|
By what may be termed a
natural process of selection, the craftsmen in Aberdeen came to be
divided into seven separate guilds, Hammermen, Bakers, `'rights and
Coopers, Tailors, Shoemakers, Weavers, and Fleshers, each with its own
deacon and office-bearers, and having at their head a deacon-convener
and head court, consisting of the office-bearers of the individual
Trades. These seven societies, however, embraced a number of separate
and, to some extent, distinctive handicrafts. The Hammermen, for
instance, have at one time or other included cutlers, pewterers,
glovers, goldsmiths, blacksmiths, gunsmiths, saddlers, armourers,
hookmakers, glaziers, watchmakers, white-ironsmiths, and engineers; the
Wrights and Coopers, cabinetmakers and wheelwrights; and the Tailors,
upholsterers.
But the classes of
craftsmen that associated under one deacon had always something in
common. The Hammer-men were craftsmen with whom the use of the hammer
was a leading feature, glovers in the olden times being makers of much
more substantial articles than are used nowadays, while saddlers made
the iron as well as the leather parts of harness; the Wrights and
Coopers dealt in the same material; and the upholsterers were classed
along with the Tailors, because they used the needle and thread.
In addition to these
seven, however, separate societies were formed by the Litsters or Dyers,
the Masons, and the Leechers (barber-surgeons), all of which elected
their deacons, and possessed a constitution similar to the Seven
Incorporated Trades. The litsters formed themselves into a society about
as early as any other body of craftsmen in the town. In 1501 their
deacon was presented to the Council to be sworn, and to have his
election confirmed; but it does not appear that they ever applied for a
Seal of Cause, as was done by the other crafts about this period. On the
contrary, the dyers seem to have held aloof from the rest of the
craftsmen, and at times claimed an equality with the merchant
burgesses—an equality, however, which was never acknowledged either by
the merchants or craftsmen. When the question of precedence was rife at
the time of the religious pageants, the litsters frequently claimed a
superior place, but in 1546 they were definitely instructed to furnish
their banner and take part in the Corpus Christi and Candlemas
processions along with the rest of the craftsmen:—
25th June, 1546.—The said
day, the haill litstaris of this burgh chesit Alexander Fresser, litstar,
thair dekyne of the said craft for this instant yeir ; quhilk accepit
the said office on him, and is sworne the grit ayth to exerce the same
lelie and treuelie, dureing the said yeir: and the bailyeis interponit
their auctoritie tharto, and ordanit thame to haue thar banar and Paoane,
as uther crafteis of the said burgh hes, ilk yeir, on Corpis Christi day
and Candilmess dais processiounis, under the paines contenit in the
statut maid tharupon.—Council Register, vol. xix., p. 143.
At the beginning of the
seventeenth century the question of precedence was brought before the
Court of Session, when a decreet was pronounced finding that the
litsters could not exercise their own trade and the trade of Guild
burgesses at the same time, notwithstanding the Acts of the Convention
of Burghs, the custom of the burgh of Aberdeen being different in this
respect from that of other burghs.
The claim to be classed
before the craftsmen was revived in 1759, when the litsters endeavoured
to obtain precedence, or at least equality, for their sons at Robert
Gordon's Hospital over the Incorporated Trades. The barbers and
bookbinders (The mention of bookbinders in a petition by the convener
and deacons of the Incorporated Trades against the claim of the Litsters
suggests that they had been associated in a corporate capacity, but this
is the only mention of them we have been able to discover in the Burgh
Records.) also endeavoured to establish a like privilege, but the
Governors, as the following minute bears, declined to recognise their
claim :—
3rd April, 1759.—The said
day the Governors being about to proceed to the election of boys to be
received into the Hospital betwixt this date and the first day of June
next, in terms of the Deed of Mortification, a representation was
offered to them in name and behalf of the Convener and Deacons of
Incorporated Trades or crafts of Aberdeen, complaining of a resolution
and act made by the governors upon the 3rd day of April last, 1758,
"finding that in terms of the mortification litsters burgesses had an
equal title with any other burgesses tradesmen of the Seven Incorporated
Trades or crafts to have their children received into the Hospital," and
the said representation being read and considered by the governors, and
they having at great length reasoned on the affair, and the question
being put, it carried by a great majority that the sons and grandsons of
the incorporate tradesmen of the burgh of Aberdeen are to have the
preference immediately after the sons and grandsons of burgesses of
guild in terms of the deed of mortification in all time coming, and
therefore the governors did decree and determine accordingly.—Hospital
Records.
About the middle of the
seventeenth century Archibald Bean, a member of the Litsters Society,
left several properties to provide funds for the benefit of decayed
members of that craft, and down to April of last year (1886) the funds
belonging to the society were administered for that purpose. But the
last of the members has now passed away. On 30th April, 1886, John
Bannerman, the only surviving member and office-bearer, died at the
advanced age of 95; and the funds that remained after his death, and
several old houses, have been claimed by the Queen's Remembrancer on
behalf of the Crown. Mr. David Mitchell, advocate, the agent for the
Society, is at present engaged in winding up the affairs of this
venerable association.
The Barbers, who down to
the end of the seventeenth century were designated as chirurgeons (An
antique oak chair, which bears the inscription "H. G., Chirurgie" with
the Guthrie arms, is preserved in the Trades Hall, and is said to have
been the chair used by the deacon of the Barber's Society.) and periwig
makers, obtained a Seal of Cause from the Town Council in 1537,
authorising them to elect a deacon, make rules, prescribe an examination
for entrants, &c., in the same manner as the other crafts. In 1674, when
they had established a benevolent fund, they obtained a confirmation of
their privileges under the title of barbers, surgeons, and periwig
makers, but ultimately the association consisted solely of barbers and
periwig makers. On 22nd January, 1729, a petition was presented to the
Town Council by "Francis Massie, barber and periwig maker, present
boxmaster, for himself, and in name of the haill incorporation," for
power to raise the entry money from £6 to £12 Scots, on account of the
increased benefits that were being given from accumulated funds. The
prayer of the petition was granted, the incorporation being ordained to
"call the Dean of Guild to their meetings to oversee and inspect their
accounts, and to take the Dean's advice in stocking and lending their
money." Up to about 1840 there were over thirty members, but gradually
the membership fell off, and several years ago the remanent members and
beneficiaries entered into a private arrangement for dividing the stock
of the society among themselves. There is only one surviving member at
the date of writing (1887).
The masons obtained a
Seal of Cause in 1532 along with the wrights and coopers, but beyond
being coupled with them in the same Seal of Cause the masons never
became part of the society formed by the wrights and coopers. When the
Seal of Cause was obtained, the masons elected their own deacon, formed
a society for themselves, passed bye-laws, and accumulated funds in the
same manner as the other associations. But about the middle of the
seventeenth century their society underwent a curious metamorphosis.
Free or " speculative" masonry was introduced into Aberdeen shortly
after the mason craftsmen obtained their Seal of Cause, but little was
heard of the mysteries of masonry until some time after the reformation,
when a regular lodge was formed in connection with the Masons' Craft
Society about 1670. At the outset, freemasonry was simply an adjunct of
the original association of craft masons; but gradually it became its
leading feature, and the incorporation of mason artificers eventually
became what is now known as the Aberdeen Mason Lodge. The "olde book" of
the Aberdeen Lodge contains the "lawes and statutes for measones
gathered out of thir old wreatings by us, who ar the authoires and
subscriberis of this booke," and the great bulk of these ordinances have
reference to the of tirs of the incorporation, and are drawn up in
similar terms to those enacted by the other craft incorporations in the
town. They have nothing whatever to do with speculative masonry, which
slid not obtain prominence until a charter was obtained from Grand Lodge
of Scotland in 1743.
These separate societies
having as it were swarmed off by themselves, the seven remained as a
compact body, and have acted together for over two hundred and fifty
years, aiding and assisting each other in preserving their rights and
privileges, and amalgamating for the purpose of instituting various
general funds for the benefit of their members and dependants.
Down to the beginning of
the eighteenth century the craftsmen rigidly excluded burgesses of guild
from their societies; but as the differences between the two classes of
burgesses became more amicably adjusted, several of the crafts relaxed
their constitution to the extent of declaring that the fact of an
applicant being a burgess of guild should not be a bar to his becoming a
member of one of the crafts should he be found otherwise qualified. In
1738 the Baker Trade passed an enactment that all members who should
become burgesses of guild should still enjoy the same privileges as the
other members of the trade, and from that date down to the year 1801,
burgesses of guild were called to all the meetings and voted at the
elections of the Baker Trade, with the exception of voting for the
election of deacon. But in that year the right of burgesses of guild to
vote at the election of deacons and other office-bearers was called in
question. At this election five burgesses of guild were present. They
gave no vote for the office of deacon, but, on his election being
completed, they all voted for the masters of the trade and for the
boxmaster. A complaint was presented to the Magistrates complaining,
inter alirc, of the interference of the burgesses of guild in the
election. The burgesses of build grounded their defence principally on
the Act of the Trade, passed in 1738. After hearing both parties the
Magistrates, on the 14th December, 1802, found that "the Act of the
Baker Trade of Aberdeen, dated the 11th May, 1738, founded on by the
defenders, was contrary to law and ultra vires of the corporaLion, and
therefore ordained Robert Spring, the deacon of the trade, to expunge it
from their books at the sight of the private complainer. Found that the
defenders — William Strachan, Adam Watt, John Wallace, Alexander Hall,
and George Henderson—by obtaining themselves admitted burgesses of guild
virtually renounced their craft as bakers, and were disqualified from
voting in the election in question." The decree then contains the
following prohibition:—"And further prohibits and discharges the said
William Strachan, Adam Watt, John Wallace, Alexander Hall, and George
Henderson from attending or voting in the election of deacon, masters,
or boxinaster of the Baker Trade of Aberdeen in future, so long as they
remain burgesses of guild of this burgh, under the penalty of £20
sterling each, toties quoties." This sentence was ultimately complied
with, the minute of 11th May, 1738, was erased from the minute book, and
a small fine and the expense of process were paid by the burgesses of
guild. In 1803 William Strachan and several other burgesses of guild who
were then members of the Baker Trade, raised an action of reduction and
declarator. The action of reduction had reference to certain minutes of
the trade, at the meetings of which the votes of the members of the
guildry had been refused. The business before the court related to the
lending of a large suin of money, and after the foregoing sentence of
the Magistrates, the burgesses of guild had not been called to the
meetings of the trade. The action of declarator was to have it found
that the burgesses of guild " were entitled to be called to the meetings
of the trade, and particularly in every question regarding the disposal
of these funds to which they have contributed." In this action the trade
was assoilzied both by Lord Armadale and Lord Hermand, both Lord
Ordinaries finding that the pursuers (the burgesses of guild) were not
entitled to vote in the disposal of the funds of the trade. The next
case occurred in the year 1815. Three tailors, named Torrie, Spence, and
Smith, having become members of the guildry, the trade gave orders that
they should no longer be called to the usual meetings of the tailor
trade. The tailor burgesses of guild brought a complaint before the
Sheriff against the office-bearers of the trade, and craved that the
Sheriff should find that they were entitled to be called to the meetings
of the trade, and to vote in the election o all the office-bearers with
the exception of the deacon, and that they were entitled to vote in all
questions regarding the administration of the funds of the trade. In the
course of the process the pursuers gave up their claim to vote for
omcebearers, and restricted their claim to voting in any matter
connected with the funds of the trade. Dr. Dauney, the
Sheriff-Substitute, gave judgment in favour of the pursuers, thereby
giving them a right to be called to the meetings and voting in the
administration of the funds. Against this judgment the trades appealed
to Sheriff Moir, who reversed the sentence and assoilzied the
corporation by finding that the pursuers, the members of guildry, were
not entitled to vote or to be called to the meetings of the Tailor
Trade. In this case the names of all the members of guildry belonging to
the other trades were mentioned, and it was alleged that in the other
trades these members were called to all meetings, and voted in every
case, with the exception of the election of deacon, but the Sheriff (Moir),
notwithstanding, gave the sentence against the complainers. After the
abolition of trading privileges in 1846, the Trades became less strict,
and guild brethren who were also craftsmen have been free]y admitted. |
