Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 6.djvu/252

224 do with the craft, and the rise of great capitalists and the development of competition in trade made the regulation of industry by means of companies no longer possible. For an account of the &quot; degeneration of craftgilds &quot; a general reference may be made to Brentano On Gilds, c. iv. The usurpation of power on the part of the richer members was not always effected without opposition. Brentano refers to a pamphlet on the Clothworkers Company, published in 1649. which asserts that &quot;the commonalty&quot; in the old charters meant, not the whole gild, but only the masters, wardens, and assistants. Herbert records a most interesting dispute in the Goldsmiths Company in 1529. The mode of electing officers, and the system of management generally, was challenged by three members who called themselves &quot; artificers, poor men of the craft of goldsmiths.&quot; The company, or rather the wardens, the assistants, and livery, presented a petition to the lord mayor, which was answered by the discontented craftsmen. The dispute was carried into the Court of Chancery and the Star Chamber. The artificers accused the company of subverting their grants, misappropriating the funds, and changing the con stitution of the society, and they complain of this being done by the usurpation of persons who &quot; were but merchant goldsmiths, and had but little knowledge in the science. &quot; In 1531 the three complainants were summarily expelled from the company, and then the dispute seems to have ended. In the last stage of the companies the members have ceased to have any connection with the trades, and in most cases their regulative functions have disappeared. The one characteristic which has clung to them throughout is that of owners of property and managers of charitable trusts. The connection between the companies and the municipality is shortly as follows. The ordinance of Edward II. required freemen of the city to be members of one or other of the companies. By the ordinance of 49 Edw. III. the trading companies were to nominate the members of common council, and the persons so nominated alone were to attend both at common councils and at elec tions. An ordinance in 7 Richard II. restored the elections of common councilmen to the wards, but corporate officers and representatives in Parliament were elected by a conven tion summoned by the lord mayor from the nominees of the companies. An Act of Common Council in 7 Edw. IV. appointed the election of mayor, sheriffs, &c., to be in the common council, together with the masters and wardens of the companies. By 15 Edw. IV. masters and wardens were ordered to associate with themselves the honest men of their mysteries, and come in their best liveries to the elections ; that is to say, the franchise was restricted to the &quot;liverymen&quot; of the companies. At this time the corpora tion exercised supreme control over the companies, and the companies were still genuine associations of the traders and householders of the city. The delegation of the franchise to the liverymen was thus, in point of fact, the selection of a superior class of householders to represent the rest. When the corporation lost its control over the companies, and the members of the companies ceased to be traders and householders, the liverymen were no longer a representative class, and some change in the system became necessary. The Act 11 Geo. II. c. 18, and the Reform Acts of 1832 and 18G7, reformed the representation in several particulars. The liverymen of the companies, being freemen of the city, have still, however, the exclusive power of electing the lord mayor, sheriffs, chamberlain, and other corporate officers. The contributions made by the companies to the public purposes of the state and the city are interesting points in their early history. Their wealth and their representative character made them a most appropriate instrument for the enforcement of irregular taxation. The loan of &amp;lt;2 1,263, Gs. 8d. to Henry VIII. for his wars in. Scotland, in 1544, is believed by Herbert to be the first instance of a pecuniary grant to the Crown, but the practice rapidly gained ground. The confiscation of ecclesiastical property at the time of the Reformation affected many of the trusts of the com panics ; and they were compelled to make returns of the im proper ty devoted to religious uses, and to pay over the rents to the Crown. In course of time the taxation of the com panies became &quot;a regular source of supply to Government.&quot; The historians of the city have for the most part described these as unjust and tyrannical exactions, but, looking at the representative and municipal character of the companies and the purposes to which their contri butions were applied, we may regard them as a rough but not unfair mode of taxation. The Government, when money was wanted for public works, informed the lord mayor, who apportioned the sums required among the various societies, and issued precepts for its payment. Contributions towards setting the poor to work, erecting the Royal Exchange, cleansing the city ditch, discovering new countries, furnishing military and naval armaments, for men, arms, and ammuniton for the defence of the city, are among what Herbert calls the sponging expedients of the Government. The Crown occasionally interfered in a more unjustifiable manner with the companies in the exercise of their patronage. The Stuarts made strenuous efforts to get the control of the companies. Terrified by the proceedings in the quo warranto case, most of the com panies surrendered their charters to the Crown, but such surrenders were annulled by the Act of 2 William and Mary reversing the judgment in quo warranto against the city. The livery companies now in existence are the following:—

Apothecaries. Armourers and Bra ziers. Bakers. Barbers. Basket Makers. Blacksmiths. Bowyers. Brewers. Broderers. Butchers. Carmen. Carpenters. Clockmakers. Clothworkers. Coach and Coach- harness Makers, Cooks. Coopers. Cordwainers. Curriers. Cutlers. Distillers. Drapers. Dyers. Fan Makers. Farriers. Fellowship Porters. Felt Makers. Needlemakers. Fishmongers. Painter Stainers. Fletchers. Parish Clerks. Founders. Pattern Makers. Framework Knitters. Pewterers. Fruiterers. Plasterers. Girdlers. Plumbers. Glass-sellers. Poulterers. Glaziers. Saddlers. Glovers. Salters. Gold and Silver Wire- Scriveners. drawers. Shipwrights. Goldsmiths. Silkthrowsters. Grocers. Skinners. Gunmakers. Spectacle Makers. Haberdashers. Stationers. Homers. Tallow Chandlers. Innholders. Tilers and Brick- Ironmongers. layers. Joiners. Tinplate Workers. Leather-sellers. Turners. Loriners. Upholsterers. Makers of Playing Vintners. Cards. Watermen. Masons. Wax Chandlers. Mercers. Weavers. Merchant Taylors. Wheelwrights. Musicians. Wool men. The following are the twelve great companies:—Mercers, Grocers, Drapers, Fishmongers, Goldsmiths, Skinners, Merchant Taylors, Haberdashers, Salters, Ironmongers, Vintners, Cloth-workers. The &quot;Irish Society&quot; was in corporated in the 1 1 James I. as &quot;the governor and assistants of the new plantation in Ulster, within the realm of Ireland.&quot; The twelve companies contributed in equal portions the sum of 60,000 for the new scheme, by which it was intended to settle a Protestant colony in the lands forfeited by the Irish rebels. The companies divided the settlement into twelve nearly equal parts, assigning one to each, but the separate estates are still held to be under the paramount jurisdiction of the Irish Society. The charter of the society was revoked by the Court of Star Chamber in the reign of Charles I., but a new one was granted by Charles II., under which the society still acts.