|
IN a previous chapter some
account was given of the early differences among the craftsmen. For a
time these differences were lost sight of on account of the disturbing
effect of the wars with England. About 1430, Scotland became so much
depopulated by the wars with England, that it was found necessary to
import craftsmen from France and Flanders. In 1431, King James, "to
augment the common well, and to cause his lieges increase in mair
virteus, brocht mony nobill craftsmen out of France and Flanders, and
other partes—for the Scottis were exercit in continuell wars frae the
time of King Alexander the Third to thay days. Thus were all craftsmen
slave be the wars." James V. had also to plenish the country with
craftsmen from France, Spain, Holland, and England. Pitscottie tells us
that "some of these were gunners, wrights, carvers, painters, masons,
smiths, harness-makers, tapesters, broudsters, taylors, cunning
chirurgeons, apothecaries, with all other kinds of craftsmen that might
bring his realm in policy, and his craftsmen apparel his palaces in all
manner of operation, and necessaries, according to their order, and gave
them large wages and pensions yearly." The depopulation of the country
by the wars with England also told severely on the common good of the
burghs. In 1491 the third Parliament of King James, "holden at Perth,
18th March," passed the following Act, in which the deacons are asked to
furnish a statement to the Chamberlain of Scotland of all monies
received from craft burgesses in payment of their freedom :-
lit is statute and
ordainit anent the Common Good of all our Sovereign Lord's Burrows
within the Realme that the said Common Good be observed and kept to the
common profit of the town, and to be suspended (expended) in common and
necessary things of the burgh with the advice and councill of the town
for the tyme: and Deacons of crafts where they are, an inquisition
yearlie to be taken by the Chamberlain of expenses and disposition of
the samen.
When the country became
more peaceful the burgesses again began to differ among themselves as to
their relative rights and privileges. We have already seen that in the
earliest trading charters granted to Aberdeen the weavers and fullers
were excluded from the Merchant Guild, and in the reign of James III. a
general statute was passed enacting that every craftsman "aither
forbeare his merchandise or els renounce his craft" without any colour
or dissimulation, under the pain of escheat of his merchandise; and
again, in the reign of James IV., the Convention of Royal Burghs enacted
that " na craftesman sail vse ony maner of merchandise within the burgh,
but occupy his awin craft under the pains contenit in the Actis of
Parliament." But, notwithstanding these statutes, there were always
differences of opinion as to what was meant by the "use of his awin
craft." The wrights, for instance, claimed the right to import timber,
the shoemakers to deal in leather, the skinners and glovers to deal in
hides and skins, and so forth ; and in these disputes the Town Councils,
being dominated by the merchant influence, showed little favour for the
craftsmen. In this respect Aberdeen was a notable example. The Dean of
Guild was a member of the Town Council ex-ojicio ; he collected all the
burgess dues not only from merchant burgesses, but from trade burgesses,
and handed them over to the Common Good; and this coalition with the
alderman and baillies naturally aroused the jealousy of the more plebein
but more numerous craftsmen. The craftsmen, at certain periods of the
town's history, contributed as liberally as the merchants to the Common
Good, and naturally they held they were entitled to a proportionate
representation in the Town Council. Frequent disturbances were the
result—disturbances that were -at this time common in most of the burghs
in Scotland. A specially severe encounter between the merchants and
craftsmen of Edinburgh led to the passing of an Act in the reign of
Queen Mary (1555) which again abolished the office of deacon. Shortly
before the passing of this Act the Edinburgh magistrates had passed a
law encroaching on the craftsmen's special rights and privileges, and
this new infringement, says Campbell in his "Cordiners of Glasgow,"
roused the resentment of the deacons of the Trades to such an extent
"that they at once resolved to let it be clearly understood that they
were in no mood to submit, but were determined to obtain redress, and
that speedily." They accordingly proceeded to the Town-House, where,
apparently with the intention of overawing the magistrates, they drew
their swords. In this object they were disappointed and were themselves
seized and overpowered by an armed force, and thereafter imprisoned. The
craftsmen then assembled to rescue their deacons; but, on the matter
beginning to assume a serious aspect, it was put an end to by the
interposition of the Regent Arran.
In few burghs in Scotland
was the war between the two classes of burgesses waged with such
bitterness as in Aberdeen. The Act of 1555, giving the Magistrates the
power of appointing deacons of the crafts, gave great dissatisfaction,
and in the following year a "special gift" was obtained from Queen Mary
restoring to the craftsmen the power to elect their own deacons, and
bestowing other privileges, with the object of removing "the
dissensions, public and private hatred and contention of our merchants
and craftsmen dwelling within our burghs." (See Appendix).
But while this charter
strengthened the position of the craftsmen in Aberdeen, it did not, as
might be supposed, tend to lessen the friction between them and the
merchant burgesses or Guildry. On the contrary, disagreements became
more frequent and more bitter. The composition paid to the Common Good,
the relative rights and privileges of the two classes of burgesses, and
their representation at the Town Council, all in turn formed matters of
dispute and controversy. In reference to the question of representation
it may be here explained that at the end of the fourteenth century the
management of the public affairs of the burgh was vested in the hands of
an Alderman and four baillies who were chosen " with the consent and
assent of the whole community of the burgh; "but this, apparently
popular, mode of election existed in name only and not in practice. The
Magistrates were for a long period practically self-elected, and the
management of the public affairs of the town fell into the hands of a
few leading families, who took care to exclude all who did not meet with
their approval. Meanwhile the craftsmen had increased in number, and
through their associations they began to act more vigorously. By an Act
of Parliament passed in 1460 craftsmen had a right to take part in the
elections, it having been then enacted that "Ilk craft shall choose a
person of the same craft that shall have voice in the said election of
officebearers for that time," and this right they determined should be
fully recognised. They were just beginning to feel their strength, and
to realise the usefulness of their associations, each with its duly
appointed deacon and set of officebearers. They had to bear "Scot and
lot, watch and ward "the town, and they claimed to have a voice in the
election of the governing body. And to enable them to carry on their
agitation for more control in the management of the town's affairs, they
incorporated their associations under a Deacon-Convener and Convener
Court. The Town Council evidently did not like the new office-bearer,
and in 1591 declared the office illegal and the election
unconstitutional. The jealousy of the Council with regard to the
Convener can easily be understood. The craftsmen had become more
numerous than the merchants; they had obtained privileges independent of
the Town Council; and the Deacon-Convener must have occupied a position
of no small influence in the community. The whole population at this
period, it may be observed, was about four thousand, and as the members
of the free craftsmen numbered several hundreds, they, with their
journeymen, servants, apprentices, and families must have represented a
large proportion of the total population.
Not the least serious
element of dispute was the composition or dues charged for making
freemen. When trading privileges were first granted, no special
arrangement existed with regard to the sums paid for burgess-ship. A
freeman was simply bound to pay " Scot and lot, to watch and ward the
town ; " and, as will be seen by the Acts of Parliament already quoted,
the sums collected were to be spent upon the "common warkis of the toune."
These dues formed one of the chief sources of the town's revenue, and,
along with the grants of lands and fishings made by the Crown,
constituted what, to this day, is known as the Common Good.
The disputes about the
composition arose when the Crafts began to exact entrant dues to their
own associations. The Council held that these entrant dues interfered
with the dues exacted for the freedom; while the Crafts maintained that
the entrant dues to their own associations were used for eleemosynary
purposes, and for protecting the craftsmen in the exercise of their
special trading privileges. The craftsmen had no objection to undergo "scot
and lot" for the maintenance of the "Common Warkis," but they also
claimed the right to institute funds of their own, to provide for their
own poor, and to combine for the protection of their own special rights
and privileges. It was, in short, the old familiar warfare of the more
plebeian crafts fighting for political power and the maintenance of
their rights against their richer and more powerful brethren. And this
warfare continued, to a greater or less extent, from the end of the
fifteenth century down to the passing of the Burgh Reform Acts.
In 1579 the dispute about
the composition, and the admission of members to the Crafts who had not
duly passed the Council, reached an acute stage. A number of craftsmen
were arrested and fined for "breaking the Acts and ordinances of the
town," in sums ranging from 40 shillings to ten pounds Scots; and "the
counsal being convenit for the maist pairt within the counsal-hous,
reasoning upone the exorbitant and glyt compositions Lakin be the
deconis of the craftes of this burght fra craftesmen and breder of the
craft in admytting thame fre of their craft aganis thair prevelegeis,
statut, devysit, and ordanit, that in all tyme cuming the detain of
everie craft sail present the person of craft creven to be admittit free
of the said craft to the deines of gill of this burght as ane worthy and
qualificit craftismen to be admittit be the toune free of his craft
efter diligent tryell and examination of thair habilitie be the said
craft; and that the decanis of thair craft sal nawayis compone witht
thame quhill the person creven to be admittit free of the craft first
compone with the said deines of gill, and to be admittit free be the
toune, the maisterstick of the persone to be admittit being exhibit and
producit in judgement; and gill ony detain heireftir contraveinis this
present ordinance, and acceptis the contrair of the premises the
contravener to pay als mekil to the deniss of gill of this burght of his
awn purss as he happenit to tak for the composition of the
craft."—Council Register, vol. xxix., p. 879.
Two years after the
passing of this statute something very much resembling modern
"boycotting" was resorted to in the case of a number of leading
craftsmen who were disturbing "the bowels of the burgh." Johne Duncan,
Ion Roray, talyeouris; James Bannerman, baxster; and Patrick Leithe,
armourar, were charged with having purchased law burrows against the
Provost, Baillies, and Council, "intending thairby to leive within this
burght without any correctioun or ordour" Leithe promised to become
obedient, but with regard to the others, "the counsell, seeing the
forenamed three persons within this burght and bowills thairof,
continuallie refusing all dutiful obediens of their superiouris and
magistrates under the Kingis Majestie to the evill of the guid burght,
gif remeid were nocht provydid for correcting of the saidis licentious
persones, and to avoid the evill example and company of the saidis three
persones, it was ordanit, consentit, and grantit to, that na burgess of
gild suld set ony dwelling-houss or butht to ony of thame, nor keep
secretis witht thame, or gif thame ony labour or manual execrations of
thair craft in tyme cuming, in respect thai are discharget of thair
fredome and fundin be the decretis producit unprofitabill neeboris of
the Commoun Weltht of this bught, resors of upror, sesime, and
clivisioun withtin the bowallis thairof unto the tyme they come to
obedience of our Soueran Lordis lawis and lauchfull statutes of this
brught, and be receavit be the magistrates thairof quharinto the hail
bredrene of gild consentit bot [with out] ony contradictioun."—Council
Register, vol. xxx., p. 612.
Meanwhile the craftsmen
were diligently collecting funds to "prosecute their causs" against the
Guildry, and the Council deemed it necessary to "mak ane oulklie
(weekly) stent and contribution to be uptaken of everi burgess of gild
sua that the samen exceed nocht twa shillings of ilk persone at the
maist," this collection to be used in defending themselves against what
were regarded as encroachments by the craftsmen.
In 1581 the Aberdeen
craftsmen took a bold step. Immediately after James VI. came to the
throne they joined with the craftsmen of Edinburgh, Dundee, and Perth in
applying for a new charter of privileges, and succeeded in obtaining an
important confirmation of previous rights and liberties, along with an
extension of their right of dealing in merchandise. The Act of 1555,
which deprived the Crafts of the power to elect their Deacons and
conferred it on the Town Councils, was specifically repealed. With the
object of "removing all public and private dissensions, hatreds, and
contentions between merchants and craftsmen, and for certain other
reasonable causes," the charter declares:—"We repone them to use and
have Deacons of Crafts who shall have vote in choiceing of officers of
Burrows and shall elect and admitt all kinds of Craftsmen within Burgh
to use and exerce their craft if they be fund able therefor. And they
shall Siclyke hear the compts of the common good and be parts of the
Auditors thereof ; and they shall conveen and make priviledges statutes
and ordinances above the said Craftsmen for keeping of good order
amongst them, and sustentation and Intertainment of Gods service, and
said use and exerce all maner of merchandize within our said Realme, and
outwith the same as they shall think most expedient to their greatest
commoditie, with all and sundrie priviledges and liberties and faculties
granted to them by our most noble progenitors, or whereof they have been
in possession in times bypast, notwithstanding the said Act of Parlt, or
whatsoever pains contained therein, anent the whilks we be thir present
dispenses. Attour we be thir present ratifys and approves all
priviledges, liberties, and faculties, given and granted by our most
noble progenitors to the saids Craftsmen in all times bypast, to be used
and exerced by them in the same form, force, and effect, in all times
coming as they possest the same off before, &c."
The Aberdeen Magistrates
were very much displeased with the craftsmen for joining with their
brethren in Edinburgh, Perth, and Dundee in applying for this gift, and
immediately took steps to punish the ringleaders among the craftsmen. A
number of them were summoned to appear before the Magistrates and
Council, when they admitted that they had rashly and unadvisedly
approved of the purchasing of the new "pretendit" privileges, expressed
their contrition for engendering uproar, schism, tumult, and sedition
betwixt them and their superiors, the Provost, Baillies, Council, and
Free Burgesses of Guild, and consented, as the following minute bears,
to pass therefrom.
25th August, 1581.—The
said day thir craftismen vnderwretin that is to say Mathow Guild,
armorar, Lowrens Marsar, George Elphinstoun Arthour Hill, Hew Johnnstoun,
sadlaris ; Patrik Hay, Goldsmyth, George Nesmyth, Patre Leithe, Androw
Meille, smythtis; Patre Wilsoune, Lourens Bell, Pewteraris ; Richart
Williamsoune, Williame Allane, Culteltaris; Gilbert Blak, Robert
Sanders, cowparis; Johnne bra, Thomas Spensar, Alexr. Patersone, David
Henrie, George Keir, Johnne Barnis, Johnne Knycht, Talzeouris; and
Patrik Straquhyn, Baxter; comperit all personallie in Jugement and being
aduysit with yame selffis efter retfull deliberatioun and consultatioun
and grantit and confessit yat yai had raschly and onaduysatly apprevit
in jugement the purchasing of ye new pretendit preuilege obtenit of ye
kyngis maiestie and lordis of secreit counsale agains ye freedom,
libertie, and common weill of ye frie burgessis and Brethren of gild of
yis burt, quhilk yai understand now tendis to engener vproar, schism,
tumult, and seditioun, betuixt yame and yare superiouris and magistrates
the prouest, Ballies, Consale, and frie burgessis of gild of yis burt,
and yairfor war content to leave ye samen and pas yairfra, and to leif
upon yair awin Craftis and vocatioun only, according and conforme in all
poyntis to ye approbatioun, consessioun, act, and ordinance maid be ye
remanent craftismen of yis burt, upon ye fourtene day of August instant
and ratefeit and apprevit ye samen in all poyntis and obleist
yameselflis and war sworne neuir to cum in ye contrair yairof and put
yame in will fur the said assisting and adhering to ye said new
preuilege, craving pardoun and forgifnes yairof, and obleist yameselves
neuir to do ye lyk in tym cuming bot to be subjectit to all obedience of
ye said prouest ballies and consale and to leif at quyatues upon yeir
Craftis and vocationis alanerlie in all tyme cumiug. And renuncit ye
said preuilege and all uyir preuilege and letters purchest or to be
purchest be yame perpetually in all tym cuming.—Council Register, vol.
xxx., p. 494.
The Council, however,
could not undo the King's Charter, and the promises they exacted from
the craftsmen that it would not be acted upon, do not appear to have
restored anything approaching an amicable understanding. In 1582 the
representatives appointed by the craftsmen to vote at the annual
election of magistrates, declined to take any part in the proceedings, a
step that brought matters to a crisis, and forced the Council and
Guildry to the conclusion that some definite mutual agreement must be
arrived at without further delay. The following is the entry in the
Council Register bearing on the refusal of the craftsmen to take part in
the election, a refusal which in a measure led to the important
negotiations narrated in the next chapter :—
1st October, 1582.—The
saide day the craftismen eftir following, that is to say Andrew Will,
George Elphinstoun, Patrik Hay, Mathew guild, Alexr. Patersone, David
Watsoun, Johne Sanders, Cordinar; Thomas Cuik, Cordeuar; Arther Hill,
Alexr. Donaldsone, Alexr. Stevin, James Wysman, Johne Wricht, being
oppinlie inquirit be calling of ye suit roll be yair names in speciall
to gif thair wote in chesing and electing of ye provest, bailies and
officiaris of yis burt. according to the comoun order and consuetude of
yis burt. obseruit in tymes by past, whilkis anserit everie ane
particularlie be yame selffis personalie present yat yai Wald gif na
vote nor electioun of ye saidis juges and officiaris quhill yai be
restorit to yair libertie and adjoint to ye Societie of uyiris fremen of
this burt, and ye actis gif ony be maid yair anent annullit andyair foir
refusit to nominat ony persone to exerce ye said office and tuik act and
instrument yairupon ; and siclyk Robert Mengzes, baillie, in name of ye
toun tuik act and instrument yairupon and protestit yat yai be not hard
to haif vote in tyme coming becaus efter yair present refuse without
just occasioun.Council Register, vol. xxx., p. 722. |
