Brit. Mus. 357. c. 1. (59).
The Old History of Bradford (1776).

Thoresby. Ducatus Leodiensis (17 15) ; ed. by Whitaker (1816).
To the King's Majestic, the Humble Petition of the Clothiers of Leeds for redress

of Grievances affecting their Trade, 1642 ; Brit. Mus., E. 144 (6).
Watson. History and Topography of Halifax ( 1 77 5) .
Whitaker. Loidis and Elmete (1816).
Wright. The Antiquities of the Town of Halifax (1738).
York Courant, 1764 onwards.
Yorkshire Magazine, 1786—7.

5. PRINTED WORKS
(a) General

Abrani, A. Social Life in England in the Fifteenth Century (1909).

Ashley, W. J. An Introduction to English Economic History and Theory

(4th edition, 1909).
"Ashley, W. J. The Early History of the English Woollen Industry (1887).

The Economic Organisation of England (1914).

Baines, E. 'An Account of the Woollen Manufacture of England' (Brit.

Assoc. Lecture at Leeds, 1858, printed in Yorkshire, Past and Present, 1870).
Bateson, M. Review of ' Beverley Town Documents ' (Eng. Hist. Rev., xvi).
'Bischoff, J. Comprehensive History of the Woollen and Worsted Manufactures,

2 vols. (1842).
Bonwick, J. Romance of the Wool Trade (1804).
.Burnley, J. History of Wool and Wool-combing (1889).
Clapham, J. H. ' Economic Change ' (Cambridge Mod. Hist., vol. x).

Woollen and Worsted Industries (1907).

Clarendon. History of the Great Rebellion (1888 edition, Oxford).

Cole, G. H. D. The World of Labour (1913).

Cooke, A. M. ' The Cistercian Settlement in England ' (Eng Hist. Rev., viii).

Cooke Taylor, T. The Modern Factory System (1891).

Cunningham. Growth of English Industry and Commerce (1907 and 1910).

Dechesne, L. L'evolution economiquc ct socialc de V Industrie de la lainc en

Angleterrc (Paris, 1900).
De Gibbins, H. B. Industry in England (1897).

Industrial History of England (1910 edition).

Dixon. Florentine Wool Trade (Trans. Royal Hist. Soc, New Series, vol. xii).

Dodd, A. F. Early English Social History (Bell, IQ13).

Dodd, ('.. Textile Manufactures of ('rent Britain (1844).

Durham. Relations of the Crown to Trade under Janus I (Trans. Royal Hist.

Soc, New Series, xiii).
Espinasse, F. Lancashire Worthies (1874-7).
Forbes, II. History of the Worsted Manufacture in England (185 1 Exhibition

Lectures, vol. ii, pp. 301 -31).
Gardiner, S. R. History of England, 1(11)4-42 (1SS3).
Green, Mrs. J. R. Town Life in the Fifteenth Century (1894).
Gross, C. The Gild Merchant (i8qo).

444 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Guiseppi. Alien Merchants in England; trans. R. Hist. Soc, n.s., vol. ix.
Hasbach. History of the English Agricultural Labourer (1908).
Hirst, W. History of the Woollen Trade during the past sixty years (1844).
Hobson, J. A. Evolution of Modern Capitalism (1906).
3 James, J. History of the Worsted Manufacture in England (1857).
Lambert. Two Thousand Years of Gild Life (1891).
Law, A. The English Nouveaux-Richcs of the Fourteenth Century (Trans. Royal

Hist. Soc., New Series, vol. ix).
Leonard, E. M. Early History of English Poor Relief (1900).
Lingelbach. The Merchant Adventurers of England (Philadelphia, 1902).
Lipson, E. An Introduction to the Economic History of England in the Middle

Ages (1915).
Lohmann, F. Die staatliche Regelung der englischen Wollindustrie, vom xv.

bis zum xviii. Jahrhundert (1900).
Madox. The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer (171 1).
jMantoux. La Revolution industrielle au XVIIIt sieclc (1906).
McCulloch. Commercial Directory (1839).
McLaren, W. S. B. Spinning Woollen and Worsted (1884).
Morley, J. Walpole (1899).

Life of Gladstone (1903).

Price, L. L. : Money and its Relation to Prices (1909 edition).

Priestley, J. Hist. Account of Navigable Rivers, Canals, &c, throughout Great

Britain (183 1).
Ramsay. Lancaster and York (1892).

Rogers, J. E. T. History of Agriculture and Prices (1886-7).
Salzmann, H. English Industries in the Middle Ages (1913).
\ Samuel Bros. Wool and Woollen Manufactures of Great Britain : a Historical

Sketch (1859).
Schanz, G. Englische Handelspolitik gegen Ende des Mittelalters (1881).
Seebohm, F. ' The Black Death ' {Fortnightly Review, 1865).
Sydney. England in the Eighteenth Century (1891).
Tawney, R. H. ' The Assessment of Wages in England by the Justices of the

Peace (Vierteljahrschrift fur Social- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte , 191 3).
Toynbee, A. The Industrial Revolution of the Eighteenth Century in England,

(1908 edition).
Unwin, G. Industrial Organisation in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

(1904).

The Gilds and Companies of London (1908).

Ure, A. Philosophy of Manufactures (1835).

Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, and Mines (1861 edition).

Webb, S. and B. History of Trade Unionism (1902).

History of Local Government :■ the Manor and the Borough (1906).

The Story of the King's Highway (191 3).

Westerfield, R. B. The Middleman in English Business, particularly between

1660 and 1760 (191 5).
Wood, Trueman. Industrial England in the Eighteenth Century (J 91 1).

(b) Local

Allen. History of Yorkshire, 6 vols. (1828).

Atkinson. Ralph Thoresby, His Town and Times, 2 vols. (1S91).

Baines, T. Yorkshire, Past and Present, 4 vols. (1870).

Beddoe. 'Ethnology of the West Riding' (Yorks. Archaeol. and Topogr.

Journal, vol. xix).
Bradford Antiquary, 4 vols. (1884-97).
Clapham, J. H. ' Industrial Organisation of the Yorkshire Woollen and

Worsted Industries' {Economic Journal, xvi (1900)).

BIBLIOGRAPHY 445

Clap ham, J. H. ' The Transference of the Worsted Industry from East
Anglia to the West Riding ' {Economic Journal, 1910).

Colman. History of Barwick-in-Elmct (Thoresby Soc, vol. xvii (1907)).

Cook. Historical Notes on Beverley (1880).

Cropper, An Old Leeds. Old Leeds, Its Bygones and Celebrities (1868).

Dawson. Loose Leaves from Craven History (1891).

Fletcher, J. S. Picturesque History of Yorkshire, 6 vols, (no date).

Halifax Antiquarian Society Reports (1900 onwards).

Heaton, H. ' The Assessment of Wages in the West Riding of Yorkshire in
the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Economic Journal, 1914).

The Leeds White Cloth Hull (Thoresby Soc, vol. xxii (1913)).

Tricks of the Trade (Thoresby Soc, xxii, part iii (1914)).

Hewart, B. ' The Cloth Industry in the North of England in the Sixteenth

and Seventeenth Centuries' (Economic Journal, 1900).
Hodgson. Textile Manufacture . . . in Keighley (1878).
Holroyd. Collectanea Bradfordiana (1873).
Ibbetson's Directory of Bradford (1845).
Jackson. History of Barnsley (1858).

Guide to Leeds ( 1 889) .

James, J. History and Topography of Bradford (1841 and 1866 editions).

Keighley and Holmes. Keighley, Past and Present (1858).

Law, M. C. D. The Story of Bradford (191 3).

Lister, J. ' Halifax in the Days of Henry VIII ' (Halifax Almanack, 191 3).

' Notes on the Early History of the Woollen Trade in Bradford and

Halifax ' (Bradford Antiquary, vol. ii).

Lister, J., and Ogden. Poll Tax Returns for the Parish of Halifax.

Mayhall, J. Annals of Yorkshire, 3 vols. (1870).

Murray's Handbook to Yorkshire (1904).

Notes and Queries (Leeds Mercurv Supplement, 1890 onwards).

Old Yorkshire, ed. Smith, 8 vols. (1881-91).

ed. Wheater, 1 vol. (1885).

Parsons, E. History and Description of the Manufacturing Districts of the

West Riding, 2 vols. (1834).
Price, A. C. Leeds and its Neighbourhood (1909).
Raine, Canon. History of York (Historic Towns Scries, 1893).
Robinson. Relics of Old Leeds (1906).
Roth, H. Ling. ' Hand Card-making ' (Bankfield Museum Notes, 1st series, xi).

' Hand-combing ' (Bankfield Museum Notes, 1st scries, vi).

' Bishop Blaize, Saint, Martyr, and Woolcombers' Patron ' (Bankfield

Museum Notes, 2nd series, vi).

Yorkshire Coiners (1906).

Schrocder, H. Annals of Yorkshire, 2 vols. (1851).

Sellers, M. Chapters on ' Economic History ' and ' Textile Industries ', in

Victoria County History of Yorkshire, vols, ii and iii (1913).
' The Merchant Adventurers of York ' (Brit. Association Handbook,

York, [906).
- The Merchant Adventurers of York (pamphlet. 1013).

' York in the Sixteenth Century ' (Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. xvi).

Smith, W. Rambles round Morley (1866).

Svkes, I). F. E. Huddersjield and its I'icinity (1898).

Travis, J. Notes, Historical and Biographical, of Todtnorden and District

(i8y6).
Turner, J. Horsfall. Shipley. Idle, mid District (n.d.).

The Wakefield House of Correction (n.d.).
Wardell, J . Municipal History of Leeds (1848).
Wilson. History of Bramley Parish (i860).

INDEX

Abbeys, as wool-producers, i ;
Black Death in, 25.

Aberford, 6, 213, 359.

Adwalton, 287.

Agriculture : allied to textile in-
dustry, 24, 93 ff., 290 ff. ; small
holdings, 290 ff. ; wages in, 113.

Aire, 287.

Aliens : declining influence of , 152 ;
cloth factors, 249 ; Merchant
Adventurers and, 158.

Almondbury : illegal practices at,
134 ; in ulnage accounts, 74 ff.

Altona, 192.

Alverthorpe, 5 f., 287, 370.

Al wood ley, 6.

Andover, 284.

Anglesey, 188.

Antwerp, 156, (59, 186.

Appleby, 16.

Apprentices : runaway, 306 ; train-
ing and treatment of, 104 f.,
305 ff. ; wages to, 303.

Apprenticeship : and cloth halls,
308, 311, 374 ff., 382; and
division of labour, 310 f . ; and
journeymen, 309 ; and Poor
Law, 104 f., 303 ff. ; and wool-
combers, 312; and worsted in-
dustry, 310 f. ; decline of, 310 ff. ;
in Broad Woollen Corporation,
233 ; indenture quoted, 301 f. ;
indictments under 1563 Act,
103 f., 309 ff. ; in Domestic Sys-
tem, 101 ff., 204; in eighteenth
century, 301 ff. ; in gilds, 35 ;
in Leeds, z^h ff., 303 ft., 309 ff. ;
in Merchant Adventurers, 158,
161 ; lax observance of 1563
Act, 106 f., 308 ff. ; premiums,
303 ; soldiers and sailors and,
312; statutes relating to, 102 f.,
310 f.

Ardsley, West, 300, 430.

Arkwright, 282, 333.

Armitage family, 169.

Armitage, Sir George, 367.

Armley, 288, 307, 374.

Askwith, 335.

Assize of Measures ( 1 197), 1 2(1.

Atkinson, John, 308, 354.

Atkinson, L., 296, 351.

Auckland, 212.

Austria, 27(1 ; Archduke of, 18O.

AysLNirth, 7.

1 Baildon, 287.
j Balance of trade, 191.
! Baltic, trade with, 150, 156, 158,
162, 165, 175.
' Banding ', 131.
j Barbary, 143, 150.
I Barker, Edmund, },z~ .
I Barnsley, 71, 80, 283, 359.
. Barwick-in-EImet, 285.
I Bateson, Miss M., on Beverley gilds,
i 30.
Batley, 10, 134, 287, 305, 370, 374.
Bawtry, 17, 19, 21.
Baynes (Baincs), 134.
Baynes, Adam, and Yorkshire mer-
chants, 167, 174 f., 214, 231 ff.
Baynes, E., quoted, 358.
Baynes, John, 203.
Beaumont, R. H., 367.
Beaumont, Sir Richard, 226.
Bedale, 70, 253, 286, 329, i^>
Bedford, 85 f., 420.
Beeston, 196, 288, 354.
Berkenhout, John, 236, 246.
Berkshire, ulnage returns for, 85 ff.
Beverley : early industry, 3 f. ;
effect of Reformation on, n ;
exodus from, 53 ; export of
cloth, 4 ; industrial decline of,
49 ff. ; in 1086, 10 ; merchants,
13, 171 ; municipal strife in, 52 ;
pestilence in, 195 ; wool market
at, 329 ; workhouse at, 354.
Bierley, 370.

Bingley, 183 f., 197, 380, 419.
Birmingham, 195.
Birstall, 134, 179, 230, 370.
Bischoff family, 368, 394.
Black Death, 25 ft., 47, 195.
Blackwell Hall, 76, 80, 146 ff., 181,
204; and depression (1622),
188; factors in, 148 f., 204;
northern cloths in, 146 ff., 239;
special rooms in, 148.
Bocking, 269 f., 279.
Bordeaux, 151.
Boroughbridge, 70.
Boston, 263.
Bowling, 287, 370.
Boynton, factory at, 355.
Brabant, immigrants from, 14 ft.
Bradford : and ulnage lawsuits,
182 ft., IQ7 ; Black Death in, 20 ;
decline of, 210, i~ 3 ; during Civil
War, 208-14; illegal practices

448

INDEX

at, 134; industry in fourteenth
century, 17, 21, 22, 68 ; in eigh-
teenth century, 273 ; in six-
teenth century, 78 ff. ; in ulnage
accounts, 71 ff. ; Piece Hall, 273,
311, 380 ft.; plague in, 196;
population of, 274 ; revival of,
273 f. ; worsted industry in,
265 f., 273 f., 286.

Bramley, 303, 374.

Brandenburg, 193.

Braunsberg, 162.

Bridges, 399.

Briggs, Oliver, 147.

Bristol, 13, 16, 38, 160, 356.

Broadbent, Peter, 307.

Brogger, in wool trade, 119 ff., 329.

Brooke, Elijah, 295 f.

Brown, Sarah, 308.

Bruges, 46, 159.

Buckinghamshire, 85 f. ; wool of,
118.

Burghley, Lord, 117.

Burial in woollen cloths, 252 f.

Burnley, 380.

Burton, John, 303.

Bury, 286.

Busfield, W., 203, 223.

Byram of Manchester, 90.

Calais, staple at, 120.

Calder Vale, 287 ; factory in, 355.

Calverlev, 374 ; earlv industry in,

5, 287'.
Calverlev, Sir Walter, 290.
Cambridge, 80, 85 f., 195 f., 205.
Canals, 256 f., 273 f., 402 f.
Carding, 262, ^^^. 357-
Carlisle, 326.
Carriers, 148, 199 f.
Carron, M., 138 f.
Cartwright, 282, 283.
Causeways, 399, 401.
Cawood, 359.
Caygill, Mr., 379.
Cecil, R., 81 f., 167.
Chapel Allerton, 284.
Chapeltown, 213.
Chapman, and wool supply, 119,

203 ff.
Cheshire, 86, 133, 335, 382, 420.
Chester, 16, 146, 150.
Childe. Wm„ 320, 347, 350.
Children : abuses in employment

of, 337 f. ; employment of, 96,

293, 305, 336, 347 f. ; industrial

schools for, 336 f., 354.
Churwell, 288.' '
Civil War, 174, 206 ii. ; and textile

industry, 206, 2 14.
Clapham, 424.

Clap ham, Charles, 300, 327.

Clapham, J. H., quoted, 297.

Clarendon, quoted, 208.

Cleckheaton, 287, 370 f .

Cleveland, 285.

Clifton, 370.

Clothiers : and Civil War, 207 ff . ;
and factories, 296, 351ft.; and
public markets, Chap. XI ; and
wool export, 325 ; become mer-
chants, 169, 203 ; broad woollen,
230 ff., 31 1 f. ; cost of equipment,
294 ; equipment of, 94 ff., 293 ;
functions of, 91 ff. ; grades of,
91 ff., 203, 292 ff. ; homes of,

289 ff. ; in fifteenth to seven-
teenth centuries, 89 ff. ; in west
of England, 92 ; in worsted in-
dustry, 297 ff. ; small, 202, 293 f.,
320 f., 330 f. ; small holdings of,

290 ff. ; struggle between rich
and poor in Leeds, 221 ff. ; work-
ing to order, 203 f., 299 f ., 384,
386 ff .

Cloths : Arras cloths, plan for
making in Yorkshire, 100 ; bays,
84, 188, 192, 251, 268, 269 f., 276 ;
Beverley pieces, 4 ; ' Bristols ',
280 ; broad cloths, 79, 84, 108,
137, 192, 220, 230 ff., 267, 295 f.,
406 ff . ; calico, manufacture for-
bidden, 253 ; calimancoes, 250,
270, 274 ; camlets, 250, 270,
274 f . ; carpets, 266, 285 ; change
in character of kerseys, 197 f.,
204 ; cloths of assize, 70, 128 ;
cogware, 127, 128 f. ; coloured,
exported by Eastland Merchants,
152 ; coloured, forbidden entry
into Flanders, 186; comparison
of qualities, 205 f. ; complaints
from overseas concerning bad
quality, 135, 138 f., 193 f. ; ' cot-
tons', 84, 122, 129, 132, 136 f.,
148 f., 150, 188, 194; cotton,
257, 279; 'cushions', 265, 266;
customs on, 170 f., 184, 197,
201, 227 ; Devon, 84, 133 ;
Exeter Long Ells (serges), 269 f.,
275; 'frizes', 132 f., 136 f.,
139, 148 f., 188; Halifax pieces,
76 ; improved quality of ker-
seys, 198, 205 f. ; Keighley
whites, 139, 145 ; Kendal cloths,
84, 127 ff., 132 f., 251 ; Kerseys,
69, 79 f., 84, 94, 109, 115, 128,
132, 136ft., 145. '47, 'SO, 179.
182 ff., 107, 200, 251, 267, 269,
276, 388 ; labour required for
production of various cloths, 90,
95 f., 108 f., 338 ; narrow cloths,

INDEX

449

69 f., 410 ff. ; new draperies, 148,
150, 217, 265 f. ; northern dozens,
84. 90» 93. 97. 115, 136, 138 f.,
145, 179, 222, 405 ; pcnnistones,
8ot 136, 139, 145 ; prices of, 4,
"45. l97 '> quality of Yorkshire
pieces, 19 f., 145, 205 f., 280 ;
says, 217, 264; serges, 84, 192,
217, 251, 264, 2661., 269, 270;
shalloons, 264 f., 267 ff., 274,
298, 387 ; state regulation of
dimensions and quality, Chaps.
IV, VII, XII; tammies, 264,
270, 271, 275, 387 ; trade in,
Chaps. V and XI, 249 ; varieties
of, 72. 79, 136, 217 ; volume of
exports, 150, 156, 168, 187 f.,
201, 244 f., 248, 258, 281;
Welsh, 194 ; West of England,
205 f. ; white cloths, 274, 287,
365 ; white cloths exported by
Merchant Adventurers, 152, 156,
185 f., 249 ; worsteds, 86, 261 ff.

Cloth Halls : and apprenticeship,
308 f., 311, 374 ff. ; and smiif^-
fjling, t,2j ; Blackwell, 147 ff. ;
Bradford Piece, 273, 297, 311,
380 f. ; Colnc, 311, 381 ; decline
of, 386 ff. ; Gomcrsal, 366 f. ;
Halifax, 256, 271, 379 f. ; Hud-
dersfield, 311, 381 f. ; ' Leaden ',
148 f. ; Leeds Mixed, 297, 371 ff.,
390 ff. ; Leeds White, 256, 297,
365 ff., 375 ff., 380 f. ; small
clothiers and, 204 ; ' Tom Paine '
375 ; Wakefield, 272, 365, 382.

Clough, Robert, 104.

Cobden, R., 379.

Cockayne dyeing project, 185 ff.

' Cockling ', 131.

Cogmen, 128.

Colbert, 192, 250.

Colchester, 220, 284.

Colne, 380, 3S1 ; Cloth Hall, 311,
336, 3&1 > worsted industry in,
271, j.s'>.

Combing, 262 f.

Communications : by canal, 402 ft. ;
by river, 271, 402 f. ; by road,
396 ff. ; in eighteenth century,
395 ff. ; means of, 256 ff., 274.

Companies. See Gilds.

Constable, Sir Marmaduke, Com-
missioner on frauds, 134.

Convoys. See Shipping.

Cookson, Wm., 306.

Copenhagen, 102.

Corn : market at Wakefield, 2~2,
40? ; scarcity of, 188, 211 ; trade,
[68, 208 f.

Cornwall, 8; f., 133.

1526.12 C. il

Corporations : at Leeds, 220 ff. ;
for new draperies, 219 ; for
towns, 219 ff. ; of Broad Woollen
Clothiers of West Riding, 230 ff.,
314 f. ; to control industry, 218 ff.

Cottars, 5, 9, 24 f.

Coventry, 13, 86, 284, 392 ; decline
of, 272, 275.

Coverlet Weavers, 13, 15, 18, 19, 21,
31; Act of 1542-3, 55 ff. ; in
York, 55 ff., 265.

Crabtree, J., 199.

Craven, 13, 16, 335.

Credit : in cloth sales, 204, 246,
- 383, 385 ; in wool trade, 1 19.

Crompton, R., 323.

Cromwell, Thomas, 134, 135.

Crossley, John, 146.

Crowther, 134.

Cullingworth, 430.

Cumberland, 86 ; clothiers of, 121 f.

Cunimy, T., 221.

Currer, 424.

Customs on cloth, 170 f., 180, 184,
191, 201.

Cu thbert of Kendal, 90.

Dantzig, 162.
Darlington, 212, 397.
Davey, Thomas, 180 f.
Dawson, John, 238.
Day, John, 317.

Defoe, quoted, 264, 269, 271, 273,
285, 291, 353, 361 ft'., 383, 384,

3c/>-

De Laci family, 10.

Denholme, 269.

Denison family, 169, 368.

Denmark, 158, 378.

Dent, 286, 329, 359.

Depressions: (1614), 187 f. ; (1621-
3), 150, 157, 185, i88f., 195;
(1630), 189, 195; during In-
terregnum, 214 f. ; temp. Car.
II, 248 ff. ; (1703), 251 ; in
eighteenth century, 275 ff. ; at-
tempts to overcome, 252 ff. ;
causes of, 189-95 '• inquiry into
causes of (1022), 190 ff.

Derby, 85 f., ^^, 353 *■> 3<*2.

Devon and Cornwall : industry in,
20, 84 f., 88, 188, 284; textile
wages in, 114.

Dewsbury, 6, 10, 134, 2S7, 365, 370,
374 ; plague in, 196 f.

Dixon, John, 183.

Dobson, Anthony, 307.

Domesdav Book : meaning of word
' Waste ', <) f.

Domestic Svstcm : and health of
workers, 3 ^4 f., 337 f • 34". ."4s ff- ;

450

INDEX

and machinery, 352 f. ;] and
supervision of employees, 351 f.,
418 f. ; apprenticeship in, 101 ft.,
301 ff. ; clothiers' homes, 289 ff. ;
criticism of, 347 ff. ; employers'
attitude towards, 351 f . ; in
fifteenth to seventeenth cen-
turies, 89-123 ; in eighteenth
century, 293-301 ; poem de-
scribing, 344 ff . ; position of
employees in, 107-17, 312 ft.;
slow decay of, 356 ff.

Doncaster : 21, in, 265, 396, 399;
and Worsted Committee, 429 ;
in ulnage accounts, 70 ff . ; knit-
ting industry at, 286 ; wool fair,
119, 123.

Dorset, 85 f. ; textile decline of,
279.

Drake, John, 182.

Drake, Nathan, 199.

Drapers, 18, 24, 153 ; of London,
217.

Drighlington, 287.

Dunkirk, 324, 328; men of, 163,
172.

Durham, 80, 86 ; clothiers of, 121 f.

Durrans, Samuel, 304.

Dyeing : Cockayne experiment in,
185 ff. ; described, 332 f. ; fault}-,
137 ; improvement in, 392 f. ; in
Low Countries, 156, 249, 392;
in West of England, 206 ; on
manors, 22 f. ; organization of,
299 ; use of logwood, 220 f .

Dyer- J-. quoted, 324, 331 f... 340,
342, 3; 5 f. ; factory described by,
355 f.

East Anglia : and Worsted Com-
mittee, 420 ; industrial decline of,
259, 279 f. ; new draperies in,
148, 150, 263, 266 f., 275 ; ulnage
accounts for, 86, 88, 129.

Eastland Merchants, 46, 152 f., 156,

161 f., 168 ff., 172 f. ; area of
activity, 162 ; controlled by
London members, 162 ff. ; decline
of, 242, 244 ff. ; government of,

162 ff. ; local branches, 164;
obstacles to trade, 191 ; of Hull,

163 f. ; of Newcastle, 164; of
York, 163 ff. ; relations with
Merchant Adventurers, 165 ;
struggle between London and
outports, 165 ff.

East Riding, 4, 6 f ., 18, 285, 342.
Edward III and Flemish immi-
grants, 1 3 f.
Eccleshill, 287, 374.
Elbe, 160, 162, 244.

Elbing, 162.

Elbceuf, 280.

Elland, 19, 23, 134.

Ellis, J., 296.

Elsinore, 162.

Emden, 159.

Emigration of textile workers, 192,

250 ; forbidden, 254.
Engrossing wool, 1 19 ff.
Essex: textile wages in, 114;

ulnage accounts for, 85, 88 ; wool

of, 205.
Exeter, 156, 264, 269 f., 275, 326,

361.
Export, of wool, 1 f. ; see also Wool ;

of cloth, 4, Chap. V, 185 ff ., 197 f .,

201, 214, 241ft., 251, 276 f.,

383 «.

Factories : and charitable institu-
tions, 354 ff. ; and gaols, 355;
and poor law, 354 ff.; and
water-power, 353 ff. ; anti-fac-
tory Act (1555), 90; early evi-
dence of, 89 f. ; factory system,
283 ; in eighteenth century, 273,
296, 352 ff. ; opposition to,
347 ff. ; plan for factory at
Skipton (1588), 98 f. ; slow
growth of, 353 ff., 356 ff.

Factors, 145, 148 f. ; alien, 249 ;
and foreign buyers, 249, 271,
383 ff. ; and private orders, 300,
386 ff. ; in cloth market, 204.
See also Middlemen ; Holroyd,
Joseph.

Fairfax, Lord, 189, 208 ff., 214.

Fairfax, Sir Thomas, 208.

Fairs, 167, 359; cloth, 145, 166 f.,
2°3. 359 '• St. Bartholomew's, 76,
146 f., 180 f., 204; wool, 329.

Farrer, Henry, 146.

Farsley, 287, 374.

Felting, 260 ff.

Fielden, 424.

Finishing, 272, 274, 393 ; and
apprenticeship, 309 f . ; in towns,
289; labour unrest in, 316 f. ;
machinery for, 357 ; organiza-
tion of, 298 if., 319 f.

Firth, Stephen, 301 f.

Flanders, 152, 251 ; import of dyed
cloths forbidden, 186.

Flanders, Count of, 153, 171 f.

Flemish immigration, 8-21.

Flocks, 145 ; commission on illegal
use of, 133 ff. ; fraudulent use of,

I3L 137 i-

Florence, 152.

Flying shuttle, adoption of, 340 f.

Fountain family, ?68, 370.

INDEX

45i

France, 150; and illegal cloths,
141 ff., 193 f. ; smuggling wool
to, 193, 324 ; textile industry in,
192 f., 249 ff., 280, 324 ; wars
with, 276.

Freedom of trade, 245.

Frome, 284.

Fuller's Farth, 192 f., 250 ; export
of, forbidden, 254 ; use of, 342.

Fulling, 262 ; act of 1376-7, 22 ;
and cloth seals, 406 ff. ; de-
scribed, 342 f. ; on manors, 22 ;
on Sabbath, 348 ; organization
of, 298 f .

Gainsborough, 167.

( kirnett, 424.

Gascony, 46.

Germany, 46, 80, 150, 152, 156,

191, 246; textile industry in,

193, 250 f., 277.
Gildersome, 287, 374.
Gilds, 27-44, Chap. VII.

at Beverley: number of, 31 ;
weavers' gild, 4, 29 ff.

at Hull, }2 ; disappearance of,

63-

at Leeds, 223 ff., 238 ff.
at I'ontefract, 32.
at Wakefield, 32.
at York : decline of, 59 ff. ;
membership of, 32 ; number of,
31 ; revival of, 219 ; weavers'
gild, 3 f., 27 ft., 33 f., 47 t-
admission to, 36, 63 ; aim of, 33 ;
and bad workmanship, 40 ff., 130;
and municipal control of, 41 ft.,
52 ff., 59 ; apprenticeship, 35 f.,
50 ; attempted revival of, Chap.
VII ; attitude to ' strangers ',
34 f., 50 ; confiscation of pro-
perty, 54 ; control of working
conditions, 39 f., 50 ; decline of,
46-63 ; demarcation disputes,
50 f. ; executive officers, 41;
financial burdens, 51 f. ; fusion
of gilds, 59, 61 f. ; monopoly of
industry, 33, 50 ; origin of,
27 ft. ; over-regulation, 51 ; posi-
tion of journeymen, 37 f. ; posi-
tion of women in, 38 ; searchers,
41 t\, 130 ; wages, 39.

Gladstone, W. E., 370, 43''.

Gledhill, Thomas, 301.

Gloucester, 16, 85, 88, i8q, 270.

Godley, Michael," 182.

Gomersal, 366 f.( ^-o.

Goxhill, 328.

Graham, J., 291 f.

< irantham, i(>, 284.

Green, Robert, 370.

Greenwood, — , 297 f,
Grimsby, 167.
Guinea, 271.
Guisborough, 329.
Guiseley, 287, 374.

Haggas, James, 269, 298.

Hainsworth, — , 328.

Halifax : and ulnage lawsuits,
180 ff., 197 ft.; Cloth Hall, 271,
379 f. ; clothiers of, 146 f., 181,
269 ; cloth market at, 203 ;
described (161 3), 183 (1637),
201 ; described by Camden,
Ryder, &c, 77 ; during Civil War,
207-14 ; early industry in, 6, 19,
21, 55, 68 ; ' Gibbet Law ', 394 ;
illegal practices in, 134; in
eighteenth century, 271 ; in
ulnage accounts, 71 ff. ; plague
around, 196 ; progress in fif-
teenth and sixteenth centuries,
71 ff. ; small clothiers around,
93 ff., 202 f. ; small holdings
around, 290 f. ; wool supply,
1 18 ff. ; worsted industry in, 26s,
268 ff., 286.

Hall, Robert, 199.

Halstcad, Alice, 304.

Hamburg, 151, 159 f., 162, 173, 175,
u>2, 244 ff., 271, 384 ; and defec-
tive cloths, 194.

Hampshire, 85, 88.

Hanover, 275 f.

Hansards, 46, 152 f., 162.

Hardy, John, 147.

Hardy, William, 146.

Harewood, 399.

Hargreaves, 282, 323.

Harrison, 134.

Harrison, John (Leeds clothier), 99,

Hartley, James, 433 f.

Hartlepool, 16, 263.

Hartshead, 370.

Haworth, 380; worsted industry
in, 269, 27 r, 286, 288.

Heaton, 134.

Heckmondwike, 370.

Hedon, industry in, 4, 16.

Helli field, n,

Heptonstall, 1 54, 146, 106, 430.

11 ere ford, 85 f.

Hertfordshire, 85 f., 210.

Hill, Sam, 3S7 ; and worsted in-
dustry, 260 t\, 270, 298.

Hightown, 3<>4-

I lipperholme, ;.

Hirst, 1 34.

1 loby, Sir Thomas, Si .

1 lodgkins of Halifax, go.

Gg2

452

INDEX

Hodgson, Richard, 307.

Hodgson, Sarah, 307.

Holbeck, 25, 196, 288, 307, 374 ;

strike at, 317.
Holden, 424.
Holdsworth, 134.
Holland, 191 ; cloth finishing in,

156, 249, 271 ; complaints from,

138 f., 193 ; emigration to, 192 ;

merchants of, 384, 387 ; rise of

textile industry in, 192, 250 ff.,

324; wars with, 174 ft., 214,

248 f.
' Hollvred ', John (Halifax clothier),

98/148.
Holroyd, Joseph (factor), 242, 249,

384 f., 387 ; and bays, 268 ;

private purchases by, 300.
Holstein, 162.

Hop ton, Ralph, 223, 287, 370.
Horbury, 287, 374.
Horn-blowing, 346 f .
Horsforth, 287, 307, 374.
Hotham, Sir John, 208.
Hours of labour, 39, 107 f., 338,

344. 347-
Houses of Correction, industry in,

• 355-

Howden, 70.

Huddersfield, 21, 7;, 146, 296, 326;
Cloth Hall, 311," 381 f. ; illegal
practices at, 1 34 ; industry in,
284, 287.

Hudson, John, 250.

Hull, 328 ; and Ship Money, 81 if. ;
depression in, 189; during Civil
War, 207 f . ; Eastland Merchants
of, 164 f. ; export trade from,
146, isof., 173, 249; fortifica-
tion of, 151; industrial decline
of, 49 ; in ulnage accounts, 74 f. ;
local merchants, 7, 173 ; Mer-
chant Adventurers at, 156, 160,
244 ; struggle with York, 167 f. ;
wool merchants, 2. Sec also
Gilds.

Hungary, 150.

Hunslet, 213, 288, 304, 374.

Hunsworth, 370.

Huntingdon, 3, 16, 85 f., 205, 420.

Hustler, John, ^2~, 330, 403, 424.

Ibbctson, James, 367, 394.

Idle, 287, 370, 374.

India, 255.

Industrial Revolution, 282 f. ; and

joy of labour, 350 f. ; opposition

to, 320 f.
' Interlopers', 243, 245.
Ipswich, 1 56, 160, 220.
Ireland, wool from, 205, 325, 329.

Irwin, Viscount, 2^6, 271, 365,

368 f., 379-
Italy, iso, 271; merchants from,

152.

Jack of Newbury, 89.

Jackman, Thomas, 269.

Jackson, Christopher, 225.

Jackson family, 169.

Jackson, John, 269.

James, Wm., on worsted industry,
267.

Jenkinson, John, 183.

Justices of the Peace : and anti-
tentering laws, 140 ff., 229 f.,
409 ff. ; and apprenticeship law,
309 ; and Broad Woollen Cor-
poration, 232, 234, 241 ; and
plague, 213; and Ship Money,
82 f. ; and unemployment, 188 ;
and wages regulation, 1 10 ff . ;
and wool dealer, 123 ; and wool
export, 326 f . ; and Worsted
Committee, 421, 428 f.

Jutland, 158.

Kay, John, 338, 340 f., 356.
Keighley, 104, 116, 139, 182 ft.,

197, 380 ; factory at, 354 ;

worsted industry in, 269, 271,

286, 298.
Kendal, 284, 286, 309, 336 ; cloths,

7, 66, 84, 127, 251 ; merchants of,

25 ; staple at, 123.
Kent, 188 ; ulnage accounts for,

85, 88 ; wool of, 118, 205.
Kidderminster, 284.
Killingbeck, John, 307.
Killingbeck, William, 307.
Kirkby, 28.
Kirkheaton, 2S7.
Kirkstall, 200; Abbey, 2.
Kitson, 134.

Knaresborough, 21, 195, 20S.
Knitted goods, 265, 285 f.
Konigsberg, 102.
Kytc, 241;.

Lancashire: bays of, 251; clothiers
of, 121 f., 133, 382; 'cottons',
84, 122, 129, 132, 136 f., 148 f.,
1 so, 188, 194 ; pestilence in, J96 ;

280,

rise of cotton industry, 257,
323 ; ulnage dispute in,
86

203 ;

284,

woollen industry in,

286, 414, 420.
Lancaster, 329.
Land-owners, and roads, 397, 400 ;

and small holdings, 291.
La we, Richard, 182.

INDEX

453

Lawe, Robert, and ulnagers, 182 If.
Lawsuits: (1612-14), 177 ff.; (1637-
8), Ii6, 197-203; (1676), 11$ f.,
203.
Lazenby, 340.
Leaden Hall, 148.
Leake, on textile frauds, 137 f.
Lee Fair, 359 f.

Leeds : apprenticeship in, 236 ff.,
303 ff., 309 ff. ; cloth finishing
at, 208, 273 f., 280; cloth halls,
565 ff. ; cloth market at, 78, 203,
220, 280, 287, Chap. XI ; Cloth-
workers' Company, 239 ff. ; com-
mission on frauds at, 134 ; cor-
poration and cloth laws, 229 ff. ;
depressions in, 276 f. ; during
Civil War, 207 ff. ; early in-
dustry in, 5, 10, 2i, 25, 55 ;
factory in, 354 ; Fleming in, 17 ;
gilds in, 223 ff., 238 ff. ; illegal
practices at, 134; incorporation
of, 220 ft. ; in eighteenth century,
280, 288 f . ; in sixteenth century,
78 f. ; in ulnage accounts, 70 ff. ;
labour unrest in, 316 f. ; Mer-
chant Adventurers in, 1O5, 244 ;
migration from, 288 f. ; muni-
cipal regulation of industry, 223,
2^ ff. ; opposition to Charter,
22 r ff., 228 ; pestilence in, 195 f.,
2 12 ff. ; poem describing domestic
life in, 344 ff. ; Poor Law policy
at, 303 ft.; population of, 214,
220, 280 ; rise of merchant class,
78, H14, r68 !'., 203 ; seeks parlia-
mentary representation, 226 it. ;
small holdings around, 291 ff. ;
staple at, 123, 220; textile out-
put of, 227, 280 ; wages in, 115;
wealthy clothiers around, 96 ft.,
22 t ff. ; wool supply, 1 1 8 f .,
123; workhouse at, 354 ; worsted
industry in, 269, 274, 286.

Lees, 333.

Leicester, 13, 195.

Leicestershire, 420 ; cloth output
of, 85 f. ; wool of, 118, 205 f.,
263, 272, 328.

Leland, yS, 2Si>.

Lennox, Duke of, and ulnage, 17S,
180, 217, 242.

Letto, U>2.

Lille, 251.

Lincoln, 3, 4, 13, in, 28 I., 325.

Lincolnshire, 420 ; (loth output of,
8; f. ; plague in. [<>h ; wool of.

Il8, 20; f., 2<)2, j; I, 2<)S, 52; t.,
.?J8. .U--

Linen industry. 2^i<; power-loom
in, 283.

Lister, J., on Flemish immigration,

17. 21.
Lister, John, 147.
Lister, Michael, 203.
Lister, Thomas, 199 ft.
Littletown, 287.
Liversedge, 19, 370.
Local authorities, use of, in regulat-
ing industry, 133 ff., 136, 140,
Chaps. VII and XII.
Lockwood, 1 16.
Lodge, Richard, 203.
Lodge, William, 203.
Logwood, 220 f.

London, 3, 31, 86, 14^), 162, 195,
284 ; and Yorkshire clothiers,
145 ff., 211 1., 383, 388 ; cloth
export from, 150, 187 ; cloth
markets in, 145 ff. ; merchants
of, 153 ft'., 156; struggle with
outports, 165 ff. ; trade unions
in, 315.
Longbotham, Lydia, 419.
Lonsdale, William, 147.
Looms, hand, 340 L, 357 f. ; slow

adoption of power, 356 11.
Low Countries, 153 f., 15O, 173,

191 f., 249, 268.
Lubeck, 158.
Luccock, j., 328.
Lumley, Sam, 236.
' Lyttinge Leade ', 97.

Machinery, 283 ; and water-power,
353 ff. ; carding, 333, 357 ; fin-
ishing, 357 ; in cotton industry,
323 ; in early factories, 352 ff. ;
opposition to, 321, 347 f. ; scour-
ing, 433 ; slubbinj,', 357 ; spin-
ning, 13(1, 356, ^7.

Magna Carta, 126.

Malton, 13, 28, 49, 70, 103 ; factory
at, 354.

Manchester, 13, 280 ; ' cottons ' of,
84, 136, 148, 149.

Manchester Hall (London), 148, 188.

Manningham, 147.

Markets, 145, 203, Chap. XI ; small
clothier in, 204, ?6i, ?6S. See
lilackwell Hall ; Lairs ; Cloth
Halls.

Marlborough, 4.

Marston Moor, 209, 211.

Masham, 07, 285.

May, J., ([noted, 02, 144, 2 17 1., 342.
Medicine ', applied to cloth, 13; ft.,
1 v If.

Mercantilist theories, 104, 24011.

Mercers, 7, 13, [8, 25, 153 ; com-
pany in York, 1 54 f ., i(>i : organ-
ization of, in London, 153!.

454

INDEX

Merchant Adventurers, 46, 120,
138, 152 ff., 165 f., 169, 173, 232 ;
admission to, 158 f. ; aims of,
1 57 f . ; and Cockayne's dyeing
project, 186 ff.; decline of,
242 ff . ; government of, 1 59 ff. ;
head-quarters of, 159 f. ; local
branches, 160 ; monopoly en-
joyed by, 158; of York, 155,
159 ff., 165; struggle between
London and northern ports,
154 f., 165 f. ; unpopularity of,
186, 191, 194.

Merchants : alien, 152, 245 f. ; and
cloth halls, 365 ff., 382 ff. ; and
finishing, 393 ; and making to
order, 203 f., 299 ff., 384, 386 ff. ;
and middlemen, 204, 383 ff. ; and
wool export, 325 ff. ; become
manufacturers, 300 f ., 388 f . ;
cloth merchants, Chap. V, 271,
382 ff.; control production, 299 f.,
388 f. ; dangers at sea, 165 ff. ;
enter politics, 255 ; native, 7,

151 f. ; of Staple, 120, 123,

152 f. ; rise of merchant class in
West Riding, 78, 82, 168 ff. See
Merchant Adventurers ; Eastland
Merchants ; Shipping.

Mervyn, Sir Henry, 173 f.

Metcalfe, familv, 169 ; Thomas,
198 ff., 223.

Middelburg, 160.

Middleham, 285.

Middlemen : and foreign buyers,
249, 384 f. ; and wool supply,
118 ff., 329 ff. ; in cloth market,
204, 380, 383 ff. Sec Factors.

Middlesex, 8=; f.

Middleton, Sir John, 178, 180, 183.

Migration: at harvest time, 114,
342, 348 ; from towns to villages,
288 f. ; from West of England,
279.

Mirfield, 6, 134, 196, 287, 310,

37"-
Molyneaux, Darcy, 370.
Moravia, 158.
Mordaunt, 433.

Morlcy, 287, 288, 295, 304, 370, 375.
Morris, W., 350.
Muscovy, 143, 150.
Musgrave, — , 134.
Musgrave, Joshua, 317.
Myton, battle of, 25.

Neville, John, 129, 134.

New draperies, 148, 150, 265 I.

Newcastle, [3, K>, 86, 140, 150,
163, 249, 326; Eastland Mer-
chants of, 164 f., 173; Merchant

Adventurers of, 156, 160, 166,
173-

Nixon, G., 178,. 180, 181 ff.

' Noils ', 334.

Norfolk : industry in, 85 f. ; tex-
tile wages in, 114 ; trade unions
in, 315 ; wools of, 205 ; worsteds
of, 264, 275 f., 420.

North America, cloth export to,
151, 255, 277, 280.

North Riding : industry in, 4, 7, 17,
19, 23, 285 f. ; spinning in, 285 f.,

335-
Northallerton, 7, 70.
Northamptonshire, 85 f., 420.
Northern Hall (London), 148, 188.
Northumberland, 85 f.
Norway, 162.
Norwich, 65, 84 ft., 156, 264, 270,

284, 326, 420 ; decline of, 264,

275 f., 279.
Nottingham, 3, 85 f., 195, 207, 284,

342.

Oakworth, 298.

Oder, 158.

Oldrield, John, 183.

Oldham, John, 306.

Order, making to, 203 f., 299 f.

Ossett, 5 f., 287, 294, 365, 370, 374.

Oswestry, 330.

Otley, 335.

Oxenhope, 297.

Oxford, 3 f.

Oxfordshire, 85 f. ; wool of, 118.

Pack-horses, 148, 199 ft'., 212, 336,

397. 4°i-
Partnerships, 2j6.
Paul. L., 336, 356.
Pawson, John (Leeds clothier), 97 f.,

266.
Peck, report on new draperies,

265 f.
Pendle, 380.
Penistone, 79!'., 136. (The old

form, ' Pennistone', is now obso-
lete.)
Perching, 344.
Pickering, 7, 266, 397.
Pocklington, 6.
Poland, 80, 150, 162, 193 ; and

defective cloths, 194.
Poll Tax returns, 16-27, 68.
Pomerania, 162.
Pontefract, 103, 111, 134, 208 f.,

213, 359, 428; decline of, 49;

early industry at, 7, 10, 18, 21 ;

gilds at, ^,2 ; in ulnage accounts,

70 ff. ; wool fair, 119, 123.
Poor Law : and factories, 354 ff.

INDEX

455

and industrial training, 336, 354 ;
and apprenticeship, 104 f ., 303 If. ;
and worsted industry, 266 f . ;
establishment of municipal in-
dustries in York, 64 ff .

Population: and plagues, 157 ff.,
212 ff. ; during Civil War, 209 ff. ;
effect of Black Death on, 25 f. ;
mobility of, in fourteenth cen-
tury, 25 ; scattered, 289. See
Migration.

Portugal, 46, 251, 271 ; Methuen
Treaty with, 255 ; wool from, 329.

Prices : of cloth, 145, 190 f., 197 f. ;
of wool, 120, 205, 325 ; rise in,
1 16 f., 120.

Priestley family, 148.

Priestley, John, 1 18 f .

Priestley, Thomas, 21 1 f.

Privy Council : and convoys, 173 f.;
and Hull, 167 f. ; and illegal
practices, 100 f., 122, 138, 141 f.,
147 ; and Ship Money, 82 f. ;
inquiry into depression (1622),
190 ff.

Processes of Production, 95 ff., 293,
295; and health, 334 f., 337 f.,
340,348 ft.; comparatively back-
ward in West Riding, 205 f., 322,
332 ; described, Chap. X; differ-
ence between woollen and
worsted, 260 ft., ^^7, ; monotony
of, 350 f . ; slow introduction of
machinery, 283 f.

Prussia, 193, 250.

Pudsey, 25, 287, 358, 374.

Pullayne, John, 134.

Raleigh, Sir Walter, 178.

Ramsden, Sir John, 226, 382.

Rastrick, 0.

Rawdon, 287, 374.

Heading, 137.

Revel, 162.

Richmond, 7, 70, 195, 265 ; ami

Worsted Committee, 429.
Rider, John, 318.
Ripley, 16, 17, 19.
Ripon, 7, 10, 13, 17 f., 21, 23, 285,

359. 399 I in ulnage accounts,

70 f., 74 f. ; wool fair, 119, 123.
Robinson, James, 199 tl.
Rochdale, 326 ; woollen industry

in, 2^<i ; wool supply, ti8, 122,

Roebuck, Jonathan, 306.

Rostock. 158.

Rotherham, early industry in, 7, 18,

21, 24/7 1.
Rothwcll, 308.
Rotterdam, 2<)S.

Ruskin, J., 350.

Russia, 80, 143, 150, 250; textile

industry in, 277 ; Yorkshire

cloths in, 407.
Rutland, 85 f., 118, 420.

Saffron Walden, 284.

St. Bartholomew's Fair, 76, 146 f.,

180 f., 204.
Salzmann, H., on gilds, 30.
Sandal, 5.
Savill, E. E., 367.
Savill, Sir Henry, 222, 226.
Savill, Sir John, 82 f., 181, 223,

227.
Saxony, 329.
Scaife, C, 199.
Scarborough, 28, 49, 208.
Schools : industrial and spinning,

336 ; Sunday, 434.
Scotland, wool from, 205, 279, 324,

329-

Scouring, 342.

Scribbling, 354.

Scudamore, Eleanor, 354.

Searchers, 101, 136 f. ; abolition
of, 417 ; and anti-tentering law,
140, 143 f., 216, 229 ; and in-
spectors and supervisors, 415 ff. ;
failure of, 216 f. ; in Blackwell
Hall, 149 ; in eighteenth century,
409 ff. ; in Leeds, 235 ff. ; under
Broad Woollen Corporation, 233.

Selby, 4, 16, 21, 70, 147.

Sellers, Dr. Maud, 245 ; on Flemish
immigration, 8 f., 15.

Sheepshanks, ■ — , 280.

Sheffield, 7, 21, 398, 399; mill at,

354-

Shepherd, William, 420.

Sherburn, 209.

Ship Money, struggle over, 81 if.

Shipley, 197, 287.

Shipping, 159; becomes safer, 255 ;
convoys, 159, 167, 172 ft., 214;
dangers to, 165, 171ft., 214,
248 f., 385 ; during Civil War,
208 ; limitations on, 163 ; wool
smuggling, 326 ft.

Shropshire, 85 f., 147.

Silesia, 150, 158, 193, 198, 251.

Simpson, Robert, 225.

Simpson, William, 254.

Sizing, 345.

Skipton, '>, 13, 17, to, 21, 71, 104,
209, 350, 380 ; plan for large
scale production at, 98 f.

Smith, Adam, 279.

Smithson family, 36S.

Snaith, 2 1 .

Snydall, T., 178, 180 f., 183.

456

INDEX

.Soap, drawback on, 285, 423 f., 436.

Somerset, 85, 88, 129, 279.

Soothill, 370.

Sorting wool, 206, 332.

Southampton, 129.

Sowerby, 5 f., 19, 403.

Soyland, 119, 211.

Spain, 46, 150, 251, 254, 271 ; wool
from, 329.

Spinning, 262, 285 f., 289, 335 ff. ;
agents, 336 ; by machinery, 336,
356, 357. 433 ; in factories, 435 ;
labour supply for, 335 f. ; piece
rates for, 116; thefts in, 418 f.,
4^7. 430.

Spofforth, 17, 19.

Stade, 160.

Staffordshire, 85 f.

Stamford, 4, 16.

Stanningley, 236, 374.

Staple, at Kendal and Leeds, 123 ;
Merchants of, 120, 123, 329.

Statutes : Aire and Calder naviga-
tion (1698), 402 ; (1758), 403 ;
anti-factory (1555), 90, 102, 321 ;
anti-tentering (1597 and 1601),
139 ft.; (1623), 143, 200, 216,
229, 405 ; apprenticeship (1406),
102; (1557-8), 56; (1563), 102 f.,
3ioff.; (1725 and 1733), 311;
(1749 and 179;), 312 ; Blackwell
Hall ( 1 696-7) , 1 48 ; Broad Wool-
len Corporation (1662), 232 ff.,
314; burial in woollens (1666,
1678, and 1680), 252 f. ; calico
acts (1720 and 1735), 253 ; cloth
thefts (1742), 395 • (*777). 422 ;
dimensions and weight (1224),
126 ; (1271), 126 ; (1328), 128 ;
(1353), 128; (1389), 128; (1464),
132 f.; (1483), 133; (J5I4-I5).

133; (1523), 133 ; (1552), 135 i- ;
(1557). 137; (1507), 1 39 «•; (1708),
406 f . ; (1725), 31 1,408 ft., 412 f. ;
(1734), 311/ 410; (1738), 411 f. ;
(1741) 410; (1765), 414 ff.; dye-
ing (153 5 — f>), 185 ; drawback on
soap ( 1 7 1 1 and 1 7 1 3 ) , 423;
emigration (17 19 and 1750), 254 ;
exports and imports (1463-4), 45,
48 ; export of textile utensils
(1780-1), 433; Flemish immi-
grants (1337), 14; fulling before
export (1376-7), 22; Halifax
wool supply (1555), 04, 120, 122 ;
home workers (1749), 422;
labour combinations (1725, 1726—
7, and 1748—0), 3 1 5 f . ; Leeds and
Liverpool Canal (1770), 403 ;
Leeds street improvement (1755),
371; logwood (1580 and 1596),

221 ; Merchant Adventurers
(1497), 154; Statute of Artificers
and Apprentices (1563), 91, 102 f.,
107, 1 10 ff., 308 ff., 312 f. ; towns,
decay of (1535 and 1540), 49;
turnpikes (1750), 400; ulnage
(1353), 69, 128; (1393), 69, 128 f.,
180; wages (1351). 24; (1563).
107, noff., 313 ff. ; (1603), no,
112,314; (1725,1726-7,1748-9,
and 1756), 315 f. ; wool dealers
(1552), 120; (1555), 94, 120, 122 ;
wool export (1698), 323 ; (1787-
8), 327 ; wool, theft of (1610),
419 ; (1702), 419 ; (1739. 1748,
and 1774), 419 ; Worsted Com-
mittees (1777, 1784, 1785, and
1790), 420 ff. ; York, closing
churches in (1547), 58; York,
coverlet weavers of (1542-3),
55 ff. ; York, wool export from
(1529), 49.

Stell, Joseph, 354.

Stettin, 158.

Stokesley, 7.

Stourbridge, 284.

Stralsund, 158.

Strickland, Sir George, 354 f.

Subsidy. See Linage.

Suffolk, 148 ; illegal practices in,
137 ; ulnage accounts for, 85,
88, 205 ; textile wages, 1 14.

Surrey, 85 f., 129.

Sussex, 85 f., 129.

Sutcliffe, John, 147, 435.

Swaledale, 285.

Sweden, 162, 251.

Sykes, Richard, 223, 354.

Sykes, William, 203.

Tariffs : Austria, 276 ; Dutch, 192 ;
France, 250 f. ; Hamburg, 192 f.

Taunton, 284.

Taxation on cloth, Chap. IV ; cus-
toms rates, 170 f.

Tenche, Randall (Leeds clothier),
99 ff., 122.

Tentering : and cloth thefts, 303 it. ;
described, 97, 131, 140, 143, 343!'.;
foreign complaints, 138!'., 144,
193 f., 407 f. ; frauds practised
in, 131 f., 137 f. ; legislation con-
trolling, 133, 136, 143, 200, 210,
229, 405 ff. ; legislation forbid-
ding, 139 ft'.; tenter frames,
142 f., 291.

lhanet, Farl ot, 250.

Thirsk, 28, 104.

Thoresby, Ralph, 253, 2~,7, 305,
392 f., 390, 405.

Thorne, 327.

INDEX

457

Thornhill, 370.

Thorp Arch, 6.

Thrums, 97, 131, 133, 145.

Tickhill, 208.

' Tops '. 334-

Trade Unions, in eighteenth cen-
tury, 315 ff. See also Wage-
earners.

Tricks of the Trade, 125, 130 ft.,
1 37 f.. 190 ; and Russian army,
407 f. ; injure market, 103 f.,
107 f., 407 f. ; legislation to
prevent, 132 ff., Chaps. VII and
XII ; offences, 144, 2y->.

Turkey, 249.

Turnpikes, 256 f., 396 f., 399 f.

I'lnage, abolition of, 242 f. ; collec-
tion of, 177 ff., 242 ; evasion of,
130; expenditure of revenue
from, 129; farmed out, 178;
lawsuits about rate of, 177 ff.,
197 ff. ; on kerseys, 170 f., [98 f. ;
subsidy and, 69.

Ulnage Accounts, 23, 38 ; declining
output in York, 60 ; for West
Hiding, <><; ff. ; for whole king-
dom, 84 ff.

Ulnager, 12') ff. ; and new* draperies,
217. 265, 268; deputy ulnagers,
127, 150, 180 ff., [99 ff., 242;
sale of seals, 242 ; seizure of un-
sealed cloths, 1. So ff.

Vavasour,

183.
\ ire, 280.
Virginia, 1

Sir Thomas, 178, [80,

Wade, Benjamin, 223

Wade family, 169.

W'age-carners : and annual con-
tracts, 107, 313 ; and apprentice-
ship, 300, 312; and machinery,
320 f. ; become clothiers, 204,
313; combinations of, 315 ff. ;
conduct of, 351 ; delays in com-
pleting work, 422, 430 f. ; divi-
sion of labour, l()8 f., 2<-)}, 298 f.,
310 ff., 313; favour domestit
system, 347 ff. ; hours of labour,
107; in Domestic System, 107 It.;
206, 312 ff. ; in gilds, ;~ f. ;
permanent class of, 313 ff. ; posi-
tion under Act of 1503, 107;
theft of material by, 418 f. ;
unemployment, 188 1.. 202 ; work
at home, 1 1 ?, 290, 2>>y 1 ., ; ?; it. ;
347 ff.

Wages : and Broad C lothicrs' Cor-
poration, 3 14 1. ; and rising prices,

1 16 f. ; apprentices', 303 ; breach
of Act of 1 35 1, 24; comparison
of, for West Riding with those of
other counties, 1 14 ; disputes
about, 316 ff.; piece rates, 1 10,
113, 1 1 5 f ., 314 f. ; rates, 100,
115 f., 201, 316; regulation of,
under Acts of 1563 and 1603,
cio ft., 233, 313 ff. ; truck, 315,

43' f-

Wakefield : broad cloths of, 230 ft, ;
cloth-finishing at, 272 f. ; cloth
halls, 2-2, 365, 382 ; cloth
market at, 203 I., 208, 2j2, 359 f.;
corn market, 2^2 ; early industry
in, 6, 10, 13, 17 f., 21,24; gilds
at, 12 f. ; House of Correction,
io5» 35 5 > dlegal practices at,
134 ; in sixteenth century, 78 f. ;
in eighteenth century, 272 f. ;
in ulnage accounts, 70 ff. ; mer-
chants of, 25, 272 f. ; plagues in,
212 f. ; women weavers in, 23;
wool market at, 78, 1 18, 123, 208,
2j2, 529 ; worsted industry in,
271 ff.

Wales, 133, 140.

Walker family, 109.

Walker, James, 296, 351.

Walker, John, 98, 134.

Walker, Thomas, 199.

W'alpole, R., 250, 258.

Warwickshire, 85 f., 88 ; wool of,
118.

Waterhouse family, 178.

Water-power, 353 ff.

Wattes, Sir John, 178, 180, 183.

Weaving : cost of equipment, 294 ;
described, 339 ff. ; flying shuttle,
340 1. ; fraudulent practices in,
131 ; in employees' homes, 113,
296 ; in villages and farms, 288 f.;
irregularity of, 292 f. ; slow in-
troduction of power-loom, 283 ;
weavers' windows, 290.

Welch Hall, 148.

Wenslevdale, 285.

W'entworth, 196.

Wentworth family, 178.

W'entworth, Thomas, 222, 307.

West ot England : competition
with West Riding, 279 ; in-
dustry in, ^8, 92, 150, 284;
quality of cloths, 20; 1. ; trade
unions in, 315 f.

West Riding : and Ship Money,
81 It.; boundary of textile area,
284, 28(1 tf. ; competition with
York and Beverlcv, ^4 It. ; Cor-
poration of Broad Woollen
Clothiers of, 230 ff., 314 1. ; during

458

INDEX

Civil War, 207 ff . ; early in-
dustry in, 4-21 ; exemption of
industry from regulation and
taxation, 69, 90, 102, 128 ; Flem-
ish immigration to, 9-21 ; in-
dustrial conditions in fourteenth
century, 22 ff. ; industrial expan-
sion in eighteenth century, 258 ff .;
in ulnage accounts, 71 ff. ; means
of communication in, 396 ff . ;
merchants of, 78, 82, Chaps. V and
XI ; mixed cloth area, 287 f. ;
plagues in, 195 ff., 212 ff. ; politi-
cal strength of, 81 ; progress in
eighteenth century, Chap. VIII ;
rates of wages in, 1 1 1 ff . ; white
cloth area, 287 f. ; worsted in-
dustry in, 264-76.

Westmorland, 86 ; clothiers of, 121.

Wetherby, 17, 19, 71.

Wilkinson, James, 303.

Wilson, Christopher, 373.

Wilson, Richard, 294, 372, 392.

Wiltshire : and competition of West
Riding, 279 ; textile wages in,
114, 148, 284; ulnage accounts
for, 85, 88 ; unemployment in,
189 ; wools of, 205.

Winchester, 3 f .

Windsor, John, 254.

Witherington, Sir Thomas, 175.

Wismar, 158.

Whitby, 4, 12, 397.

Wolsey, 48.

Wombwell, 199.

Women : and Worsted Committee,
430 f. ; in domestic system, 336,
345 f . ; in gilds, 38 ; in industry,
23 f. ; wages, 116.

Woodhouse Moor, 203, 288.

Wool: and Halifax Act (1555), 94 f.,
100, i2off.; dealers in, 93, 118 ff.,
329 f . ; distribution of, to workers,
335 f. ; export of, 1 f., 45 f., 48,
190, 192, 194, 323 ff. ; frauds in
sale of, 331 f. ; importation of,
279, 325, 329 ; legislation attack-
ing dealers in, 120 ff. ; length of
fibre, 261 ; prices of, 120, 205,
325 ; qualities of, 118, 145, 205 ff.
328 ; sale by contract, 329 ;
smuggling of, 192 f., 250, 254,
276, 323 ff. ; staplers, 279, 329 f. ;
supply, 118 ff., 205, 295, 323 ft.,
345 ; wool hedges, 98, 291.

Wool-combing, 192 ; combers and
apprenticeship, 310 f., 312;
combs, 97, 333 ; described,
333 ff. ; organization amongst
combers, 316, 318!., 432; un-
healthy, 334 f.

Woollen industry : apprenticeship
in, 10 1 ff., 294, 301 ff. ; attempts
to encourage, 25 1 ff . ; big employ-
ers, 296, 313; clothiers'equipment,
94f.,97f.,293f.; Cockayne dyeing
project, 186 ff.; commission on
fraudulent manufacture, 133 ff. ;
competition between northern
and southern areas, 279 ; com-
plaints from overseas concerning
defective quality of cloth, 135,
138 f., 407 f. ; conditions in
fourteenth century, 21 ff. ; credit
system in, 204 f ., 385 ; decline
in York and Beverley, 47-68 ;
decline of Stuart organizations,
241 ff . ; division of labour in,
108 f., 293, 298 f. ; domestic
organization of, 89-123, Chap.
IX ; early factory development
in, 89 ft., 353 ft.; early history,
Chap. I ; exemption of cheap
northern cloths from regulation,
127 f., 129, 132 f. ; expansion
during eighteenth century, 246 f .,
Chap. VIII ; expansion in West
Riding, 68 ff., 278 f. ; extent and
distribution of, in Yorkshire,
7 1 f ., 275, 281, 284 ft.; failure
of legislation regulating quality,
Chap. IV, 217 f., Chap. XII;
gild organization of, 27-44 »"
gilds and companies in seven-
teenth century, Chap. VII ;
growth of export of cloth, 46,
258, 276 ff. ; hours of labour, 39,
107 f., 344 ; imports of foreign
cloth, 7, 191 ; in whole kingdom,
84 ft. ; 284 ; labour organiza-
tions in, 315 ff. ; large scale pro-
duction, 98 f ., 296 ; making to
order, 203 f., 299 f., 384, 386 f. ;
marketing of cloth, Chap. V, 217,
294, Chap. XI ; merchant com-
panies and, 153-70, 243 ft".;
merchants control, 299 ff ., 386 ft.;
numbers engaged in making
kerseys, 183 ; position of wage-
earners, 107-17, 312ft.; pro-
cesses in, 109 f., 293, 295,
Chap. X ; quality of West Rid-
ing cloths, 19 f., 197 f., 204 f.,
280 ; rate of production in,
109 ft., 293, 338 ; revival of, on
Continent, 190 ft., 249 ft., 276 f. ;
slow introduction of machinery,

283 f., 357 f. ; specialization in,

284 ; state regulation of, Chaps.
IV, VII, XII ; taxation on
cloth, 124 f., 127 ff. ; tricks of the
trade, 130 ft"., 137 f., 216 ft,,

INDEX

459

Chap. XII; wages in, no ft,

31.3 «■

Worcestershire, 85 f.

Workhouses, 66, 354 f., 356.

Wormald, family, 134, 368.

Worsted Committee : and inven-
tions, 433 f. ; and local justices,
428 f., 431; and philanthropy,
434 ; and smuggling, 327, 432 ;
and trade unions, 319 f., 432;
decline and recovery, 435 ft. ;
Mast Anglian, 420 ; inspectors
under, 421 ft, 425 ff., 435 f. ;
Midlands, 420 ; present position,
437 ; revenue of, 423 f., 436 ;
Yorkshire, 319, 418 ft

Worsted Industry : apprenticeship
in, 269, 302 ff., 310 f. ; area, 286 ;
competition between West Riding
and southern areas, 270, 272,
275 ; division of labour in, 310 f. ;
labour organizations in, 316;
large scale production in, 297 ff . ;
merchants control, 299 ff., 388 t ;
Norwich stuffs made in York, 65,
26f> ; organization of, 296 ff. ;
output of, 271, 275; poor law
authorities and, 266 f. ; rise of
industry in West Riding, 257,
262 ft ; serge maker in York,
67 ; slow introduction of machin-
ery in, 356 ff. ; technology of,
260 ff., 333 ff. ; wool supply for,
271 t, 298; Worsted Com-
mittees, 418 ff.

Wortlev, 206, 347, 351.

Wyatt, 336.

Wyke, 301, 370.

Yarm, 7.

Yarmouth, 16, 329.

Yarn : Irish, ^z-,, 329 ; makers,

297 f. ; preparation of, 285 t,
293, 297, 329, 335 ff. ; scarcity of,
338; theft of, 418 f., 430 ; trade
in, 264, 267, 275, 339 ; uneven
quality of, 338 f. ; woollen and
worsted, 260 ff .

Yeadon, 287, 374.

York : and plague in West Riding,
213 ; and Ship Money, 81 ;
Black Death in, 25 f. ; depres-
sion in, 189 ; Eastland Merchants
of, 164 1, 244 1 ; effect of
Reformation on, 53 t ; exodus
from, 51 t, 55 ff., 61 ; export of
cloth from, 146, 150; Flemings
in York, 12, 14 f. ; freemen of,
12, 15 ; in Anglo-Saxon times,
3 ; in 1086, 10 ; industrial
decline of, 47-68 ; Memorandum
Book, 31 f. ; Merchant Adven-
turers of, 1 54 f., 156, 159, 160 t,
244 f. ; municipal industrial ex-
periments, 64 ff. ; municipal
strife in, 52 f. ; plague in, 196 ;
poverty in, 64 ; struggle with
Hull, 167 f. ; trade with tondon,
146 f. ; wool merchants, 2. See
also Gilds.

Yorkshire : Domesday survey of, .
9 ; during Civil War, 206-14 ;
effect of Scottish wars and Black
Death in, 25 ff. ; pestilence in,
195 f. ; poverty in, during six-
teenth century, 117 ; ravaged by
William I and Scots, 9 ; sur-
vival of apprenticeship in, 308 f . ;
wool of, 118, 328. See West
Riding ; Wool ; Woollen in-
dustry ; Worsted industry.

Young, Arthur, 256, 264, 274 1,
278, 280, 326, 397.

Ypres, 46.

PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

AA 000 030 031

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 "The Yorkshire woollen and worsted industries, from the earliest times up to the Industrial revolution"

See other formats