Read Ebook: A Short History of the Worshipful Company of Horners by Rosedale H G Honyel Gough

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 111 lines and 14515 words, and 3 pages

The petition to the Mayor and Aldermen was granted, and from that day forward the three bottles as well as three horns have emblazoned the arms of the Horners' Company.

In the very ancient and interesting book belonging to the Horners' Company there are two early entries relating to the period during which the two Companies were legally separated though in a certain close relation to each other. The entries, which are identical, are as follows:--"The bottellmakers have continued in the Company of the Horners a hundred fourscore nine yeres and nine monthes, wrytten the last daie of November Anno Dni One Thousand five hundred fiftie and seaven."

This event preceded a time of great commercial activity, when many political circumstances compelled the City Craft Gilds to legalize themselves by obtaining from the Civic authorities , a recognition of the practices which for a very lengthy period they had made use of, in the conduct of their affairs.

Such an application took place in 1391, during the reign of Richard II, on the part of the Horners' Company. The petition was mainly concerned with the recognition of their right to elect two Wardens to preside over the Horners in accordance with the ancient practice common amongst other Gilds. At this time it would appear that there were no Masters elected, but that the position of Master of a Gild was filled either by the Alderman of the Ward or some other influential and important person, called the "Guardian," who represented the interests of the Craft on the Council of the Mayor and Aldermen.

The privilege of electing Wardens was always in the forefront of every grant, since it was of great importance to the Crafts to have this right at a time when constant efforts were made to put in representatives and nominees of the monarch, in order to bring the Crafts, and, through them, the City of London, into subjection.

It is highly probable that in 1391 the deputation from the Horners' Gild on presenting its petition was introduced by one Richard Baroun, Horner, of London, Alderman of Aldgate, and Master of the Gild in 1391. He was not only the Guardianus or Master of the Gild, but a person of great importance during the reign of Richard II, being Horner to the King. His predecessor in the office of Alderman, it is interesting to note, was one William Karlile, Master of the Bottlemakers' Gild. This fact will help to explain the close relations existing between the two Crafts.

In a newly discovered MS. of great interest which is being edited by E. H. Dring, Esq., there appears the following passage, A.D. 1397 :--"And thanne after the presentacion of the said supplication ther were made mony blank charteres and all the men of every crafte of the said Cite as well as all manne servaunts and maisters were charged to come to the Guylde halle to sette her seales to the said blank charteres." It must, have been from this MS. that Stow gathered much of his information, and this passage was copied by Fabian in 1516, Grafton in 1659, and Hollingshead in 1577.

Richard II, furious with the citizens of London for assisting the Duke of Arundel, had taken the opportunity of a brawl in the City, to humiliate the citizens. He confiscated their charters and laid the City under a fine of ?1,000,000. This was late in 1397, and the following Spring the City, which, as we have seen, would be the Common Council, more especially as the King had imprisoned the Mayor and put in a "Custos" to govern, bought back the King's favour, and, consequently, their own charters, by the most expensive procession and gifts. All the brethren of each Gild, in return for this forgiveness, had to put their seals to these blank charters, which were an acknowledgment of the King's power and their willingness to do and pay what was left in blank in that charter, so that the King could insert what he chose in the blank spaces, or, as Grafton puts it, "by which he might, when he would, undo any of his subjects."

Amongst the Companies called upon to do this was certainly the Horners, who would not have been foolish enough to seal the "charters" had they not needed the support of the City in the maintaining their own prescriptive rights based on Royal grants. The term sealing is quite a natural one, inasmuch as no charters were signed until Tudor times.

Doubtless the troubles of the period and the expenses to which the fraternity had been put, caused the Gild to value its rights and to claim further recognition, even to the extent of promoting a special Act of Parliament. They did not seek to obtain a charter, be it noted, which rarely meant any advantage to the unfortunate persons who were practically compelled to accept such charters, but, on the contrary, in most cases proved to be an invasion by the Crown of former prescriptive privileges.

The Horners were successful in obtaining a special Act of Parliament in the year 1465. The Act is worth quoting as showing to what importance the Horners' Company must have risen by that date.

In the reign of Elizabeth we find the Horners' Company carrying on its work as a Joint Stock Company. The stock being held in shares or half-shares, it therefore became necessary to place the Wardens, who alone had under the Act just mentioned, power to purchase horns, under some agreement to do so only for and on behalf of the members of the Gild. No doubt many such deeds were executed, but amongst the archives of the Company there are still two extant, the one dated 1590 and the other 1599. The parties to the deed are the Wardens and the rest of the members. The Wardens therein bind themselves to buy, and the other members not to buy, horns in London or twenty-four miles round. The horns bought by the Wardens are to be purchased for the use of the whole Company and to be divided equally between them by the Wardens. In the deed of 1599 the limit within which the purchase and sale of horns was prohibited was altered from twenty-four to one hundred miles "next in and about the City of London."

From a document in the possession of the Company it would appear that the horn industry was, during the fifteenth century at least, an English monopoly, and from the official documents of Germany, Holland and France the writer has been unable to discover a single record of such an industry existing before 1600. The following interesting sentence from a document which is dated 1455 , illustrates the contention:--

"Inasmuch as the making of Hornes and other workes perteyning unto the said mystery be not perfectly had nor knowne in any region or place of the world, except in this land only: which causeth the people of other lands & places to resort & repaire unto this Citie for Hornes yeerly, unto the great proffitt & worship of the same Citie, whereas if such people of strange lands might cleerly & perfectly understand the cunning & feat of making of such English Hornes, would not heder repaire yeerly to buy such English chaffer," etc.

Consequently, the Wardens were expressly authorized the same year by the Mayor and Aldermen to punish any who should reveal the secret of the Craft to any stranger.

So valuable a trade, however, could not remain long unknown to the Continental nations, who were, in other respects, far in advance of England, and consequently the demand for English horns on the Continent became so great that, in spite of the Act forbidding the export of horns, the members of the Gild seem to have done a considerable trade in exporting horns, on the excuse that they were refuse horns. Indeed, so profitable did they find this traffic that, about 1590, two City men, the one a merchant and the other a scrivenour, entered into competition with them and managed to secure from Queen Elizabeth,--no doubt for a substantial payment,--permission to export horns to the Continent, though not themselves members of the Horners' Company.

The controversy which this occasioned between the Horners and their opponents, Symon Furner and John Crayford, is to be found amongst the records in the Manuscript Department of the British Museum.

Lord Burleigh attempted to bring about a compromise, and instructed a Mr. Carmarthen to endeavour to arrive at some arrangement between the contending parties, but in vain. The issue at stake was a vital one. The Horners claimed exclusive privileges under some Charter which they were evidently able to produce, accorded them by one of the Kings of England, whilst Messrs. Furner and Crayford argued their privileges under the "letters patent" granted by the Queen.

It would seem that the wealth and influences behind the private adventurers were stronger than those of the Company, which was already beginning to feel the pressure of competition from the Pouchmakers and Leathersellers, who dealt in the same kinds of wares, as well as from the introduction of glass vessels, etc., which took place in the sixteenth century.

From the year 1455 onwards, the Horners seem to have fallen into the background and to have disappeared from the arena of public life. This is not altogether to be wondered at, for, towards the end of the fifteenth century, and for nearly 200 years after, City Crafts or Mysteries were the object of predatory attacks of so deadly a character, that though in 1455 we find forty-eight Crafts openly representing the City, in 1575 only twenty-eight Companies were to be found on whom the assessment for wheat could be placed. What the remaining Mysteries did is difficult to say, but no doubt they attempted to carry on their work unnoticed, either urging prescriptive rights, or claiming none, in order to avoid spoliation.

The once important trade, but now the "little craft of Horners" was evidently in this category, and had it not been for the necessity of fighting for very existence, when the export of horns was making their trade impossible by the increase in price of the raw material, they doubtless would have preferred to keep in the background, even at the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign. This contention would seem the more reasonable from the fact that had not the previous Charters or Royal grants to the Horners' Company been of very ancient date, and, consequently, almost forgotten, and had that Craft not been, as it were, keeping from the glare of public observation in order to avoid the cost of "Inspeximus's," it is unlikely that the advisers of Queen Elizabeth would have laid her open to the controversy which the grant of letters patent to Furner and Crayford was bound to produce.

It must have been a great blow to the Company when, in the first year of the reign of James I, an Act was passed which repealed the Statute of 4 Edward IV; but in the seventh year of that King's reign the Horners presented their petition to Parliament, stating, "that by reason of the repeal of the prohibition, the Company had grown so poor and decayed, as in a short time, if remedy be not provided, they and theirs shall be utterly undone;" and the Act is thereby revived except as to the powers of search in Stourbridge and Ely fairs, and a limitation of the price of horns thereby secured. A penalty was imposed of double the value of English horns sold unwrought to any stranger or sent over the sea; one moiety of the penalty to go to the informer and one moiety to the King.

Notwithstanding this Statute, the exportation of horns still continued, and Letters Patent were granted by King Charles I, in the third year of his reign, 1627, again prohibiting the exportation of horns until the Company should first have made choice of the best and most convenient number of the horns to supply the necessary occasions of the realm.

In spite of the protection afforded by these Acts and Letters Patent, the exportation of horns continued.

These were evil days for the Horners' Craft, and it would appear that the Horners themselves were not entirely guiltless in the matter. Consequently, in 1635, to stem the tide of ill-fortune which seemed to have set in, the Company approached the Mayor and Aldermen to give them fresh rules "for the reformation of the Crafte." The following rules were allowed and confirmed by the then Lord Mayor, Christopher Clitherow:--

For two years the Company exercised their powers under these new rules, but still harder times were in store for the Company.

Though doubtless this Act was never intended to apply to alterations or additions to regulations already in force, but rather to the establishment of new Companies, it became necessary for the Horners to comply with the regulations, and though it does not transpire whether they were compelled to pay any fines or not, they finally obtained confirmation of their new rules under the hands of Thomas Coventrie, Lord Chancellor, and Chief Justices John Branston and John Finch, but not until after they applied for and obtained a Royal Charter, and as Charles I, in order to assert Sovereign rights, was unwilling to admit ancient prescriptive claims, care was taken to justify this subversion of the ancient rights of the Gild, by stating in the Charter that the Horners had never been "incorporated."

The examination of the New Rules by the Judges just mentioned, had revealed the fact that the Horners were a Joint Stock Company holding property in perpetuity in opposition to the Statute of Mortmain. Here was a splendid opportunity for the King to reap a harvest, and nothing remained for the authorities of the Company but to obtain a Charter as soon as possible and to avoid the heavy penalties to which they would otherwise be subjected by assenting to the legal fiction that they had not acted as a corporation, and never had been one, but merely an association in existence from year to year, acting under ancient and well-recognized privileges. Whether this claim was technically correct or not, the antiquity of the Company was so great and the process of proving any breach so lengthy and difficult that no doubt Charles I thought it best to take the cash payment which always accompanied grants and so close the matter. Thus the Charter of 1638, which is the only one now extant, was obtained, and the proceedings of the Company as a joint stock concern holding property in perpetuity were again legalized, though doubtless long before that time the right to hold property and to do all that was required of them as a Craft Gild had been regularly accorded to the members in the persons of their several "Guardians."

Like many other City Companies, the Horners have been accustomed to believe that this Charter, which in its preamble for obvious reasons takes for granted no previous Charter, was the first and only legal instrument authorizing them to carry on their work as a Gild. Very little reliance, however, is to be placed on the statements of the Charters of this period, which were often little more than a temporary instrument of protection against further encroachments on their resources and powers by the ruling monarch. For this very uncertain privilege large sums had to be paid, sums wrung again and again from the unfortunate City Gilds by threats of suppression.

It is mere than probable that at all times Charters were freely purchasable by those who could afford to pay for them, and, having served their particular purpose, were as easily lost or mislaid. For all practical purposes, however, until the sixteenth century at least, they offer no indication whatever of the antiquity of any Company, even where they seem to state in the preamble that there has been no previous Charter, a statement which should be taken only to indicate that the Sovereign granting the Charter wishes it to be supposed that he, and he alone, is the person to whom the Company is indebted for its privileges, privileges which often existed only in name. In many cases the Charters were really encroachments by the State on the ancient privileges which had been inherited from the earliest times, and which were supported by Municipal law, against which State law waged continuous warfare.

If further illustration were required, to demonstrate how great is the right of the Horners' Company to rank amongst the earliest of the acknowledged Trade Gilds, that proof is to be found in the study of what are known as "Adulterine" Gilds. These were unwarranted or unlicensed Gilds, and from time to time were heavily fined. There is no mention, however, of the Horners having been among such Gilds thus swooped down upon by the King, though lists are given of those who were mulcted from the twelfth century. The Horners could not have escaped had they been unwarranted at the time, and must, therefore, have possessed indisputable rights.

Reference has been made to Richard Baroun and William Karlile.

As a culminating proof that the Caroline Charter was not the first and only Royal grant held by the Horners' Company, we have but to turn to the Correspondence recently found in the British Museum, and it will at once become evident that the Horners were possessed of a Charter long before 1638. Mr. Carmarthen, writing to Lord Burghley in 1597, says:

Thus it will be seen that the Charter of 1638 is but an instrument reiterating and once more legalizing the acts which had been in vogue amongst the Horners for a very considerable time.

The Charter of Charles I provides that the Horners, Freemen of the City of London and Westminster and liberties and suburbs of the same, are incorporated by the name of "Master, Wardens, Assistants, and Fellowship of the Mistery of Horners of the City of London," with power to purchase and hold freehold and leasehold estates of every kind and all manner of goods and chattels, and to grant, alien and dispose of the same, and by the same name to plead and be impleaded, and to have a Common Seal.

One of the said Fellowship is to be chosen the Master, two to be chosen Wardens, and ten or more of the Fellowship, Assistants. The Master, Wardens and Assistants, or the greater part of them, whereof the Master and one of the Wardens are always to be two, have power to make and alter, amend or make new, "reasonable laws and constitutions touching the Trade, Art, or Mistery, and for punishment and reformation of abuses, wrongful practices and misdemeaners, and for defraying the charges of maintaining and continuing the Corporation, and after what order they shall demean themselves in their office mistery and work." And to impose such fines, amerciaments, or other lawful punishments upon all offenders as shall seem necessary; such fines, etc., to be raised for their own uses.

Robert Baker was appointed the first Master to continue in office until the 2nd February, 1638, and until another person was elected in his place. Christopher Peele and Thomas White were appointed first Wardens under the new rules and Charter. Ten brethren were appointed the first Assistants during their lives or good behaviour, and the Master and Wardens were upon retirement from their offices, to be assistants in the same manner. The Master and Wardens were to take oaths before the Master in Chancery to "well and truly execute their offices" before entering upon the same.

Power is given to the Master, Wardens, Assistants, and Fellowship to meet in their Common Hall or other convenient place upon the 2nd of February, if it be not Sunday, and if it be Sunday, then upon the next day after, to elect a Master and Two Wardens for the ensuing year; and they are to take their oaths of office before the late Master and Wardens, or two of them; and like power of election is given until the next 2nd of February in case of the death or removal for misbehaviour of any Master or Warden during his term of office, and also in like manner to elect an Assistant on the death or removal of any of the Assistants appointed by the Charter.

Power is given of oversight, rule and search of all persons occupying, importing, exporting, or using the art or mistery of Horners within the cities of London and Westminster, and the liberties and precincts thereof, and of all manner of wares thereunto appertaining, to the intent that all delinquents may be discovered and punished. They may purchase for ever one house for a Hall not exceeding the yearly value of ?40.

They are to elect one honest and discreet person as Clerk, and also appoint a Beadle.

The last occasion on which the Court exercised its rights against persons infringing its monopoly was in the year 1745. Having ascertained that certain persons not free of the Company had bought rough horns and pressed them into lantern leaves, and were disposing of them within the City of London and twenty-four miles distant, proceedings were ordered to be taken against them, and, as a result, the Company successfully established its right to the monopoly in the manufacture of horn work in the City of London and twenty-four miles round. From that time forward the trade in horn declined, and during the second half of the eighteenth century, the Company finally ceased to be a trading community. Thus ended the operative existence of a Craft Gild which from "time out of mind" until the present moment has had a useful and honourable career. The Horners' Company has been practically contemporaneous with the history of England, and is, it may be believed, still destined to serve many a useful purpose.

In spite of legal incorporation the property of the Company has, from time to time, been vested in certain trustees, the last trust deed being dated 1756.

The earliest Minute Book in the possession of the Company covers the period 1731 to 1796, and is extremely interesting as showing the care taken in the apprenticing of novices to the trade, in the appointment of its officers, and, perhaps most of all, in the unbroken continuity of the annual dinner held generally at some place outside the City, which though, at the time, partaken of only by the members of the Court, represented the annual feast of the mediaeval Gilds, and finds its successor to-day in the Livery Dinner, which has become almost a matter of civic importance.

During the eighteenth and first part of the nineteenth century the favourite inns selected for the annual dinner seem to have been the "Crown and Sceptre" at Greenwich, the "Plough," or "Folly House," Blackwall, the "Star and Garter," Richmond, and, in much later days, the "North and South American Coffee House," which latter, however, was probably used more for the ordinary meetings of the Company than for the annual dinner.

Time, however, brought its changes, and when, in 1603-4, the Horners' Act was repealed, it would seem likely that they found it either impossible to continue to pay the rent, or, realising that disaster awaited them, may have sold the property, if it were theirs to sell. It is, however, certain that in 1604 the Company leased a house with storehouses and sheds in Wentworth Street, Whitechapel, for the term of 1,000 years at a ground rent of ?4. When, in 1789, these premises were no longer required for the use of the trade, which had declined, they were let for ?30 a year, and in 1879 were sold to the Metropolitan Board of Works and the money invested on behalf of the Horners' Company.

It has been stated that the Horners' Company never had a Hall. It is difficult to see quite why this statement has been made, for there is much to make the student of Gild lore think otherwise. The Charter of 1638 expressly provides for one, and, as in every other respect, it simply imposes the absolute conditions then existing, there would seem no reason to doubt that the sum of ?40 per annum therein mentioned was the exact value of the property then held. The Bottlemakers would not have joined the Horners had the latter Company not had a hall or meeting place.

As with other Craft Gilds, the Fire of London probably proved very disastrous to the Company, and, no doubt, very little was saved.

The fact that there are hardly any deeds of importance anterior to 1666, that the Old Book of the Company, which has recently been recovered, after wandering so long, ceases to have an entry after 1636, together with the fact that the two or three early deeds which ante-date the Fire of London are in a deplorable condition, as well as the fact that the Company owned a considerable amount of silver plate, which was sold in 1789, makes it not improbable that the Horners, like every other City Gild, had its regular Hall or meeting place.

The coat of arms of the Company is Ar. on a Chevron sa., three bugles of the first between three leather bottles of the second.

Though, as a trading Gild, the Horners' Company declined, it has steadily risen in reputation as one of the ancient mysteries of the City of London, and, in 1837, the Commissioners on Municipal Corporations classed it as fifty-fourth out of eighty-nine Companies there enumerated. In 1846 the Company petitioned the Court of Aldermen for a livery which was granted them, the number of liverymen being limited to sixty.

In the course of the year 1900, at the instance of Mr. A. W. Timbrell, C.C., it was decided to present Queen Victoria with a horn casket in order to fittingly commemorate the new century. On being approached upon the subject, Her Majesty graciously accepted the offer. Before, however, the presentation could be made, her lamented death occurred. It was then decided to present the casket to King Edward, and on March 28th, 1901, the late King's Secretary wrote to the Clerk of the Company expressing His Majesty's pleasure in accepting the proposed gift.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet