ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL HISTORY, 1545-1835
TRADE AND INDUSTRY.
Because of its poor
communications and its proximity to industrial
Coventry the economic position of Warwick showed
little change between the 15th and 18th centuries. A
scheme to make the Avon navigable, first mooted in
the 15th century, (fn. 1) was revived about 1634 by William
Sandys of Fladbury (Worcs.) and received support
both from the corporation (fn. 2) and from the Privy
Council, (fn. 3) but the improvements reached only so far
as Stratford. (fn. 4) Although naturally minimising their
ability to pay Ship Money in 1636, the bailiff and
burgesses claimed that Warwick was 'a town of very
small trading consisting of many poor artificers, and
is no common road to receive the benefits of travellers,
and standing betwixt Coventry and Stratford, both
towns of common road, and their markets more
abundant and populous . . .'. (fn. 5)
More than sixty years earlier there was said to be
'no trade to be reckoned of', but most people had
'corn and some husbandry', which was 'the chiefest
maintenance of their poor housekeeping'. (fn. 6) At that
time the most prosperous traders were mercers and
drapers; malting, hitherto also profitable, was in
decline. (fn. 7) Other trades in the town were represented
among the principal and assistant burgesses, although they were not a completely representative
cross-section of the community. An analysis of
members of the corporation between 1554 and 1588 (fn. 8)
reveals 7 butchers, 6 drapers, 6 mercers, 4 shoemakers, 3 each of bakers, carpenters, glovers, and
victuallers, 2 each of tanners and smiths, a chandler,
and a pewterer. In 1586-7 a survey (fn. 9) of craftsmen,
journeymen, and apprentices in the town (Table I)
revealed that the tanners were the largest group. (fn. 10)
The mercers, grocers, and haberdashers were
clearly the most organised group, (fn. 11) having a master,
2 wardens, and 9 others who were together described
as 'householders and free of those occupations'. In
addition to a journeyman and apprentices there were
three others not qualified under the statute. The 6
servants employed by glovers were hired by the day,
also contrary to the statute. Henry Moore, it was
noted, wove, sheared and dressed his cloth in his
own house, and another weaver exercised his trade
without having served an apprenticeship. (fn. 12)
| TABLE 1 |
|
Warwick Tradesmen, 1586-7
|
|
Trade
|
Masters
|
Journeymen
|
Apprentices
|
Servants
|
| Tanners |
17 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
| Butchers |
16 |
2 |
8 |
| Mercers |
14 (fn. a)
|
1 |
5 |
3 |
| Grocers |
| Haberdashers |
| Shoemakers |
9 |
14 |
10 |
1 |
| Smiths |
9 |
2 |
11 |
- |
| Pewterers |
| Cutlers |
| Glaziers |
| Glovers |
7 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
| Tailors |
6 |
6 |
6 |
- |
| Weavers |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
| TOTAL |
81 |
33 |
53 |
17 |
The glaziers, with at least 3 masters, a journeyman, and 4 apprentices formed an important group. Their leader seems to have been Nicholas Eyffler
(d. 1591), a native of Osnabrück, (fn. 13) who was also the
most prosperous of the foreigners in the town. (fn. 14) At
his death his workshop was found to contain glass
with the arms of Lucy, suggesting that he might be
responsible for some of the glass at Charlecote. (fn. 15)
Another glazier was Roger Saunders, who was
employed regularly at St. Nicholas's Church between
1583 and 1610. (fn. 16) A third master glazier was John
Weale, described as such in 1597-8, when he was
also selling barley and making malt. (fn. 17) Weale
illustrates well the point that tradesmen also had
interests in agriculture; Thomas Oken, mercer, and
several others dealt in corn and malt and invested
the profits of their trade in land. (fn. 18)
An important feature of urban economy were the
trade companies, the successors of the medieval
craft guilds, through which corporations exercised
economic control. In Warwick they seem to have
owed their existence to corporation initiative but
were supervised in many of their activities by the
court leet. The leet, for example, as early as 1549-50,
had ordered that no baker should sell his wares
outside the borough. (fn. 19) This decision had subsequently been set aside by the 'governors of the
town', (fn. 20) but soon after the establishment of the
corporation in 1554 the decision was again reversed,
the corporation, with the consent of the justices of
assize, issuing a new ordinance for bakers. (fn. 21) During
the 1570s a number of 'books' or ordinances were
issued by the corporation, indicating the growth of
organisation within various trades in the town. The
butchers' book (1570) (fn. 22) was followed by ordinances
for pointmakers, glovers, and skinners (?1572), (fn. 23)
walkers (fullers) and dyers (1572), (fn. 24) bakers (1573), (fn. 25)
drapers and tailors (1573), (fn. 26) and mercers, haberdashers, grocers, and fishmongers (1574). (fn. 27) By 1604
masons and tilers, (fn. 28) carpenters and joiners, saddlers
and wheelwrights were similarly organized. (fn. 29) While
on the one hand these companies, each with a hall
for meetings, (fn. 30) indicate increased economic development, on the other hand they are evidence of greater
control exercised by the corporation. With the one
exception of the company headed by mercers, the
corporation was able to control membership, a
power which could be exercised for political and
social as well as economic reasons.
Markets and fairs were similarly controlled by the
corporation through the bailiff, who was clerk of the
market ex officio. The bailiff was required in 1571
to attend at each market between 11 and 1 o'clock
with two or three burgesses, and was to keep sessions
as clerk of the market at least once each year. (fn. 31) By
1611, however, the court leet had taken over the
bailiff's functions by appointing bread weighers,
flesh tasters, leather sealers, and aletasters. (fn. 32) The
corporation retained control of the general administration of markets, ordering that the Tuesday (before
1554 the Wednesday) market be held at the High
Cross and surrounding streets until it was abolished
before 1683. (fn. 33) Butter and cheese were to be sold at
the cross itself, wheat in Castle Street, barley in
Church Street, and beef in Jury Street. Alternative
sites were used on fair days. The Saturday market,
as in medieval times, probably remained in and
around the Market Place. Other places of trade
included shops under a Wool Hall, mentioned in
1556, (fn. 34) and a Butter House, pulled down early in the
18th century. (fn. 35) After 1554 the corporation enjoyed
rents paid by stall holders in the Booth Hall. In 1581
34 tradesmen paid a total rent of 113s. 4d. (fn. 36) By
1692-3 there were 45 stall-holders paying rents
varying from between 5s. and £2 a year, totalling
£19 13s. (fn. 37) The stalls then lay on the northern and
southern sides of the hall, and evidently overflowed
into the street, for some were described as lying
inside and others outside the hall. (fn. 38) In 1725 the
income had increased to £35 11s. (fn. 39) The serjeant at
mace was responsible for the collection of the rents
for the mayor, (fn. 40) but by the beginning of the 18th
century, despite leases containing voidance clauses,
arrears of rent mounted rapidly. (fn. 41) As a result of the
Chancery suit of 1735 the Booth Hall was taken into
the hands of the Sequestration Commissioners in
1742. (fn. 42) The corporation probably recovered the hall
when they re-occupied the Court House in 1761. (fn. 43)
Repairs to the hall subsequently became costly, and
it began seriously to decay. As a result it was sold in
1791 and demolished. (fn. 44)
To the three surviving fairs of the 15th century, (fn. 45)
each in 1554 of two days' duration, was added by the
town's first charter a fair on the first Saturday in
Lent. (fn. 46) The charter of 1613 allowed another on St.
John the Baptist's day (24 June). (fn. 47) By 1664 a fair
was held from 26-28 September, giving an annual
total of six fairs covering 22 days. (fn. 48) A further fourday fair around the feast of the Purification (2 Feb.)
was granted in 1683. (fn. 49) Nine fairs were held in
Warwick in about 1796, (fn. 50) 12 in 1815, (fn. 51) and 14
in 1850. (fn. 52)
As in the case of markets, fairs were held in
various parts of the town, and particular places were
allotted to individual commodities. In 1554 space
was created around the High Cross. (fn. 53) A corporation
order of 1685 declared that fairs should be kept at
the usual places in the town and not moved without
leave. The cloth fair, however, was to move to High
Street, between the brasiers' and the shoemakers'
stalls, and the grain market was to be held in Castle
Street. (fn. 54) Certain commodities came to be associated
with particular fairs: fish was the speciality of the
March fair, cheese and cattle were sold in May, wool
and cattle in August, cheese, cattle, and hops in
November. (fn. 55) Horses were sold at every fair, but
particularly in May. For each sale the corporation
received 4d., and for each exchange 8d.; a careful
record of business was kept to ensure honest
dealing. (fn. 56) These sales, incidentally, continued without a break in the early 1690s when the legality of
the town government was in doubt. (fn. 57)
Throughout the period the court leet issued orders
to regulate sales in both fairs and markets according
to supply and demand. Badgers retailing grain,
coming from as far afield as Worcestershire, had to
be licensed, (fn. 58) and in 1597-8 several men were
required not to make malt for eight months. (fn. 59) Both
corporation and court leet interfered to regulate
standards and prices. (fn. 60) In 1611 the corporation
ordered that foreign butchers should not sell meat
on Saturdays after the beadle had rung the market
hall bell at 2 o'clock, and that these butchers should
bring hides and tallow for sale on Fridays and
Saturdays, on pain of fines. (fn. 61) The leet was also
concerned for the good conduct and cleanliness of
the market. An overseer was appointed in the corn
market in 1611 partly to prevent people winnowing
corn at the cross, in the four principal streets and
in the chapels. (fn. 62) By 1648 a scavanger had been
appointed to carry away refuse, and the inhabitants
of the Market Place and the four streets were
required to pay him. (fn. 63)
Much of this control was to encourage outside
traders, although on one occasion in 1615, the
corporation went so far as to expel foreign butchers
altogether from the Booth Hall, until they should
conform to the bailiff's regulations and agree to an
increase in rent. (fn. 64) In 1628, on the other hand, the
leet ordered that town butchers should sell tallow at
8s. the tod while country butchers could undercut
them by a shilling. (fn. 65) Again, in 1648 country bakers
were being encouraged to bring bread into the town,
as much wheaten and 'household' bread as white. (fn. 66)
An important argument against Sir Thomas
Puckering as a possible parliamentary candidate for
the borough in 1626 was that he was 'not so commodiously sending corn to the market for the general
good of the people'. (fn. 67) Local maltsters, however,
needed protection: no stranger was allowed to buy
barley to make malt in any house in the town, and
no bachelor nor maid was to buy barley for this
purpose. (fn. 68) These protective measures suggest that
Warwick's economy was rather precarious, that the
growth of population (fn. 69) made the town rely heavily
on outside producers, limiting malting to increase the
availability of barley. There is no evidence that
Warwick's craftsmen were producing significantly
for outside consumption.
Warwick's trading community in the second half
of the 17th century seems to have expanded fairly
rapidly to meet the needs of a growing population. (fn. 70)
In turn the corporation sought to increase its control
over the town's economy through the trade companies, as well as continuing its direction over
markets and fairs. A corporation order of 1669
attempted to control membership of the companies
by requiring that the freedom of the borough (fn. 71)
should be purchased first and that no company
should accept anyone not free of his trade. (fn. 72) A
stationer, a watchmaker, two maltsters, and two
tanners were enrolled in the following six months,
after which further traces of admissions are slight.
In an attempt to impose indirect Crown control over
membership, the charter of 1683 confirmed the
previous order, and, as a result, a list of tradesmen
free of the borough was commenced. Enrolled under
twelve companies are 103 names, (fn. 73) though not all
had taken the oath as freemen. (fn. 74) The smiths formed
the largest group, (fn. 75) followed by mercers, tailors,
fullers and dyers, bakers, shoemakers, masons and
tilers, and glovers. New companies had been formed
for flax-dressers, and silk- and woollen-weavers. At
least one other company, the butchers, was not
included in this list, (fn. 76) and the inclusion of names of
other borough freemen suggests that some trades
were not organized in companies at all, and that
certain individuals were working outside companies
of their own trade. For a time certain trades remained subject to corporation oversight. Bakers
were fined in 1698 for making light bread, though
composition money, amounting to a third of admittance fees, seems to have been of more interest
to the burgesses. (fn. 77) Control of standards through the
clerk of the market was retained, the fish and flesh
taster being presented by him to the grand jury at
quarter sessions in 1697 for neglecting his office. In
1707 the leather sealer was presented for accepting
bribes. (fn. 78)
The number of trades outside the confines of
the companies shows a marked increase in types and
variety. The survey of 1586-7 and the companies
known to be in existence by 1604 (fn. 79) indicate over
twenty different trades. The 'Free and Voluntary
Gift' returns of 1661, (fn. 80) by no means providing a
complete survey, reveal thirty. Tradesmen who
petitioned for relief in the area destroyed by the
fire of 1694 represented nearly fifty. (fn. 81) A century
later 87 different trades appear. (fn. 82) Bakers, maltsters,
and innkeepers led the field in the incomplete 1661
returns, followed by glovers, shoemakers, and
mercers. The market for their goods would seem to
have been largely local, but the appearance of
certain traders producing luxury articles reflects the
position of the town as the centre of county administration. For the increasing numbers of gentry
and professional men for whom Warwick provided
either temporary residence during assizes and
sessions, or, increasingly during the 18th century, a
permanent home, (fn. 83) the watchmaker and the stationer
admitted to the town in 1669, (fn. 84) a clockmaker, and a
'lymner', (fn. 85) plied their trades. By 1694 had appeared
a bookseller, a confectioner, two milliners, six
apothecaries, two goldsmiths, and two gunsmiths. (fn. 86)
One product of the town in the 17th century was
of wider appeal. Among the 22 members of the
smiths' company in 1684 were Nicholas and Samuel
Paris. Samuel was regularly employed mending and
maintaining clocks at the castle between 1682 and
1715. (fn. 87) Nicholas, described as a gunsmith in 1694,
was also employed at the castle between 1677 and
1713, particularly in supplying metal fittings for the
castle fire engine and mill. (fn. 88) Elsewhere in the town
he maintained the clock at St. Nicholas's Church for
over 25 years, (fn. 89) and was responsible for regilding the
effigy of Richard Beauchamp in St. Mary's. (fn. 90) His
fame as an iron worker extended well beyond
Warwick, examples of his work having been identified in several parts of the county and as far afield as
Oxford, and Frome and Taunton in Somerset. (fn. 91) His
son, Thomas, continued his work until the middle
of the 18th century. (fn. 92) Thomas Swarbrick (d. 1751),
the Warwick organ-builder, was also well known in
the midlands. (fn. 93)
The effects of the fire which in September 1694
destroyed a large part of the centre of the town are
difficult accurately to determine. Nearly three
hundred people, of whom 156 were tradesmen,
applied for relief to the commissioners for the rebuilding. (fn. 94) Malting houses were particularly mentioned by the justices among the losses, together
with barns, stables, and outhouses. (fn. 95) Individual
losses ranged from the £2,500 worth of damage to
St. Mary's, and Alderman Heath's loss of £1,536,
to the 12s. claim of Mary Drury, servant of Thomas
Gibbes, and the 10s. of Thomas Briscoe, 'tewkerer'.
Total damage was estimated at about £120,000.
Nearly £9,000 was collected from individuals, cities
and boroughs, and the Treasury made a grant of
£400 a year and 1,000 tons of timber. (fn. 96) While a
heavy burden fell on the rebuilding commissioners
who sat for ten years examining claims and planning
a new town, the justices had to take emergency
measures for rehousing, providing immediate relief
and preventing extortion. (fn. 97) The disaster occurred at
a period of serious food shortage, thus increasing the
difficulties; the great recoinage two years later added
to the burden. For a short while Warwick was
considered a suitable place for the site of one of the
four country mints established to produce the new
milled coin. Instead, the town suffered, since much
of the coin contributed to the relief fund was clipped
and therefore devalued. (fn. 98) The justices also took
steps to prevent a repetition of the fire by demanding
the replacement of thatched roofs by tiles on some
200 barns, stables and hovels. (fn. 99)
The impetus given to rebuilding the town in
contemporary style brought to the fore a number of
individuals whose work as architect-builders earned
them a wide reputation in the midlands. Francis
Smith (1672-1738), surveyor at Warwick Castle
1720-35, was responsible for many buildings in the
town, (fn. 1) as well as for Stoneleigh Abbey and Umberslade Hall. William (d. 1776) and David Hiorn
succeeded to his business about 1747, and were
responsible for churches and country houses in the
midlands. William's son, Francis (1744-89), three
times mayor of Warwick and county bridgemaster,
also left his mark as an architect. (fn. 2) Job Collins,
employed as a mason at the castle from 1742 until
1785, Thomas Johnson (d. 1800) and Henry
Couchman (d. 1803) each helped to create in 18thcentury Warwick a town for the residence of gentry,
which the Act for Rebuilding had set out to encourage. (fn. 3) This social change is reflected in the
trading community by the appearance by the end of
the 18th century of hairdressers, stay makers,
mantua makers, pattern makers, and gardeners, a
perfumer, a coach painter, and a nursery and
seedsman. (fn. 4)
A more significant change in the economy of the
town came with the opening of the Warwick and
Birmingham Canal in 1793 and the Warwick and
Napton Canal in 1800. (fn. 5) By improving communications and lessening the price of coal, industry
was stimulated in the town, and during the last
decade of the 18th century and the first two decades
of the 19th century Warwick experienced a minor
'industrial revolution'. That this boom was closely
associated with wartime requirements is amply
demonstrated by the closure of most of the large
textile firms not long after peace had been signed.
Textile manufacture was not new to the town. The
petitioners for compensation in 1694 (fn. 6) had included
8 flaxdressers and a flax man, 4 weavers, 2 'tewkerers',
and a jersey comber, together with a number of other
traders and craftsmen in close association. Flaxdressers were again prominent in the return of
thatched dwellings made after the fire in 1696. (fn. 7) The
manufacture of worsted and woollen cloth on a
considerable scale as a cottage industry at the beginning of the 18th century was still remembered a
hundred years later, (fn. 8) but not until the last decade of
the century were factories established on a large
scale. The first was apparently that of Messrs. Smart,
whose cotton spinning factory opened at Emscote in
1792. (fn. 9) Woollen manufacture on a smaller scale began
in 1789: William Parkes, in partnership with his
brother, Joseph, a cotton factor, set up workshops
and warehouses in Barrack Street. In 1795 they went
into partnership with Joseph Brookhouse, cotton
spinner, and Samuel Crompton, and in the following
year built their factory in the Saltisford for worsted
spinning. (fn. 10) By 1815 it employed about 500 hands,
and the chief markets were Leicester, Hinckley, and
Nottingham for worsted and Kidderminster for
yarn. (fn. 11) In 1797 Messrs. Parker, cotton weavers,
opened a factory in Oil Mill Lane (now Priory
Road), employing 200 hands in 1815 and depending
for raw materials and sales entirely on Manchester. (fn. 12)
By 1815 Messrs. Lamb, hat manufacturers of
Market Place, Tomes and Handley's Navigation
Mill (1805), Nunn, Brown and Freeman's lace
factory (1810), and Thomas Roberts's iron foundry
(1810) were all in active production. (fn. 13) This boom
was short lived: Parkes, Brookhouse, and Crompton
failed in 1819, (fn. 14) and Smarts and Parkers seem to
have disappeared by 1822; (fn. 15) Lambs, the hatters,
who took over the Parkes factory in 1819, were not
included in Pigot's Commercial Directory for 1841.
Nunn, Brown and Freeman also ceased production
in the third decade of the century. (fn. 16)
To some extent these firms were replaced: John
Burton's worsted and hosiery manufactory was
established by 1822 and remained until the middle
of the century; other textile firms, less successful,
made only transitory appearances in the Commercial
Directories. Three silk mills appeared in the 1830s,
but hat manufacturing by Messrs. John Mollady
and Sons, established in 1838 or 1839, became the
principal trade. (fn. 17) Roberts's iron foundry, by 1822 in
the Coventry road, which 'deservedly obtained
considerable reputation for making all descriptions
of machinery', (fn. 18) remained for a further half century.
The firm of Richard Buckley, brazier, of Old Square,
established on a small scale in 1816 outlived the
century. (fn. 19) Perhaps the most unusual newcomer was
the business of George Nelson, Dale and Co., of
Emscote Mills, Wharf Street, established in 1837 as
timber merchants and gelatine manufacturers, and
still (1965) in existence. (fn. 20)
Apart from these manufactures the general trade
of Warwick expanded to meet the needs of its
rapidly increasing population (fn. 21) and the early demands on retail trade made by the rise of Leamington as a fashionable resort. The 'good trade in malt'
noted in the 1790s (fn. 22) continued predominant
throughout the 19th century, with cabinet-makers,
carpenters and joiners also prominent. (fn. 23) In about
1825 the market was said to have been for some time
increasing in trade and reputation', and the sale of
corn was considerable. (fn. 24) The supply of provisions,
with the exception of fish, was plentiful, and the
income from rents for market stalls more than
doubled between 1823 and 1829. The decrease by
1833 was explained by the fact that fewer people
came to the market rather than by less efficient
collection. (fn. 25) In 1830 the Market Place was said to be
'constantly improving with highly respectable
drapers' and other shops and inns of the first class. (fn. 26)
Seven years later the commissioners enquiring into
the proposed municipal boundary thought that the
town was thriving, with rapidly increasing trade,
'which may be accounted for in a great measure by
its proximity to and connexion with Leamington,
where most of the Warwick tradespeople have shops,
and where the chief speculators from this town
invest their capital'. (fn. 27) In connexion with investment
the two Warwick banks of Dawes, Tomes & Russell
(afterwards Tomes, Russell and Tomes), and of
Greenway, Whitehead & Weston were both founded
in the late 18th century. (fn. 28) A savings bank was
established in 1818, and two further banks were
opened in the 1830s, which had strong connexions
with Leamington. (fn. 29) The growth of Warwick's
neighbour henceforth was an increasingly important
factor in the development of the town.
POOR RELIEF
In 1571 John Fisher complained
that the number of poor was very great, and that
they 'were relieved only by the charitable devotion
of the inhabitants both with collections in the
church . . . and also with meat and drink according
to every man's ability'. (fn. 30) Already existing charities (fn. 31)
may have been adequate for a time, and the problem
does not seem to have been treated with any urgency.
Only one of the medieval hospitals, St. Michael's,
was still providing any kind of hospitality in 1545,
with a weekly distribution of 8d., and the provision
of four beds for poor men under the care of a poor
woman who received 8d. a week for attending them. (fn. 32)
The master of St. Michael's was said in 1586 to be
partly supporting one family. (fn. 33) In 1611-12 the
master of St. John's was said to take all the profit,
bestowing little on the poor, though Sir Thomas
Puckering, in possession of St. Michael's at the same
time, paid half the income to the poor. (fn. 34) In addition
there were Eyffler's almshouses, and others in
Gaolhall Lane and near St. Peter's Chapel. (fn. 35)
Following national legislation in 1576 appear the
first signs that the corporation was taking steps to
provide stocks of wool and other commodities 'to
keep the rogues to work'. (fn. 36) The alleged failure to set
the poor to work as provided under certain charities
was the excuse for a petition in 1580 as part of a
general attack on the corporation. The terms of the
petition must therefore be treated with reserve, but
it is clear that it was partly the result of a then
recent decision to prohibit almsgiving to the
impotent poor by ordering them to live on the
church rate only, which, it was claimed, was not
sufficient, and others, not on relief, were in an
equally poverty-stricken state. (fn. 37)
By 1582, however, concentrated action was being
taken for the support of the impotent poor by the
levy of a general rate in the two town parishes, and
assessments have survived for both that year (Table
2) and 1587. (fn. 38)
| TABLE 2 |
|
Weekly Poor Relief, 1582
|
|
Ward
|
Persons Assessed
|
Assessment
|
Persons Relieved
|
|
|
s.
|
d. |
|
|
St. Mary's parish:
|
| High Pavement |
24 |
6 |
1 |
1 |
| Castle Street |
12 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
| Jury Street |
11 |
1 |
7½ |
1 |
| Market Place |
36 |
7 |
7½ |
17 |
| West Street |
13 |
1 |
4 |
14 (fn. a)
|
| Saltisford |
3 |
|
2½ |
9 |
| TOTAL |
99 |
18 |
4½ |
43 |
|
St. Nicholas's parish:
|
26 |
4 |
3½ |
20 |
A further survey in St. Mary's parish in 1582 gave
the names of householders 'thought able to maintain
their households without help of others' relief but
upon their own labours' (Table 3, column a), of
which some were 'ready to decay' but not already
relieved (Table 3, column b).
| TABLE 3 (fn. a)
|
|
St. Mary's Parish, Household Survey, 1582
|
|
Ward
|
a
|
b
| |
| High Pavement |
14 |
- |
|
| Castle Street |
22 |
7 |
| Jury Street |
15 |
5 |
| Market Place |
66 |
22 |
| West Street |
48 |
8 |
| Longbridge |
3 |
- |
| Saltisford |
67 |
26 |
| TOTAL |
235 |
68 |
(31.6 per cent.) |
The surveys indicate clearly the poorest areas of the
town, and suggest that the corporation was attempting to tackle the problem seriously. A further survey,
made in 1586 on the insistence of the Puritan master
of Lord Leicester's Hospital, Thomas Cartwright,
'touching the disorder of beggars', (fn. 39) described 114
adults and 113 children in St. Mary's parish as poor,
of whom 50 adults and 60 children were beggars.
Seven adults and a child were declared to be able
bodied, and one adult was to be whipped and
ordered to find himself a master. Eight families,
including at least as many children, were to be sent
from the town to their places of origin, mostly in the
county but one as far as Wales.
As a result of this report a further assessment was
made for the parish. (fn. 40) The figures are incomplete,
but at least 63 adults and 82 children were to be
supported by the parish at a weekly cost of over 33s.
4d., which represents an increase of 50 per cent. in
the number of adults relieved since 1582 and of 80
per cent. in the size of the assessment. (fn. 41) A year later
the weekly cost had risen to 38s. 4d. borne by 114
people.
A visitation of plague in the winter of 1604-5 so
strained the resources of the overseers (fn. 42) that an
attempt was made to decrease the number of people
chargeable on the rate by removing inmates or
lodgers from the town. Under a corporation order
of 1605 36 inmates were required to leave the town,
their landlords often having to find security to
ensure their removal. (fn. 43) Subsequent presentments of
inmates by the court leet indicate that the problem
still remained. (fn. 44) By 1628 all inmates were required
to give pledges on entering the town lest they became
a burden on the rates. (fn. 45) Another way of dealing with
the problem was the appointment of an official in
1618 for 'avoiding of rogues and restraining of wood
stealers'. (fn. 46) He was succeeded in 1629 by an official
to be known as the 'marshal to keep out rogues and
sturdy beggars and wanderers', whose salary and
uniform were to be provided by levy from both
parishes. (fn. 47) This did not solve the problem, for
householders were still willing to give shelter to
outsiders. The corporation therefore ordered that no
inhabitant should let or sell any house room without
prior notice to the bailiff and burgesses, on pain of a
heavy fine. (fn. 48)
The corporation had an obligation to distribute at
least £16 each year to the poor and to raise £100 in
stock to put them to work as required in Lord
Ellesmere's Decree of 1618. (fn. 49) Its repetition by Lord
Keeper Coventry in 1638 (fn. 50) suggests that this had
been largely ignored, a state of affairs which continued until the Decree of 1739. (fn. 51) Subsequently,
about £50 each year was contributed towards poor
relief, together with extra payments as occasion
demanded. (fn. 52) In 1782-3 the corporation gave £77 6s.
to the overseers of both parishes to buy wheat, to
have it ground, baked, and sold cheaply to the poor. (fn. 53)
Two years later over £32 was given for the same
purpose and over £6 to provide cheap coal. (fn. 54)
Between 1795 and 1820 at least a further £230 was
given, to provide a soup kitchen in 1799-1800, to the
mayor for his special fund in 1816, and to the committeee for poor relief in 1819-20. (fn. 55) The years 1795
and 1800 in particular seem to have been years of
crisis: in the former a 'Fund for the Relief of the
Industrious Poor and Distressed Inhabitants' raised
and spent over £250 in eight months, to be succeeded
by a sinking fund under the 'Committee of the
Borough of Warwick'. (fn. 56) In 1800 Lord Warwick
proposed to create a trust of £1,000, the sum
owed to him by the corporation as a contribution for
the building of the new bridge, in order to
purchase corn for sale at 5 per cent. profit, the £50
thus obtained to be used for corn or whatever was
needed 'by the exigencies of the times'. (fn. 57) Lord
Warwick also paid a subscription to the soup
kitchen in the names of the two members of Parliament who sat in his interest, and also for plumbing
and glazing 'at the soup house'. (fn. 58) In the winter of
1816-17, 4,000 people were said to have been
served with soup and beef twice a week, and the
inhabitants were asked to eat less bread and flour and
no pastry while the price of wheat remained high. (fn. 59)
Private benefactions administered by churchwardens and overseers provided relief of a limited
kind, (fn. 60) but reliance on a regular poor rate becomes
evident in St. Mary's parish by 1694. (fn. 61) In the
following year this amounted to £168 8s. 7d., as
recorded in a return for the Commissioners for
Trade. (fn. 62) No return was made for St. Nicholas's
parish. At least until the middle of the 18th century (fn. 63)
the rate for St. Mary's was calculated on a monthly
basis; each collection amounting, according to need,
to one or more month's rate. Thus for the period
June 1746 to May 1747, twelve collections produced
22 'monthly' rates. (fn. 64) The four overseers divided the
parish into two areas for collection: part of Market
Place, High Street, Castle Street, Jury Street, West
Street, Longbridge, Barford, and Wellesbourne
formed the High Street division, the other division
embracing part of the Market Place, Joyce Pool,
Saltisford, and 'outliers'. The expansion of the town
and the creation of new streets entailed a certain
amount of reorganization of this scheme, the two
areas in 1811 being called, respectively, High Street
and Market Place divisions. (fn. 65) St. Nicholas's parish,
smaller in area and population, remained one unit
but in other respects followed St. Mary's. A regular
monthly rate had been established there by 1718. (fn. 66)
Relief, either in the form of regular monthly
payments or of extraordinary payments, disposed of
most of the income thus acquired. (fn. 67) Workhouses,
however, were established in both parishes during
the 18th century to provide accommodation and
work for those most distressed. A parish meeting of
St. Mary's in 1717 requested the mayor, justices,
and other individuals to provide a house or houses
for the parish, and authorized the churchwardens to
spend money on utensils for the houses and on
materials to provide work. (fn. 68) The house was controlled by the vestry, which in 1728 declared that no
inmate should leave the house without permission,
save children who were going to school. (fn. 69) In 1758
Lord Brooke sold a house for the use of the poor of
St. Mary's and gave £30 to the overseers to equip
it. (fn. 70) By 1815 only one house, in the Saltisford, was
used for this purpose. Described as 'unassuming in
its external appearance', it was, nevertheless,
'humanely and judiciously regulated within'. (fn. 71) The
ground floor provided apartments for the master and
mistress, a large common room, and a good schoolroom. The upper floor was divided into lodging
rooms, a piece of ground attached provided space
for drying linen, and there were two workshops for
carding, spinning and weaving. There were seldom
over 60 people in the house, and not often under
30. (fn. 72) The Poor Law commissioner criticized the
financial administration of the house, but found that
the governor 'being an honest man, had not abused
his power'. (fn. 73) The Warwick Union was formed in
1836 (fn. 74) but St. Mary's Workhouse continued in use
until the Union workhouse at the Packmores was
opened in 1838. A majority at a vestry meeting
wished to convert the old workhouse into almshouses,
but the Poor Law commissioners would not permit
the scheme. (fn. 75) The building was therefore sold in
1840. (fn. 76)
The workhouse in St. Nicholas's parish is less easy
to trace. From 1734 the overseers rented 'Frees
House' in St. Nicholas Church Street, (fn. 77) and from
1767 Thomas Bintt's house in Smith Street, (fn. 78)
though for what purposes is not known. From 1783
a house and garden formerly belonging to Francis
Williams, in Coten End, was acquired with the
income of Catherine Burton's Charity, and was
certainly used as part of the workhouse by the end
of the century and probably before. (fn. 79) In 1815 there
were twenty or thirty inmates, principally women
and children, chiefly occupied in spinning. Good
provisions were given, and clothing was issued when
necessary. (fn. 80) In 1823 part of the workhouse was
leased to a private individual, and after 1837 the
overseers retained only the two houses in St.
Nicholas Church Street. These were not charged to
them after 1839. (fn. 81)
SOCIAL LIFE
The most significant factor in the
social life of Warwick was the position of the town
as the centre of county administration. The assizes
and quarter sessions and the presence of the county
militia brought prestige to the town, a fact which the
corporation fully understood. Sessions dinners and
presents to the justices were the outward recognition
of the value placed on the attendance of numbers of
gentry, lawyers, and officials at these times. (fn. 82) The
influx was at first limited to the duration of court
days, and could be catered for by inns such as the
'Swan' in High Street, kept by Amilion Holbeche
(d. 1597). This was a large house, containing two
halls, six parlours, and twenty chambers. Several of
these rooms were set aside for local gentry and their
households: Sir Fulke Greville, Mr. Verney, Lady
Digby, Mr. Dabridgcourt and the sheriff had
accommodation there, and John Fisher had a chamber
for himself and one for his men. (fn. 83) The 'Swan'
continued to be used by public officials and local
gentry in the next century. Known variously as the
'Great Swan' and the 'Black Swan', and kept by
Moses Holloway, it was the meeting place of the
royal commissioners who received the Oath and
Declaration under the Corporation Act in 1662, (fn. 84)
and frequently housed justices of the peace. (fn. 85) It was
returned with eighteen hearths in 1663 (fn. 86) and
Dugdale recommended it rather than the 'Bell' for
the heralds' visitation in 1682. (fn. 87) The 'Bell' with
fifteen hearths, kept by Thomas Stratford, like
Holloway an alderman of the town, and the 'King's
Head' in Castle Street with ten hearths, kept by John
Kerby, must have been two of the other 'capacious
inns' which provided 'good entertainment as to wine
and other necessaries for man's delight'. (fn. 88)
Not until the 18th century did the gentry come to
reside in Warwick in any numbers. The Grevilles at
the castle, the Puckerings at the Priory, and the
Stoughtons at St. John's were families with their
principal seats within the borough boundary; only
the Archers of Umberslade and the Wagstaffes of
Tachbrook of the important local families had town
houses by the middle of the 17th century, but
Thomas Ward, probably one of the Wards of
Barford, was also living there. (fn. 89) A traveller in 1662
observed that Warwick 'for a seat is now affected by
the gentry'. (fn. 90) Those men described as gentlemen in
the return for the 'Free and Voluntary Gift' of 1661
formed the urban upper class divided between
professional and mercantile men. These are found to
rank in wealth rather below the substantial farmers
and lesser gentry of the surrounding area, but far
above yeomen and husbandmen. (fn. 91) The comparatively high Hearth Tax assessments reflect the
luxury of upstairs fireplaces which were still novel
in the country districts.
Increasingly professional classes made their mark
in the town, as a result of Warwick's position as the
administrative centre of the shire. At least a quarter
of the counsel and attorneys active in the quarter
sessions between 1625 and 1682 were resident in the
town. (fn. 92) Thomas Ward (1612-86), James Prescott the
elder (d. c. 1663), James Prescott the younger,
Edward Rainsford (1579-1653), and Matthew
Holbeche (d. 1663) were among the prominent
lawyers living there, who were related to local
families by marriage. The last three were town
clerks. The medical profession was also well
represented in the town, the most notable in the 17th
century being James Cooke (d. 1693-4) of Jury Street,
surgeon to the Archers and the Brookes, (fn. 93) and William
Johnston (c. 1643-1725), who came to Warwick in
1675. (fn. 94) A man of some means, he had a house (now
Landor House), built by Roger Hurlbut in 1692-3,
which was occupied by Dr. Walter Landor at the
end of the next century.
One of the aims of the Act for rebuilding the town
after the fire of 1694 was to encourage the settlement
of gentry and professional men in Warwick. (fn. 95) The
'regular and fine buildings' certainly impressed
Celia Fiennes, (fn. 96) and Defoe was of the opinion that
although Warwick 'was ever esteemed a handsome,
well-built town' it had subsequently been 'rebuilt in
so noble and so beautiful a manner that few towns in
England make so fine an appearance'. (fn. 97) The influx
of gentry continued throughout the 18th century
and is reflected in the development of a 'Gentlemen's
Party' in the 1760s, (fn. 98) an important factor in town
politics until the turn of the century. (fn. 99)
The new social order required fashionable
entertainments, prominent among which were the
horse races on St. Mary's Common. (fn. 1) In 1707 Lord
Brooke gave £15 to the chamberlains 'towards
making a horse race', and by 1711 regular racing had
probably been established, for Lord Brooke gave
£2 3s. as his subscription for the year. (fn. 2) In 1726-7 a
large room above the Market House was hired
during a race meeting. (fn. 3) By 1775 the races, then held
in September, provided entertainment on two days.
On each evening balls were held in the Shire Hall,
and public breakfasts were staged at the Court
House. (fn. 4) Racing increased in popularity, and a race
stand was erected in 1809. (fn. 5) By 1815 races were being
held in September and November. (fn. 6) Hunting began
in the area in 1791. (fn. 7)
Theatrical entertainments were provided in the
town during race meetings, and occasionally at other
times. (fn. 8) Strolling players, such as the Duke of
Northumberland's troupe, had visited the town in
the 16th century. (fn. 9) During the 17th century the
Market House was rented to groups such as 'the
actors of the plays', and the 'actors of Whittington'. (fn. 10)
A theatre had certainly been built by Easter 1792,
when Thomas Couchman, architect, was presented
at the quarter sessions for laying stone against it. (fn. 11)
In 1801 John Boles Watson of the Theatre Royal,
Cheltenham, planned to erect a new theatre in the
Market Place. It was to be of brick, with a portico for
use as a market. He proposed to open it for 'dramas'
on race and other public days, and to pay 3s. 6d. to
the mayor for each performance. The inhabitants of
Market Place seem to have objected to the plan, and
Watson was forced to return to his 'old shop', the
theatre in Cocksparrow Hall. (fn. 12) The external appearance of this theatre was said to promise nothing, but
'the interior affords ample space, and convenient
accommodation, for all who usually resort to
theatrical amusements'. (fn. 13) The theatre continued
under a succession of owners until the middle of the
19th century, Kemble, Macready, and Kean
appearing on its stage. (fn. 14) Race balls, hunt balls,
concerts, winter assemblies, and card parties,
usually at the Court House, completed the social
round not only for townsmen but for those who came
to the area drawn by the fame of the castle, and later
by the medicinal springs at Leamington. (fn. 15)
Less refined tastes were catered for by entertainments like the waxworks and a tiger exhibited in the
Market Hall in 1694-5, or the lion, leopard, and
puppet shows of 1726-7. (fn. 16) Cock-fighting and cockthrowing were evidently popular. (fn. 17) In the early
years of the 19th century a cherry wake was held in
Coten End, its memory perpetuated in Cherry
Street, and in 1825 two fights were staged between
bulldogs and lions. 'Wallace', one of the lions, is
remembered in the name of one of the streets in the
area. (fn. 18) Less formal amusements were provided by
gaming and the alehouse. Accusations of unlawful
gaming were frequently made by the court leet jury
in the 17th century. (fn. 19) Two bowling alleys were
presented at the quarter sessions in 1795 (fn. 20) and
gambling tables in private houses were complained
of in 1801. (fn. 21) The importance of malting in the town
implies a large number of alehouses. The reformation of alehouse keepers was one of the first
actions of Humphrey Crane on his appointment as
bailiff in 1573, (fn. 22) and 26 men were fined during his
year of office for not securing a selling licence. (fn. 23) In
1627 the constables were ordered to report whether
any suppressed alehouses were still in business; they
and the churchwardens were to see that no innkeeper or alehouse keeper allowed strangers to drink
or tipple, that none sold under measure or failed to
provide both full and small ale. All drunkards were
likewise to be reported. (fn. 24) Lord Brooke's expenses
for the 1734 election (fn. 25) included an item of £284, £4
having been paid to each of 71 publicans in the town
who had dispensed hospitality on behalf of the Tory
candidates. (fn. 26) Presentments of several inns selling ale
on Sundays were frequent in the early years of the
19th century, (fn. 27) and 26 alehouses were named during
the 1833 election enquiry as having been implicated
in the Greville interest. (fn. 28)
Orders in the sphere of rudimentary public health
and administration made in the court leet or at
quarter sessions were concerned mainly with streets
and ditches obstructed by refuse or vehicles. (fn. 29) As a
precaution against disease an order of 1648 required
carrion to be buried outside the town. (fn. 30) A scavenger
was appointed in the same year to clean the four
main streets and the Market Place. (fn. 31) Both before and
after 1694 precautions against fire were taken.
Thomas Oken had provided twelve leather fire
buckets to be 'in some place always in readiness'. (fn. 32)
In a town of timbered and thatched houses, however,
the risk of fire was high; parts of the town were burnt
in 1671 (fn. 33) and in 1692, when 34 men were paid for
beating down a fire in Back Lane and then watching
for two nights lest it should break out again. (fn. 34) The
removal of thatched dwellings and the provision of
fire buckets and lights in sconces was frequently
ordered by both court leet and grand jury. (fn. 35) The
court leet in 1648 ordered the removal of furze,
broom, and other combustible material from houses
and backsides (fn. 36) and in 1703 proscribed the use of
gigs for drying flax 'it being very dangerous to the
whole neighbourhood'. (fn. 37) A fire engine was provided
by the end of the 17th century. (fn. 38)
The library of St. Mary's Church, formed in the
15th century by John Rous and largely destroyed in
1694, was re-established in 1701. Interest declined,
however, and was not revived until the 19th century. (fn. 39) A number of booksellers, however, traded in
the town during this period. John Rider was licensed
to set up business there in 1669, (fn. 40) and George Tonge,
or Teonge, was active by 1682 until the end of the
century. (fn. 41) By 1733 a Mr. Hopkins was acting in the
town as agent for the London Daily Register
(fn. 42) and
between 1735 and 1743 J. Hopkinson (possibly the
same man) was in business there, in the former year
advertising Spenser's Law and Customs of the Lead
Mines. (fn. 43) John Sharpe carried on trade between 1769
and 1791, and included among his list J. Jones's
Remarks on the English Language. (fn. 44) A public subscription library was opened in Old Square in 1792
which in 1815 had over 100 members. (fn. 45) In 1806 a
newspaper with Whig-Independent sympathies, the
Warwick Advertiser, was founded by Henry Sharpe. (fn. 46)
About 1825 J. Merridew, printer of the Warwick
Guide, opened a library in the town. (fn. 47) Among
individuals of some intellectual standing were the
Revd. William Field, historian of the town, and
minister of the Unitarian chapel in High Street from
1789 to 1843. He was an able preacher and writer,
and leader of a congregation which included some of
the town's largest manufacturers. (fn. 48) Joseph Parkes
(1796-1865) the radical secretary of the Royal
Commission on Municipal Charities, and author of
The Governing Charter of the Borough of Warwick,
and his brother Josiah (1793-1871), the inventor of
the deep drainage system, were natives of Warwick,
the sons of Joseph Parkes, manufacturer. Another
native was Walter Savage Landor (1775-1864),
author of Imaginary Conversations, the son of Dr.
Walter Landor, a prominent figure in Warwick's
political circles.
Despite these examples of social and intellectual
activity, the general impression of the town at the
end of the 18th century, as much for political as for
social reasons, was characterised by an 'uncommon
dullness . . .' and 'an air of melancholy'. (fn. 49) It was
said to be 'a place remarkable for dull inactivity, and
for the careless inattention of the inhabitants to all
that might obviously contribute to its improvement
and its embellishment'. (fn. 50) The quickening of
economic activity in the town and the beginnings of
corporation interest in matters of public welfare had
brought improvements by 1815. The main streets
were culverted, flagged, paved, and lighted (fn. 51) at the
cost of the corporation. Water supply for parts of the
town had already been improved. (fn. 52) Shops were
'newly fronted and tastefully fitted up' so that the
town could 'fairly claim to be described not only as a
neat, airy and cleanly; but also to a certain extent, as
a spacious, regular, handsome and flourishing
town'. (fn. 53) Communications by coach were established
regularly with Birmingham, Coventry, Leicester,
Gloucester, Bristol, and London. (fn. 54) By 1830 there
were fourteen coach routes through Warwick, nine
of them daily, connecting with London, Liverpool,
Wolverhampton, Oxford, and Cheltenham, as well
as with local towns. (fn. 55)
The rapid increase in population in the first three
decades of the 19th century, (fn. 56) particularly among the
labouring and artisan classes, had a considerable
effect in the social, as well as in the political sphere.
The influx of Irish labourers whose votes were so
eagerly canvassed in the alehouses, and the small
shopkeepers who appeared in the town in increasing
numbers created new problems of public administration. These were at first tackled on a voluntary
basis, for example by the establishment of a watch
committee in 1819 'for preventing a continuance of
nightly depredations on their property' (fn. 57) or, in
another sphere, in the Provident Dispensary set up
in Castle Street in 1826. (fn. 58) The problems arising in
this situation were varied; the complaints raised by
the court leet jury in 1827 may be taken as characteristic. (fn. 59) The corporation was urged to enact byelaws to regulate the emptying of privies and to
prevent such nuisances as wheeling barrows and
rolling lead on the flagging, setting up stalls at street
corners, leaving tubs of sugar on the pavements; and
to discourage loiterers and idlers on street corners at
night 'to the annoyance and frequent insult of
females'. The jury drew attention to the need for
paved crossings at various places in the town, and
suggested that the poor from the workhouses could
be employed scraping the roads and sweeping the
crossings in winter. They pleaded for a more
efficient fire service, for the erection of public
conveniences, for the removal of fairs from the
centre of the town, and for the prohibition of
Sunday-morning trading after nine o'clock. The
'professional men and higher orders of tradesmen'
who were members of the leet jury (fn. 60) thus demonstrated an awareness of the needs of a rapidly expanding town. But these were only recommendations to a
corporation ill-equipped to cope with new economic
and social problems.