CRAFT ORGANISATION TO THE 16TH CENTURY
The Coventry craft guilds received neither royal
charters nor any municipal authorisation of which
record has survived. It has not been possible to
discover when individual guilds were founded, nor
has their early organisation been established. All
that can be said is that certain guilds were functioning by certain dates. During the 12th and 13th
centuries deeds are almost the only evidence available, but for the next two centuries there are royal
instruments, certain Trinity Guild records, and, for
the 15th century, the leet book. Clues as to organisation cannot, therefore, be found before the late 14th
century; but a comparison of this evidence with an
interpretation of the evidence for Leicester in the
13th century (fn. 79) suggests that the organisation of the
Coventry industries, as we know it to have been in
the 15th century, may have been a more longstanding one than can be proved.
Apart from their economic significance the craft
guilds played an important part in the public social
life of Coventry particularly through their responsibility for the production of pageants. The history of
the Coventry pageants at times reflects the relative
prosperity of the different trades, and is dealt with
in detail in another section. (fn. 80)
WOOL AND CLOTH TRADES.
As has been seen
the wool and cloth trades were paramount in
Coventry from at least the 13th century and were
being practised there in the 12th. Detailed accounts
of the cloth trade and cap-making in the city have
been given in another volume of this History. (fn. 81)
The most important person, around whom the
cloth industry revolved, was the merchant who
bought large quantities of wool which he saw through
the various cloth-making processes. He handed out
wool for spinning and carding; (fn. 82) he distributed the
yarn to weavers, to whom he paid wages; (fn. 83) if he was
himself a dyer, as he quite often was in Coventry,
he dyed the cloth, otherwise he put it out to be
dyed; (fn. 84) he handed it out for fulling, teasling, and
shearing; and then sold the finished article, either in
the Drapery (fn. 85) to drapers or mercers for local and
foreign markets, or himself exported it through
Bristol, Southampton, (fn. 86) London, or Boston. (fn. 87) One
might expect these central figures of the industry to
be called clothiers, but in Coventry this designation
is scarcely ever found; it is clear, however, that the
clothiers of Coventry were the dyers, drapers, and
'merchants', who were apparently so numerous in
the town.
There is little evidence during the 12th and 13th
centuries for the practice of crafts concerned with
the early stages of cloth-making, but a wool carder
appears in 1208. (fn. 88) Carders and spinners, however,
were frequently the wives and daughters of craftsmen. There is consequently no evidence of guild
organisation among them, but their work and wages
were regulated by the leet. In 1449, for example, it
was ordered that wool should be handed out to
spinners in quantities of not more than 2¼ lbs.; (fn. 89)
in the following year all weights were ordered to be
sealed, (fn. 90) and in 1452 it was laid down that if any
spinner was given more than 2½ lbs. she was to take
it to the sheriffs, who would ensure that she was
paid the correct wage for the amount of work. (fn. 91)
Similar examples of leet control are to be found in
the 16th century. (fn. 92)
Weavers were comparatively numerous in
Coventry in the 12th century and a guild organisation
may have developed early, but there is no evidence
until the 15th century of the regulations and controls
associated with craft guilds. All the craft guilds
known to have existed at this time were probably
well established, for in 1406 the mayor and bailiffs
obtained letters patent prohibiting the foundation of
any more guilds; (fn. 93) this was confirmed in 1414 (fn. 94)
and on the same day letters close addressed to the
mayor and bailiffs drew attention to reports of
unauthorised assemblies of apprentices and journeymen and required that a proclamation be issued
against them. (fn. 95) In 1425 another mandate was issued
in similar terms. (fn. 96) The reason given on each of the
latter two occasions was that these adulterine guilds
were to the prejudice of the Trinity Guild and the
Corpus Christi Guild. Journeyman guilds presuppose well established craft guilds and certainly
the commission appointed in 1378 to compel four
of the chief men of every craft to give security for
the good behaviour of all their members (fn. 97) suggests
some form of organisation.
The presentation of a weaver in 1379 at the
sessions of the peace for taking 1½d. a day more than
the statutory wage (fn. 98) is an isolated instance of a
weaver trying to raise wages contrary to the Statute
of Labourers. An affray between weavers in 1397 (fn. 99)
may have been a personal affair; it may, however,
have been symptomatic of the opposition of locallyborn craftsmen to Irish workmen and, in this case,
to an Irish craftsman with several apprentices; or it
may have been the result of a dispute between
weavers as such. A dispute of the kind did indeed
arise in 1424 between masters and journeymen
weavers: journeymen had complained about the
excessive number of looms and the numerous
apprentices employed by master weavers, the lack
of machinery for getting compensation against
masters, the employment of strangers instead of
local journeymen, the unfair share of profits taken
by masters, and their failure to pay debts. The
masters, on their side, alleged that the journeymen
did not pull their weight in the craft and were
contumacious, preventing their fellows from working
with their own masters. The chief points in the
judgement of four arbitrators were that masters
might have as many looms and as many apprentices
as they wished; that those employing journeymen
or strangers should pay 20s. to the master of the
guild; that for every brother added to the journeymen's fraternity, their wardens should pay 12d. to
the master of the guild; that masters should prefer
local journeymen, who in turn were not to prevent
other journeymen from working with their masters;
and that journeymen should receive a third of the
payment for weaving cloth. (fn. 1) Thus master weavers
were compelled to recognise a journeyman organisation already in existence.
The leet drew up and enforced regulations for the
control of the craft. In 1451, for example, weavers
were ordered to use not less than 30 lbs. of yarn for
a dozen of cloth. (fn. 2) In the early 16th century when the
cloth industry was depressed the leet interfered
continuously to regulate methods of production. (fn. 3)
The monopoly of the weavers' guild was
strengthened in 1539 when the leet ordered that no
linen yarn was to be given to a weaver unless he was
'a brother admitted and associated with the weavers
of the city'. (fn. 4) By 1544, however, the system was
changing. Because of faulty work by weavers,
clothiers were beginning to set up looms in their
own houses, bringing in employees to work on them.
Clothiers who did this were, however, to pay 3s. 4d.
to the weavers' guild. (fn. 5)
The earliest guild among the finishing trades was
perhaps that of the fullers, but the evidence is highly
confusing. In 1384 the Guild of the Nativity of
Christ was licensed to acquire property in mortmain
to the value of 8 marks for the support of a chaplain, (fn. 6)
but within three months commissioners were
appointed to inquire into the purposes of the guild,
for report went that it was being used as a medium
for labourers and workmen to resist the mayor and
bailiffs and the king's ministers. (fn. 7) It looks as if the
Guild of the Nativity, founded before 1384, was
sheltering a journeymen's guild or a rebellious
faction of some kind. In 1439 the tailors and fullers
were described as being brethren of the Guild of the
Nativity of Christ and were licensed to acquire
property to the value of 10 marks, as their licence of
1384 had never been fulfilled; (fn. 8) this was now an
accepted craft guild. At the same time the tailors and
fullers were allowed to choose four masters who
were to govern the guild, and they were granted a
common seal. (fn. 9) This is the nearest approach in
Coventry to the foundation of a craft guild by royal
licence, but the licence was issued long after the
guild had become an organised body.
Hill Mill, Prior's Orchard Mill, Earl's Mill, and a
horse-driven mill between the Radford Road and
St. Nicholas Street were possibly fulling mills, as
Baginton Mill certainly was. (fn. 10) In 1411 there were
tenter grounds for stretching the fulled cloth near
Cook Street and St. Agnes Lane and between the
Radford Road and St. Nicholas Street, and at least
two grounds lay north of Well Street. (fn. 11) Regulations
for the stretching of cloth after fulling were issued
by the leet in 1435 and 1437. (fn. 12) The tailors and fullers,
joined in one fraternity at least since 1439, (fn. 13) were
separated by order of the leet in 1448 at the desire of
the fullers; (fn. 14) at the same time the tailors and shearmen acquired St. George's Chapel which the
shearmen and fullers had been granted by the
feoffees of Laurence Cook. (fn. 15) In 1468 every fuller
was required to set his own mark on his cloth. (fn. 16)
As with the weavers, the slump in trade led to stricter
regulations: searchers were appointed in 1514 (fn. 17) and
more stringent examination and oversight were
introduced four years later. (fn. 18) For the protection of
fullers, clothiers were ordered in 1524 to pay ready
money for their work and not in truck. (fn. 19) Frequent
regulations required fulling to be given to Coventry
craftsmen and not to strangers. (fn. 20)
The earliest evidence for corporate action by
Coventry dyers is in 1415 when the commonalty
took a complaint to the House of Commons that the
dyers had agreed among themselves to raise their
prices but would not consent to improve their
workmanship, and that they had a monopoly in
madder and were great makers of cloth; it was
requested that overseers - two drapers, a woader,
and a dyer - might be appointed and that dyers
should be prohibited from making cloth. (fn. 21) Experience had perhaps shown that the dyer-clothier
used better dyes for his own cloth than for cloth put
out to him for dyeing by other clothiers. Dyers had
to be men of substance, for they were merchants
buying imported raw materials for their trade; (fn. 22)
woad and madder were imported through Southampton in large quantities from the late 1420s until
about 1478 and more of it went to Coventry than to
anywhere outside the southern towns; indeed
between 1439 and 1493 only London and Salisbury
bought more than did Coventry. (fn. 23) Since dyers were
closely concerned with foreign trade, they were
more likely at an early date to join the Guild
Merchant than to form guilds of their own, (fn. 24) but
they had their own guild by 1475. (fn. 25)
The leet issued regulations regarding dyers' use
of the river, in order to prevent flooding or pollution, (fn. 26) and in 1475 it nullified ordinances which the
dyers had made, but had not submitted to the mayor,
on methods of dyeing agreed secretly among themselves. (fn. 27) In 1527 a guild of dyers' journeymen was
forbidden, (fn. 28) but with the slump in cloth-making
closer leet control was instituted and in 1529 the
dyers' guild's monopoly was set aside. (fn. 29)
The drapers, many of whom were in fact clothiers
as well as dealers in cloth, seem to have been
organised early in Coventry; they appear as a group
in 1247 (fn. 30) and the Old Drapery at the south end of
Palmer Lane had been partly acquired by the priory
before the Statute of Mortmain. (fn. 31) The new Drapery,
near the site of the present Drapers' Hall, was given
to the Guild of St. John the Baptist by William
Walshman in the 1360s. (fn. 32) A system of apprenticeship
was in being by 1317. (fn. 33) Early in the 15th century the
Drapery was held by the Trinity Guild which leased
portions of it to individual drapers (fn. 34) and in 1425 the
leet ordered that on Fridays no cloth, except small
amounts, was to be sold anywhere but in the
Drapery. (fn. 35) Mercers, who sold linen drapery among
other goods, were ordered in 1445 not to carry on
their business outside the Drapery. (fn. 36) An order of
1474 decreed that all mercers and drapers were to
use only measures sealed according to the king's
standard. (fn. 37) In 1518 the drapers were charged with
inspection of weavers' and fullers' cloth. (fn. 38) Thus by
the early 16th century the whole cloth trade was
highly organised and centralised and was governed
with the aid of the leet.
The sale of cloth was subject to the payment of
aulnage, and in 1385 part of the sum accruing to the
king from the sealing of woollen cloth in the city was
granted to the mayor and bailiffs towards their
expenses in building the walls; (fn. 39) this sum of £24
was not received at the time and was re-granted in
1391. (fn. 40) Aulnagers had been appointed for Coventry
from 1348 (fn. 41) and, in a few cases, they had been
faced by avoidance of payment on a large scale; in
1363, for example, a draper was accused of selling
over a long period cloth which had not been sealed
for aulnage, of assaulting one of the collectors, and
of tearing up his commission of office. (fn. 42) Thirteen
years later the growth of action of this kind warranted
a commission of enquiry. (fn. 43)
The tailors' guild was well established by 1387,
when seven tailors assaulted two journeymen who
refused to join a guild in opposition to the master
tailors; the seven wished to wear their own livery,
make their own regulations, and force all journeymen coming to Coventry to join their guild before
obtaining employment. (fn. 44) It was tailors' journeymen
who were chiefly responsible for the unlicensed
fraternity of St. Anne which was prohibited in
1414. (fn. 45) By 1439 the tailors and fullers were joined
in one company (fn. 46) but they separated, at the request
of the fullers, in 1448, (fn. 47) when the latter released St.
George's Chapel to the tailors and shearmen. (fn. 48)
Tailors' goods were mostly for sale locally; there
were consequently no strict leet regulations to insist
on the quality necessary to maintain Coventry's good
name in the country at large and no process for
sealing and examining the wares.
Capping was an ancient trade in Coventry, but
little evidence is available until the late 15th century
when it was apparently flourishing. In 1496 the
master and fellowship of the cappers, seemingly 24
in number, brought their book of ordinances to the
leet for confirmation; masters were not to employ
more than two apprentices and were to keep them
for not less than seven years; journeymen were
not to make caps on their own, but only for their
masters, although they might repair old bonnets;
wages were fixed and no strangers were to be
employed as journeymen without licence of the
masters; and no member of the craft was to teach
any part of his trade except to his apprentices or to
his wife. (fn. 49) In 1515 searchers were appointed by
order of the leet. (fn. 50) Cappers resembled merchants
in that they bought wool, had it spun, knitted, and
fulled, and sold the finished article. (fn. 51) Other crafts
connected with the cloth trade were declining during
the early 16th century; the cappers, on the other
hand, were flourishing, and in 1531 they asked for a
chapel to be assigned to them. They were accordingly associated with the cardmakers and saddlers,
who could not afford to keep up their chapel of St.
Thomas in St. Michael's Church, (fn. 52) but within six
years the cappers had entirely taken over the
chapel. (fn. 53) Regulations on piece work were introduced
and the ordinances were confirmed from time to
time, while the government of the craft seems to
have been in the hands of the masters and twelve
senior members of the guild. (fn. 54)
LEATHER TRADES.
Skinners, furriers, fellmongers, tanners, curriers, and whittawers were all
concerned with the preparation of leather. One
skinner had at least two apprentices in 1380, (fn. 55) and a
century later the skinners had their own butts. (fn. 56) Evidence for their organisation is sparse but it is clear
that the trade was of some importance in the town.
Tanners came rather more under the supervision
of the leet; in 1381 a tanner was presented before
the justices of the peace for selling five unfit skins, (fn. 57)
but in 1494 the tanners asked the leet to regulate the
sale of hides (fn. 58) and two years later it was the leet
which dealt with offenders; (fn. 59) the order of 1494
forbade wholesale buying of hides by strangers from
butchers outside the recognised market. As with
other trades stricter regulations were imposed during
the first half of the 16th century: in 1508 the mayor
was to supervise the reformation of the tanners, (fn. 60)
and in 1522 he was to appoint two searchers to
examine all leather and to seal goods which passed
the test. (fn. 61) Some idea of the standing of the tanners
at this time may be gained from the fact that one of
their members, John Boteler, was town clerk and
steward; the guild wished to make him master in
1504 and it was with some difficulty that he managed
with the help of the leet to obtain a discharge from
the obligations of holding office in the company. (fn. 62)
The earliest indication of organisation among the
corvisers or shoemakers is in 1380 when three
corvisers were presented before the justices of the
peace for taking wages above the rate allowed by the
Statute of Labourers. (fn. 63) A quarrel between the
weavers and the corvisers, submitted to the arbitration of the mayor in 1444, seems to have begun as a
personal matter, but may well have been symptomatic
of an attempt by the corvisers to emulate their more
powerful rivals. (fn. 64) In 1508 the mayor and six or eight
of his brethren were to regulate the price of boots
and shoes. (fn. 65) When in 1522 searchers were appointed
to examine all leather sold in the city and to seal
leather which passed the test, the tanners and shoemakers were the two companies ordered to pay the
costs of the searchers, (fn. 66) for they - apart from the
merchant skinners - were apparently the most
wealthy and powerful of the crafts concerned with
leather.
METAL TRADES.
Although various metalworking trades are known to have existed in
Coventry from at least the 13th century, there is no
evidence of organisation for most of them until the
15th century. As the result of a bill presented to the
leet in 1435, journeymen of wiredrawers and girdlers
were ordered to work in their own houses and
journeymen of smiths and brakemen in their
masters' houses. (fn. 67) It is, however, clear that the
trades thus regulated were by this time wellestablished organisations. Smiths had been refusing
to shoe strangers' horses on Sundays but they were
now ordered to do so on any day of the week. (fn. 68) The
wiredrawers had five years previously petitioned for
the privilege of maintaining the canopy over the
high altar of St. Michael's Church. (fn. 69) The cardmakers
had acted corporately as early as 1356 when they
were parties to an indenture made by licence of the
mayor and bailiffs. (fn. 70) It is not clear whether the five
Coventry girdlers who in 1329 were allowed to
purchase tin from Devonshire stanneries for
garnishing their girdles (fn. 71) were already organised as
a guild, for the petition was brought by the men of
the stanneries; but in 1391 the girdlers of Coventry
were themselves petitioning for an exemplification
of the licence which allowed them to work girdles
garnished with white metal, (fn. 72) and in 1401 they
obtained a second exemplification. (fn. 73) Coventry was
one of seven places outside London allowed by
Parliament in 1423 to have their own touches for
goldsmiths' marks, and this may presuppose some
craft organization. There is, however, no record of
any action being taken in the city consequent on the
statute of 1423 (fn. 74) and there is no evidence of a guild
until 1523 by which time the goldsmiths, the smiths
and others appear to have formed one guild. (fn. 75)
BUILDING TRADES.
The wrights were particularly opposed to the regulation of wages by the
Statute of Labourers and ten of them were presented
in 1379 for taking excessive wages. (fn. 76) Their early
history, however, is undocumented and, along with
those of the millers and the tilers, their guild was
dissolved in 1551. (fn. 77) Master carpenters had their
wages fixed according to the Statute of Labourers
by the justices of the peace, with the assent of the
leet, in 1421. (fn. 78) By the middle of the century the
carpenters were trying to establish a monopoly by
imposing high fines on strangers coming to the city
to practise their trade, but an order of the leet in
1455 regulated the fines imposed on those who had
remained in the city and enjoyed the liberties for
two years. (fn. 79) It is not known when and why the
carpenters' guild was dissolved, but it was restored
by an order of the leet in 1528 provided that they
behaved themselves. (fn. 80) In 1553 they were apparently
again seeking a monopoly, for they were allowed
by the leet to take a penny a week from the wages
of any country carpenter who was employed in the
city. (fn. 81)
FOOD AND DRINK TRADES.
Regulations for
the production and sale of food were numerous and
strictly enforced. The leet frequently dealt with
butchers: in 1421 they were ordered not to sell
tainted meat, not to sell on Sunday meat remaining
unsold on Thursday unless they had salted it, and
not to prevent country butchers from coming in to
sell their meat on any day of the week. (fn. 82) In the same
year it was laid down that no regulations which had
not first been submitted to the mayor and bailiffs
were to be made by the butchers. (fn. 83) Orders of the leet
regulated the places of slaughter and the disposal
of waste, which was to be collected by the butchers'
cart and dumped in a pit near the Poddy Croft. (fn. 84)
By 1523 the monopoly of the butchers' company
was, however, complete, for no one in the city was
allowed to sell meat unless he belonged to the
craft. (fn. 85) The butchers' company was apparently
twice dissolved in the first half of the century for it
was reformed in 1544 and again in 1552. (fn. 86)
Fishmongers were prominent during the 14th
century on account of forestalling and regrating, (fn. 87)
and in the following century they were as strictly
regulated as the butchers. Orders against regrating
were closely linked with a prohibition on the sale of
bad fish. (fn. 88) In 1421 all sea fish brought in by strangers
was to be examined before it was sold, (fn. 89) and strangers
were to lodge only in inns where the landlord was
sworn to the mayor to prevent regrating. (fn. 90) The leet
saw to it that fishmongers' stalls made no obstruction in the highway, particularly in Cross Cheaping, (fn. 91)
that waste was disposed of, (fn. 92) that fresh water fish
was not sold wholesale but only directly to the
consumer, (fn. 93) and that fishmongers did not retail
other commodities such as butter. (fn. 94) The cutting of
fish was restricted in 1512 to seven men, apart from
the fishermen themselves. (fn. 95) The mayor had been
accustomed to choose one of the masters of the
fishmongers' guild before the same regulation was
applied to the butchers in 1520. (fn. 96)
Regulations for the bakers mainly concerned the
assize of bread. Public discontent at light-weight
or poor-quality bread made itself felt in 1374 and
again in 1387 when the commons hurled loaves of
bread at the mayor in St. Mary's Hall. (fn. 97) The bakers
had asked in 1379 for an exemplification of the
ordinances of the assizes of bread and ale and of the
composition of money and measures, (fn. 98) the implication being that it was the mayor who was at fault in
setting the assize. John Leeder, mayor, in his detailed
proclamation of 1421, listed the types of loaf which
could be sold for a penny, instituted severe punishments for offenders, and allowed country bakers to
sell in Coventry so long as their bread was of good
weight and so long as they brought it first to the
Gaol Hall door to be examined for weight and
quality by the mayor himself. (fn. 99) As the bakers were
forbidden to buy corn in the market on market
days, they were allowed in 1445 to charge more for
their bread and in 1473 to make lighter weight
loaves; (fn. 1) in 1484 the extent of this privilege was made
to vary with the price of wheat. (fn. 2) Later that year the
bakers went on strike and departed to Baginton,
leaving the city without bread. (fn. 3) Some forty years
later there were as many as 43 bakers in Coventry, (fn. 4)
so the exodus must have been considerable. They
soon gave in, were fined £20, and promised to obey
the mayor's regulations and never again to take such
action. (fn. 5) By 1520 the mayor was choosing one of the
masters of the bakers' guild. (fn. 6) Coventry was
apparently a good market for bread, for bakers came
from some distance, even from Warwick, on
Wednesdays and Fridays to sell at the Gaol Hall
door; but from 1534 they were not allowed to take
unsold stock away with them and had to leave it
at any of three specified houses for sale when
asked. (fn. 7) Consequently Warwick bakers began bringing in bread more than twice a week, but the leet
restricted them in 1551 to Wednesdays and Fridays. (fn. 8)
By 1546 the mayor's control over the bakers was
complete, for it was then ordained that the mayor, and
not the master of the craft, was to punish offenders. (fn. 9)
Brewers frequently sold ale by unsealed measure
during the latter part of the 14th century. (fn. 10) Their
trade was apparently increasing during the next
century for by 1492 former dwelling houses in Well
Street had been taken over for malt making, (fn. 11) and
in 1520 there were 68 brewers in the city. (fn. 12) The
victuallers of Coventry were sufficiently strong in
1370 to threaten strike action unless letters patent
licensing the collection of murage were withdrawn. (fn. 13)
A hundred years later their independence led them
to ignore the assizes of bread, ale, and wine, but the
leet imposed severe penalties for such offences in
1473. (fn. 14) It was normal for the mayor to fix prices of
staple foods, but in 1539 and 1550 when the mayor
was himself a victualler officials were appointed to
assist him. (fn. 15)
APPRENTICESHIP.
The first known instance of
an apprenticeship in Coventry is to a merchant in
1317. (fn. 16) The system was, however, widespread
during the reign of Richard II, and a number of
apprenticeship indentures exists. (fn. 17) One apprentice
was pardoned in 1387 for leaving the service of his
mistress before his time, (fn. 18) and the numerous
offenders, described as servants, who were presented
at the sessions of the peace between 1377 and 1397
were almost certainly apprentices. (fn. 19) Before 1421 it
was laid down that every apprentice was to be bound
for at least seven years, that he was to be sworn before
the steward of the court or his deputy, and that his
name was to be entered in the register, his friends
paying 12d. to the steward - 1d. for registration
and 11d. for the use of the wardens. These orders
were confirmed in 1494 (fn. 20) and, in the same year,
admissions to apprenticeship were noted in the leet
book, fourteen apprentices being sworn during the
period 25 April 1494 to 12 January 1495. Twelve of
these came from outside Coventry, one from as close
as Stoneleigh, one from as far as Merioneth; four
were apprenticed to cappers or hat makers, one to a
weaver, one to a shearman, one to a draper, one to a
mercer, three to grocers, one to a butcher, one to a
baker, and one to a locksmith. (fn. 21) There seems to have
been some opposition to the regulations: it was
decreed in 1494 that no scrivener was to draw up an
indenture until after the registration of the apprentice's oath; (fn. 22) and in the following year verses
pinned to the door of St. Michael's Church
condemned the payment demanded of every apprentice. (fn. 23)
At the same time, some of the crafts, for example
the cappers, were allowing only two apprentices to
one master, (fn. 24) but in 1524 an order of the leet made
it legal for any craftsman to take as many apprentices
as he wished. (fn. 25) The cappers appear to have paid
especial attention to the welfare of apprentices,
providing in 1520 for their protection against unjust
masters (fn. 26) and requiring the master of the craft
during his year of office to visit every apprentice. (fn. 27)
At the end of the 15th century payments to apprentices varied: 12d. a year was the normal rate,
with one or two exceptions, for cappers and hat
makers, weavers, drapers, and grocers; a locksmith
received 16d., a shearman 2s., and a butcher 4s.; and
in each case a large sum ranging from 6s. 8d. to
33s. 4d. was paid to an apprentice during his last
year. The butcher's apprentice who received 33s. 4d.
had to learn how to use it, however, for he had to
find his own food and clothing. (fn. 28)