Initial commit of ebook 78623 filesHEADmain

6 files changed, 2593 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/78623-0.txt b/78623-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..de85c27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/78623-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1144 @@
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78623 ***
+Transcriber’s Note: Although the title page of this book reads
+“Craft-guilds of the thirteenth century in Paris”, the text consistently
+uses the spelling “gild”.
+
+
+
+
+                BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF HISTORY AND
+                 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE IN QUEEN’S
+                  UNIVERSITY, KINGSTON, ONTARIO, CANADA.
+
+                          NO. 17, OCTOBER, 1915.
+
+                            CRAFT-GUILDS OF THE
+                        THIRTEENTH CENTURY IN PARIS
+
+                                    BY
+                              F. B. MILLETT.
+
+                       _The Jackson Press, Kingston_
+
+
+
+
+BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF HISTORY AND POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE
+IN QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY, KINGSTON, ONTARIO, CANADA.
+
+
+=No. 1, The Colonial Policy of Chatham, by W. L. Grant.=
+
+=No. 2, Canada and the Most Favored Nation Treaties, by O. D. Skelton.=
+
+=No. 3, The Status of Women in New England and New France, by James
+Douglas.=
+
+=No. 4, Sir Charles Bagot: An Incident in Canadian Parliamentary History,
+by J. L. Morison.=
+
+=No. 5, Canadian Bank Inspection, by W. W. Swanson.=
+
+=No. 6, Should Canadian Cities Adopt Commission Government, by William
+Bennett Munro.=
+
+=No. 7, An Early Canadian Impeachment, by D. A. McArthur.=
+
+=No. 8, A Puritan at the Court of Louis XIV, by W. L. Grant.=
+
+=No. 9, British Supremacy and Canadian Autonomy: An Examination of Early
+Victorian Opinion Concerning Canadian Self-government, by J. L. Morison.=
+
+=No. 10, The Problem of Agricultural Credit in Canada, by H. Michell.=
+
+=No. 11, St. Alban in History and Legend: A Critical Examination; The
+King and His Councillors: Prolegomena to a History of the House of Lords,
+by L. F. Rushbrook Williams.=
+
+=No. 12, Life of the Settler in Western Canada Before the War of 1812, by
+Adam Shortt.=
+
+=No. 13, The Grange in Canada, by H. Michell.=
+
+=No. 14, The Financial Power of the Empire, by W. W. Swanson.=
+
+=No. 15, Modern British Foreign Policy, by J. L. Morison.=
+
+=No. 16, Federal Finance, by O. D. Skelton.=
+
+=No. 17, Craft-Gilds of the Thirteenth Century in Paris, by F. B.
+Millett.=
+
+
+
+
+CRAFT-GILDS OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY IN PARIS.
+
+
+The gild as it appears in Paris in the 13th century, M. Lespinasse in
+his Introduction to Étienne Boileau’s _Livre des Métiers_, defines as “a
+combination of individuals having the right to carry on an industrial
+profession, composed of masters, _valets_, and apprentices, and bound by
+oath to observe the prescribed regulations, and to respect the authority
+of the Jurés in their supervisory functions.” The gilds in documents of
+the time are called somewhat loosely _corporations_, _corps de métier_,
+_métier_, _commun du métier_, _ghilde_, and less correctly _charité_ or
+_confrérie_.[1] The gild was a fortress to which the workman rallied
+and from which he beat off assailants in the form of feudal lords or
+foreign trade competitors. Its primary function was to safeguard the
+rights of labor, at any period none too stable, and in the complicated
+social organization of the later Middle Ages, decidedly precarious.
+Privileges had to be fought for and wrested from the overlord of the
+community, be he king or noble, and a definite regulation, though still
+in its prescriptions onerous, was preferable to a haphazard system of
+‘taxation,’ subject only to the sanity or rapacity of count, king or
+bishop. Foreign laborers and merchants, too, the narrow economic vision
+of the period pointed out as hostile to the well-being of the city-gild,
+and so exclusion by legislation is an important article in its “foreign
+policy.” Against enemies within their own ranks a sharp guard had to be
+maintained; ignorant practitioners or a superfluity of apprentices might
+sadly damage the gild’s reputation for work which was “good and loyal.”
+The organization of the 13th century gild seems to find its motives in
+the desire to establish a definite and firm control over the _métier_,
+and to establish, so far as custom and law would sanction it, a monopoly
+over the commodities produced.
+
+The question of the political significance of the gild may be set aside
+at the start. It has been a difference of opinion which came first,
+the gild or the commune, and whether there was a causal relationship
+between the two. The fact is that most of the gilds—as organizations—had
+no political share in such activities as elections. The gild was not
+the cause of the commune; the commune did not originate the gild.
+M. Fagniez[2] has said “Le mouvement communal ne fut pour rien dans
+cette émancipation de la classe ouvrière; elle était terminée quand il
+commença.” It is interesting to note, however, the prominence which,
+under the gild régime, certain _bourgeois_ and tradesmen attain. For
+example, the provost of the watermen of Paris came to rival in power the
+king’s provost of Paris.
+
+It is outside the province of this paper to discuss the somewhat vexed
+question of the origin of the gild. Various theories have been vigorously
+championed, and a mere mention of them with a few facts as to the early
+appearance of the gilds will suffice. One theory maintains a survival
+from the Roman _College_, another as an analogue to the Germanic _guild_,
+and the third as an organization under the direction of the feudal lord.
+It is curious to note how in 1725 M. Félibién in his “Histoire de la
+Ville de Paris,” misinterpreted the origin of the _Livre des Métiers_
+on the basis of this latter theory, attributing too much of the slow
+development of an _organism_ to the shaping hand of Boileau. He says:
+“E. B. _rangea_ tous les marchands et les artisans en differens corps
+de communautez, sous le titre de confrairies. Ce fut le premier _qui
+leur dressa_ des Statuts, qu’il fit ensuite approuver dans une assemblée
+des principaux bourgeois de Paris. Les prévosts successeurs de Boileau
+adjoustèrent de nouveaux réglemens aux premiers, et il en fut fait en
+recueil.”... The prevalent theory of the gilds’ origin is that they were
+born spontaneously from the needs of the people, that they were a natural
+line of development for youthful industry, in self-protection, to take.
+
+Charters or privileges claimed by the gilds date from the 11th century,
+though they are most abundant in the 13th. The most ancient charter
+published in the _Recueil des Ordonnances_ is that of the chandlers of
+Paris, dated 1061. This document, however, is now supposed to have been
+forged in the 15th century. From 1121 dates the first charter of the
+_marchands de l’eau de Paris_. In 1160, Louis the VII gave to Thèce,
+wife of Yrves Lacohe, and her heirs, the ‘mastery’ of five gilds which
+dealt with leathers, the tanners, the curriers, the shoe-makers, the
+leather-dressers, and the purse-makers. In 1162 come new privileges
+granted in regulation of the bakers. In 1183 Philip Augustus rented _a
+cens_ four houses which he had confiscated from the Jews, to the drapers’
+gild. A lord in 1219 sold the confrérie of cloth-merchants a house, and
+gave them the leases of several adjoining houses.
+
+The book which is the object of this study—the _Livre des Métiers_, owes
+its origin to a capable official of Louis IX, Étienne Boileau. He was
+appointed prévôt of Paris about 1260.[3] This official had the rank of
+the first bailiff of France. His ‘office’ was the Châtelet, where he
+judged in person the greater part of the civil and criminal cases in
+Paris and the _vicomté_; he was judge of appeal from the feudal nobles
+and ecclesiastics who still had fiefs in Paris. He had charge of the
+military service, of the policing, the finance and ‘justice’ of Paris
+and its suburbs. This official, or the holder of this office, “who
+administered with firmness and loyalty,” wished to correct the faults
+incident to the jurisdiction over the gilds, by establishing in writing
+the ‘constitution’ of each gild. The masters of the gilds accordingly
+presented their regulations, and the result is a register of the laws
+and customs of 101 craft-gilds of Paris.[4] Some of the privileges or
+implied immunities pretend exceeding antiquity. The stone-cutters claim
+immunity from the duty of the watch from the time of Charles Martel.
+Upholsterers cite privileges granted by Louis the VII, and the bakers
+claim from Philip Augustus the right to exclude ‘foreign’ bakers (i.e.
+bakers from outside Paris), from the markets except on Saturdays. What we
+have then in this invaluable _Livre_ is a cross-section of the commercial
+and industrial life of Paris in the third quarter of the 13th century. A
+study of this manuscript will show a vivid and complete picture of the
+working class, and, by implication, of the upper nobility’s commercial
+habits.
+
+The gilds were composed of three grades of individuals: apprentices,
+_valets_, and masters. The term _ouvrier_ was applied in general to all
+the divisions, even more loosely than our term _workman_.
+
+The apprentice, though considered as a member of the gild, was not of
+the corporation until his apprenticeship was over. The term was begun
+by a contract between master and aspirant. Usually this contract was
+oral, because the writing of a document was too expensive a process.
+At any rate, it was always a mutual engagement, sworn to, before the
+Jurés, an engagement which imposed on both parties mutual duties which
+neither should attempt to evade. A regulation concerning the agreement
+runs as follows: “The master who takes an apprentice should summon to
+the ceremony of the contract two masters and two _valets_, to hear the
+agreement made between master and apprentice, and it is fitting that the
+_master who guards the gild_ should be called also.” The Jurés before
+authorizing the contract, were supposed to make careful inquiries as to
+the ability and the financial position of the master.
+
+About forty of the gilds were allowed to have as many apprentices as
+they liked. Among these were the corn-dealers, the gold-beaters, the
+ale-brewers, green-grocers, farriers, drawers of iron wire, millers,
+shoe-makers and the _barilliers_. Usually, however, the number was
+limited to one or two. The mercers, the fullers, weavers of silk-stuffs,
+knife-handle and blade makers were allowed to have two, while the
+rope-makers, pewterers, precious stone dealers, braid-makers, drapers,
+goldsmiths, and shield-makers contented themselves with one. The
+motives for such limitation were at least _double_: the altruistic
+reason was that the master should not have too many to teach well; the
+self-protective reason was that the gild should at no time be swamped in
+competition by too many (prospective) masters.
+
+The term of apprenticeship was also most scrupulously fixed. The
+conditions are usually a definite term without payment of fee or a term
+gradually lessened according to the increase in the size of the fee. The
+haberdashers and the pewterers could fix the duration of apprenticeship
+at will; other terms vary from 3 to 8, to 10-12 years, with fees varying
+from 20 Parisian _sous_ (5 fr.) to 100 Parisian _sous_ (20 fr.), by means
+of which the apprentice could buy off part of his time of service.
+There seems, however, to have been no attempt to make the time directly
+proportionate to the costliness of the raw material and the difficulty
+of the process, or the skill required in the craft. The rope-makers
+require an apprenticeship of 4 years, the brass-wire drawers 6 years, the
+chest-makers 7 years, the makers of iron shields 8 years, the curriers
+of shoe-leather 9, the jewellers 10, and the coral and shell bead-makers
+12 years. The wool-weavers demand 4 years plus 4 _livres_, 5 years and
+3 _livres_, 6 years and one _livre_, or 7 years without fee. Power over
+the length of term resided of course in the hands of the masters, and
+the rules contain only the minimum requirement. We read, “No one can
+or ought to take or have more than two apprentices, and he cannot take
+them for less than 7 years of service and twenty _sous_ of Paris, which
+apprentices must give to the masters; or at 7 years without money, but
+more money and longer service he can require if need be.” How irrational
+the terms were may be seen from the fact that while the goldsmith’s term
+is 10 years, the brass-wire drawers (a far less “skilled” gild) required
+10 years and 20 _sous_, or 12 years and no fee, and that of three
+bead-making gilds, one demanded 6 years and 46 _sous_, another 10 years
+and 46 _sous_, and the third 12 years without possible shortening of the
+term. If the apprentice, however, bought off part of his regular term,
+the master was not permitted to take another apprentice till the complete
+period was over. An extra apprentice was sometimes allowed if the wife
+of a master knew the trade. “No one of the craft aforesaid can have more
+than one apprentice, and if he has a wife, can have only one if she does
+not know the trade, but if the man and the woman know the trade, they can
+have two apprentices, but they can have as many _valets_ as they wish.”
+Among the masons, a Juré could have two apprentices, the other masters
+could employ only one.
+
+Exceptions to rules of apprenticeship were made for the sons of masters,
+or of their wives, and in this beginning of family privileges, we see
+foreshadowed the tyranny of the close-corporation control of the gild
+in latter centuries. All the sons of the master and his wife, if she
+knows the trade, may rise to the ‘mastery’ usually with no fixed term of
+apprenticeship. If the children were illegitimate, no privileges were
+granted them. In the case of the goldsmith we see still wider family
+privileges, for we read “of his lineage and of the lineage of his
+wife, whether distant or close, he can have as many (apprentices) as he
+wishes.” The wool-weaver was allowed in his house two large looms and one
+small one for himself and for each of his married sons, and one loom each
+for a brother and a nephew, if they “knew how to work with their hands.”
+In the gild of the iron shield-makers and several others, appears the
+obligation of teaching the son of a poor master or his orphans free.
+
+The conditions of the contract of apprenticeship shed much light on
+the lives of these little workmen, and the statutes recognize the
+possibility of their being led astray by “leur folour et leur joliveté.”
+The apprentice, we are told, should obey all the orders of the master,
+and not complain without justice of the master’s oppression to the
+_prud’hommes_ of the gild. He had to clean the workshop, run errands
+for the family and for the business. That apprentices were not always
+docile, nor their circumstances congenial, the many rules dealing with
+their flight suggest. An apprentice who had taken flight from his master
+could not be received into the workshop of another member of the gild
+until the complete period of his apprenticeship contract had elapsed.
+The pâter-notriers had to wait a year and a day after the flight of an
+apprentice, and the tablet-makers 26 weeks, before taking in another.
+After three attempts to escape, all obligation between gild and
+apprentice ceased. “And this regulation the _prud’hommes_ of the gild
+make to restrain the folly and jollity of the apprentices, for they do
+great harm to their masters and themselves, when they run away; for when
+the apprentice is enrolled to learn, and runs away in a month or two, he
+forgets as much as he has learned, and thus he wastes his time and does
+harm to his master.” The wool-weavers and the locksmiths insisted that
+the escaping apprentice pay the master what his training had cost.
+
+The statutes recognize the right of the master to sell the apprentice
+to another master under certain circumstances. “No cutler can sell his
+apprentice unless he (the master) lies on a bed of sickness (_lit de
+langueur_), or is going across seas, or is leaving the gild for good or
+does it because of poverty.”
+
+The master’s obligations to the apprentice consisted in lodging, feeding
+and clothing him and in teaching him the trade. That masters did not
+always scrupulously abide by these duties, various law-suits and
+_régles_ attest. Only the tablet-makers and the important wool-merchants,
+provide, in their statutes, for a defence of the apprentice’s rights.
+There we find that if the master fails in his duties, the gild masters,
+upon complaint of the apprentice, “must admonish the said master, and if
+he does not comply, they must seek out a new master for the apprentice.”
+In another place, we learn of a fine imposed on the master who provoked
+his apprentice to flight.
+
+A decree from the Châtelet: 3 Sept., 1399, gives a living vignette
+of these domestic relations a century after our period.[5] “We have
+enjoined and commanded the said master that he treat the said Larin,
+his apprentice, as the son of a _prud’homme_ should be treated, and
+that he abide by the matters contained in the said contract, without
+having him beaten by his wife, but that he should beat him himself if he
+misbehaved.” In the same year also a father succeeded in breaking his
+son’s contract because the goldsmith, the boy’s master, by hitting him
+with a bunch of keys, had “made a hole in his head.”
+
+The possible marriage of an apprentice during the term of his service is
+provided for thus: “If any apprentice marries during the time that he has
+promised to serve his master, and does not wish to eat dinner and supper
+with his master, he ought to have four _deniers_ every working day for
+his support.”
+
+It is not very clear from our texts, whether an examination at the end
+of his term was usual or infrequent. Only rarely is the demand for a
+_chef-d’oeuvre_ mentioned. The saddle-bow makers claim that after an
+apprentice has made his _chef-d’oeuvre_ he should become more important
+in the workshop “so that his master may not send him out into the city to
+fetch his bread and his wine just like a boy.” The goldsmith’s statutes
+provide that if he becomes skilful enough to pay his expenses and to
+earn 100 _sous_ a year, he may be freed from his contract and allowed
+to earn a salary. At the end of the period, however, _any_ apprentice
+must declare before the Jurés on his oath that he had fulfilled his term
+according to contract.
+
+To our mind, the apprentice system here revealed does not seem devised
+for the best interest of the child. Too much power for good or ill lies
+with the master. If he so wishes, there seems to be little to prevent
+his letting his charge remain in a state of childish and unprofessional
+ignorance. The long term of service, the wide power of master upon man
+seem devised to add to the master’s profits, not to his charge’s skill.
+
+The _valet_, _sergent_ or _aloué_, i.e. hired man, was an individual
+who had finished his term of service as apprenticeship but had not yet
+risen to the dignity, as master, of having an establishment of his own.
+Women of this grade, in gilds to which they were admitted, were called
+_chambrières_ or _meschinettes_. Usually the master could have as many
+_valets_ as he wished, but occasionally the number was limited so as
+to prevent rich and attractive workshops getting many _valets_, and,
+accordingly, something approaching a monopoly of the trade.
+
+A _valet_ who had been trained outside Paris had to present evidence that
+he had done the preliminary term elsewhere. Of such a man, too, it was
+possible to require a kind of surety or testimonial of a fair dismissal
+from a former employer. Evidently the narrow mediaeval view of protection
+of home industries led to the discriminations against workmen from
+outside, for we read, “It is ordered and decreed that no person of the
+said gild should hire any foreign man so long as he can find a workman
+who is a member of the gild.” Care was taken too that disgrace and
+scandal should not fall upon the gild through _valets_ of bad character.
+“_Rêveurs_, scoundrels, murderers, knaves, thieves, men of ill fame” are
+stipulated as improper candidates, and a wool-weaver whose relations with
+a woman were a by-word “was sent out of the city and forbidden the trade
+until he should amend his character.”
+
+The length of the term of hire is not definitely stated in our
+regulations, and it varied from a day, a week, a month, to a year. In the
+morning all unemployed _valets_ assembled early in a designated street
+or square. There they were to stay until the bell from a certain church
+sounded. No private individual could hire an artisan. If a bargain was
+made, the _valet_ went to the house of his employer at dawn and stayed
+under usual conditions till sunset. The hours accordingly varied largely,
+from 14 hours in summer to 8 in winter. Very few _valets_ lodged and
+ate with their patron. They ‘went out’ in search of their noonday-meal
+with the provision that, after it, they should not loiter to wait for
+a fellow-workman. If the gild was one which allowed night-work, and
+the master desired it of him, the _aloué_ must comply for a raise of
+pay. Sometimes the _valets_ rebelled against this compulsion, and were
+threatened by the magistrates for this attempt at industrial freedom. In
+only one case is vacation mentioned, but as we shall see in discussing
+the _chômage_, there was little need of it. The brass-wire drawers
+stipulate, however, that the workmen may have a vacation in the month of
+August if they wish.
+
+Women were admitted to membership in gilds where their delicate skill and
+taste made them useful. In 1292 the group dealing with embroidery was
+composed of 81 women and 12 men.
+
+Occasionally conditions of employment are stated with more detail. A
+rule of the sword-cutlers runs this: “No[6] master should take a _valet_
+to work unless he has five sets of clothes with him in order that the
+workmen may look neat in case the nobles, counts, barons, knights, and
+other good folk should at any time come into the work-room.” The _valet_
+could not be dismissed unreasonably, and rarely the provision is made
+that two _valets_ and two masters must agree upon the dismissal before
+it could take effect. After a year and a day, the _valet_ could have his
+wife come and work with him, if the gild admitted women.
+
+A considerable distinction between masters and _valets_ already existed,
+though in the smaller organizations the gulf was less apparent. There
+were no large factories in the modern meaning, and in a small workshop
+conditions of equality were more likely to obtain. Several facts show,
+however, that the _valets_ in some places were beginning to feel
+themselves a distinct industrial class. Infrequently they had their
+own confrérie and their own jurés. The masters in some cities already
+foresaw the possibilities of a kind of class-struggle, and at[7] Beauvais
+punished with imprisonment and fine men who attempted combinations in
+the hope of raising wages. In 1280 at Ypres, workmen rebelled against an
+ordinance adding one hour to their working day, and in their rioting
+killed the mayor. Of course they were severely punished. (But how modern
+these actions prove our industrial class of the Middle Ages to be.)
+
+The obtaining of the mastership or mastery of a gild, i.e. the right
+to set up a workshop, to go into business, depended on certain
+qualifications in the aspirants, and certain formal ceremonies,
+necessitated by the organization of the gild, and its (frequent) feudal
+relationship to the king or his official. The first requirement was
+skill, acquired during service as apprentice and _valet_, capital,
+upright character and good conduct. Most of the sections have such an
+article as “Quiconques veut estre de tel mestier, estre le peut pœrtant
+qu’il sache le mestier, et ait de coi,” and an article of the _drapiers_
+reads: “Il conviendra qu’il sache faire le mestier de touz poinz, le soy,
+sans conseil au ayde d’autruy et qu’il à ce examiné par les gardes du
+mestier.” The cook’s regulations require that the son of a master have an
+expert in his bake-house until the masters judged the son skilful enough.
+This article was evidently designed to counteract the carelessness of
+regulation of the apprentice-work of sons. The formal requirement was the
+purchase of the right to trade. At the most 25 gilds were required to
+purchase this right, the rest were “free.” Among these who purchased were
+the bakers, the criers of wine, the retailers of bread and vegetables,
+the farriers, the cutlers, locksmiths, weavers of silk cloth, masons,
+hose-makers, poulterers, potters, old-clothes dealers, purse-makers,
+saddlers, shoe-makers, glovers, and fishermen. The necessity was created
+by the fact that about 30 of the gilds were fiefs of the king, and
+accordingly could be reserved for himself, or bestowed upon his favorite
+officers. In general, however, those the king retained for himself,
+notably, the dealers in food-necessities, were free of purchase.
+
+After purchasing the right from the king, the aspirant had usually to
+present himself within a week to be admitted to the corporation. At a
+solemn meeting the masters or jurés “read loudly” and explained the
+regulations. The recipient of the privilege then swore by the saints’
+relics that he would keep the laws and carry on his profession carefully
+and loyally. Initiation fees were of course variable; the criers paid the
+jurés 4 _deniers_ (0 fr. .45), the silk-cloth weavers and hose-makers
+10 _sous_ (2 fr. .50); the _épiciers_ paid 5 _sous_[8] _pour boire_ to
+their companions. The time for paying this fee also varied. The curriers
+of shoe-leather were allowed to pay their fee a year and a day after
+establishment, while the bakers were restrained only by a limit of four
+years. The widow of a master was generously permitted to carry on the
+business in his stead, though usually if she remarried a stranger, i.e. a
+man outside the gild, she forfeited this right.
+
+M. Lespinasse makes an interesting distinction in affirming that the
+mastership was not a rank, but a privilege; it was not a case of ‘once
+a master, always a master.’ Upon the relinquishment of the activity and
+privileges implied, a master became an artisan, and, for instance, the
+hose-makers assert that 35 masters among them have fallen into poverty.
+The master with all his attempts to protect his position and rights, bore
+the not-light burden of taxation from which the _valets_ were directly,
+at least, exempt.
+
+The internal administration of the gild was performed by officers called
+_jurés_ or _prud’hommes_, and the external relation of the gild in its
+dealings with other gilds or the city was supervised by the Crown or the
+Crown official who held the gild in fief. The jurés were also called
+_gardes_, _syndics_, _éswards_, _élus_. The typical method of choice was
+the election of a certain number by the masters of the gild, and their
+ratification and investiture by the Provost of Paris or other Crown
+official. Sometimes, however, the Provost or Crown officer appointed
+the _guards_ with no semblance of suggestion, in theory at least, from
+the gild itself. Occasionally the election was wholly in the hands of
+the _community_. Sometimes the departing _prud’hommes_ nominated their
+successors. Among the haberdashers, failure to serve, if one were
+elected, called down upon him a fine of 10 livres (134 fr.). The term
+of office was usually a year. The goldsmiths, however, changed their
+officers only every three years. The fullers, who had two masters and
+two _valets_ as officers, changed them at Christmas and at St. John’s
+Day. Before the Provost, the _valets_ named two masters, and the masters
+two _valets_, for service, a _nice_ balance in the interest of just
+administration. Women were allowed offices for such gilds as they were
+important in. The workers in silk-stuffs had three masters and three
+mistresses; the weavers of kerchiefs three _maîtresses_.
+
+In being invested with office, the jurés, for instance, of the bakers
+swore on the relics of the saints that they would ‘guard the gild’
+carefully and loyally, and that in appraising bread, they would spare
+neither relatives nor friends, nor condemn anyone wrongly through hatred
+or ill-feeling. The chiefs of the gilds scrutinized the quality of
+the products, denounced frauds and infractions of the rules, presided
+at solemn conclaves of the gild, and represented it before the law.
+They presided at the contract of apprenticeship, received the oaths of
+artisans and masters, and administered the funds of the corporation. In
+case of appeal from the jurisdiction of the jurés, the Provost of Paris
+was the first authority, and above him was the _Parlement de Paris_. On
+the lands of a feudal lord, the latter usually retained the privilege of
+administering petty justice.
+
+The question of remuneration to the jurés for loss of time naturally
+arises. Usually a definite fraction of the fines was awarded to them.
+Besides, too, the honor which accrued to them, exemptions from the duty
+of the watch and from certain of the fines of the trade, are mentioned.
+
+Most gilds had officers of only one rank upon whom all the duties fell.
+Occasionally discrimination was made, and two superior officers chosen
+from the masters held the power of handing down decisions while their
+_valet_-assistants exercised supervision, and reported infractions of
+the rules to the masters. Perhaps the most frequent number of _jurés_
+in a gild was two or four. The armorers, the iron-shield-makers, the
+potters, the rope-makers, bead-makers, gold-beaters, braid-makers,
+spinners of silk, etc., had two, the fullers, the tallow-chandlers four.
+The brass-shield makers were so few that they did not elect a juré, but
+asked the Provost to hear their cases directly. Only one _guard_ is
+mentioned in the statutes of the clasp-makers and the flower-hat makers.
+The curriers have three, the farriers six, the goldsmiths two or three,
+the head-dress makers eight, and later only four. The bakers and the
+retailers of fruit and vegetables had twelve officers.
+
+The most feudal feature of the craft-gild organization is, perhaps, the
+dependence of the gild on the Crown or its officials or vassals. Most
+of the gilds were dependent upon (relevaient à) the Prévôt de Paris.
+To him the _prud’hommes_ carried complaints, against other gilds, for
+example, and it was he who appointed a _prud’homme_ to execute for him
+the functions suggested above. We have seen that Louis the Younger
+granted to a woman the ‘mastery’ of five gilds, which remained enfieffed
+to the sixteenth century. The grand pantler was the judge of the bakers,
+and each year appointed a master to look after the gild. The grand
+chamberlain looked after the wool-weavers, haberdashers, tailors and
+upholsterers, and others who had to do with clothing and furnishings; the
+cup-bearer (_échanson_) had the wine merchants, and the _maréchal_ the
+smiths, farriers, helmeters, locksmiths and other iron-workers. The grand
+butler tried to keep order among the wine-shop keepers. To his mason,
+Guillaume à Saint Patrie, the king confided the masons, stone-breakers,
+plasterers, etc.
+
+Exact hours for work were not set down; the time of the world in which
+the artisan lived was too entirely dominated by the custom of the Church
+to permit of hours being designated as 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. “No one of the
+gild,” we read, “ought to work on holy days which the people of the city
+keep, nor on Saturdays during _charnage_ (i.e. the time during which it
+was permitted to eat meat) after Vespers, nor after Compline on Saturdays
+during Lent, nor at night at any time of the year.” During Lent, Vespers
+fell at 6 o’clock, and Compline at 9. _Charnage_ was used loosely to mean
+not only the period during which meat could be eaten, but also the period
+of short days, while _Carême_ meant the period of long days. Night work
+was expressly forbidden for goldsmiths, sheath-makers, weavers, braid-,
+chest-, buckles-, beads-makers, pewterers, lamp-makers and locksmith’s,
+“for the light at night does not suffice for the trade[s] aforesaid.”
+Millers and brewers could work day and night, and it was permitted to all
+farriers (but not to locksmiths and cutlers), to goldsmiths, lamp-makers,
+brass-wire drawers, to cast, if need be, during the night, inasmuch as
+the process sometimes lasted a day or a week. The restriction upon night
+work was ineffective if the work were for the household of the King, the
+Queen, the Princes of the blood, the Bishop of Paris, and other great
+Lords.
+
+The Church’s observance of Sundays and fast-days (holy days) caused among
+the gilds much cessation from work—_chômage_. The eve of Sunday and
+important holy days, work was stopped at _Nones_ or _Compline_. On Sunday
+the baths were not heated, on Sunday the bakers did not make bread, and
+kept, besides, twenty-six fast-days and the day of their Patron Saint.
+The goldsmiths, the haberdashers, the felt-hat makers, took turns within
+the gild in keeping their shops open on Sunday. The _barilliers_ and
+the armorers worked without restriction on the ground that their work
+was vitally important to noblemen. A saddler could repair a shield or a
+harness on Sunday, and rose-chaplets could be made at any time “during
+the season of roses.”
+
+Inasmuch as the policy of the gilds proscribed the action of free
+competition, it was necessary for them, in order to sustain their
+reputation, to provide in some way, that the products should be exactly
+what they pretended to be. To this end they legislated carefully as to
+the quantity and quality of raw material to be used, and provided for
+supervision through the stages of manufacture to the sale of the finished
+product. The _cervoise_ (a drink somewhat resembling ale) should have no
+constituents save grain and water. The beater of metal-leaves must have
+a certain alloy of gold in his silver leaves. The bead-makers must not
+string beads which are not perfectly rounded. The haberdashers complain
+of the appearance of “several pieces of bad work to the damage of all the
+common weal, every day, by reason of the lack of proper restriction.”
+At Amiens,[9] the locksmiths were forbidden, for fear of thievery, to
+make a key unless the lock was produced, and the butchers to _souffler
+la viande_, to mix tallow in the lard, to sell dog, cat or horse flesh.
+In Paris, boxes whose locks were made with ‘hinges’ were summarily
+burned, and fines were incurred for putting old locks on new furniture
+and new locks on old furniture. Trimmings of silver were forbidden on
+bone knife-handles for fear the makers should sell them for ivory, and
+knife-handles must not be covered with silk, brass- or pewter-wire,
+lead or iron, because inside, they were only deal, and might deceive an
+ignorant buyer. Hemp and flax must not be used in the same rope.[10] If a
+tailor spoilt a valuable piece of cloth by bad cutting, and the _gardes_
+ascertained it, he had to make restitution to the client, and pay a fine,
+3 _sous_ to the king and 2 _sous_ to the _confrérie_. If an artisan
+did the spoiling, he paid the master, and worked for one day, without
+pay, for the _confrérie_.[11] Chandlers seem to have been especially
+open to temptation. Too heavy a weight of wick is expressly regulated
+against in the provision that four pounds of tallow should carry only a
+quarter-pound of wick. Wax tapers must not be adulterated with tallow.
+
+Gilds in danger of usurping each other’s business were jealous of
+privileges. A tailor must not mend old clothes, nor a rag-man make new
+clothes. A curious controversy arose from the fact that clothes restored
+by the old-clothes dealers were frequently mistaken for new. It was
+finally decided that this latter gild must not press, fold and hang old
+garments for fear of this deception.
+
+The visits of the _gardes_ were at unexpected times, and almost all the
+gilds require their inspection of saleable articles “poer sauvoir se il i
+a nulles mesprantures.” The _gardes_ of the weavers carried an iron rule
+on which was marked the length of various kinds of cloth, as it was fixed
+by law. Goods which did not comply with the statutes were confiscated,
+burned or given to the poor, while the culprit paid a fine. To make
+sure that no bad product elude the vigilance of the guards, further
+regulations as to the place of manufacture appear. A wool-weaver could
+not have two shops on either side of the street, though we have seen how
+liberal he might be as to the number of looms. An armorer was not to get
+anything necessary for his trade made outside the shop, therefore he was
+forbidden to carry armor through the streets unless he were poor and
+lived in an out-of-the-way quarter where sales would be difficult. The
+tailor must not cut his cloth except at a window of the first floor of
+his shop.
+
+Fines ranging from three to ten _sous_ were the natural consequence of
+faulty production. The corrupt gold-beater paid 3 _sous_, the jewellers,
+who dared use colored glass, 10 _sous_, the dealers in silk-stuffs
+paid 8 _sous_, of which 5 went to the King, 2 to the Master, and 1
+to the _Confrérie_. In 1312, dealers in spices who purveyed _fausse
+merchandise_ were condemned to lose their commodities, and to pay,
+besides, 60 _sous_: “40 to us (i.e. the King, or to the lord of the place
+where justice is done), and 20 _sous_ to the master of the gild at or
+near the place where the offence is committed”—to pay the expenses of the
+gild. As a further guard against adulterated products, most of the gilds
+had a mark or a seal which carried a guarantee of quality commensurate
+with the reputation of the gild.
+
+Before goods could be sold, those who had the right to weighing and
+measuring apparatus in their own houses, must have these sealed by the
+measurers and gaugers’ gild. Others must use the scale of the king or his
+vassal. Most goods were sold on Friday and Saturday, when the merchants
+shut up shop and went to the _Halles_ where markets were held. As a rule,
+the gilds were opposed to the hawking of their goods—_col-portage_; they
+preferred the more regular custom of the stalls of the market. Here, too,
+they succeeded in legalizing their privileges against foreigners. For
+example, the bakers succeeded in preventing the sale of all ‘foreign’
+bread in the city except on Saturdays. The municipality also watched
+after its own interests in the interests of the crafts. Merchants were
+forbidden to leave the city before the opening of the Fairs, and sales
+must be transacted only in the square of the _Halles_ after a stroke
+from the great bell. The craft organizations themselves were much afraid
+of possible monopolies. The weavers, dyers and fullers are expressly
+forbidden to enter into combinations to fix a price on goods or a
+monopoly on materials “so as to prevent the people of the gild from
+having work according to their means.” The retailers of produce were
+forbidden to arrange for commodities in advance. “Retailers ought not to
+buy in advance of any merchant carriage-loads or consignments of eggs and
+cheeses, deliverable at his next trip, or after any delay whatsoever”;
+such transactions are wrong because they offer too much uncertainty and
+too many frauds in the conditions of delivery. The mediaeval man feared
+‘corners,’ for he felt “the rich will sell back everything, as dear as it
+pleases them to do.”
+
+In the market “good form” must be observed between members of the same
+gild. One member must not intrude before a sale is consummated. “If
+anyone is in front of the stall or window of a cook to buy or bargain
+with the said cook, and if any of the other cooks call him before he has
+left the stall or window of his own will,” the fine will be 5 _sous_.
+
+For the privileges implied in the gild structure, the feudal authorities
+demanded a return in the form of taxes. The gild-masters bore the
+burden not only of the civil taxes which all citizens shared, such as
+the _taille_, the _conduits_ and _péages_ (tolls), but also special
+commercial taxes such as the _hauban_, the _tonlieu_, and the _coutume_.
+
+The _hauban_, according to _Livre des Métiers_, Section I, Art. 7, “is
+the name appropriate to a tax assessed from ancient times, by which it
+was established that whoever should be a payer of _hauban_ would have
+more freedom and less taxes to pay for his right of trade and commerce.”
+It was a sort of agreement offering the advantage of combining in one
+payment a large number of daily dues. For this privilege the bakers owed
+6 _sous_, the retailers of bread and salt, 3 _sous_, the butchers 6
+_sous_, the fishermen, purse-makers and curriers 3 _sous_, the glovers 3
+_sous_, 8 _deniers_, and the old-clothes men 6 _sous_ and 8 _deniers_.
+
+The _tonlieu_, also called the tax of buying and selling, was the real
+tax on trade. At every sale, the merchant and the customer owed a small
+per cent. of the purchase to the city or lord who controlled the market.
+About twenty chapters of Part II in the _Livre des Métiers_ are devoted
+to an elaborate schedule of this tax which varied according as the
+sale was at shop, fair or market. In general, M. Lespinasse estimates,
+the _tonlieu_ equalled 4 _deniers_ per wagon-load, 2 per cart-load, 1
+_denier_ for beast-of-burden’s load, and 1 obole for a man’s load.
+
+The _coutume_ was very irregularly shared; it usually fell due at several
+times through the year. So the bakers owed 6 _deniers_ at Christmas,
+22 at Easter, and 5 at St. John’s Day, and a _tonlieu_ of 1½ _deniers_
+in bread or money per week. The retailers of produce also owed these
+taxes if they dealt in bread. At any earlier period, the _coutume_ was
+always paid ‘in nature,’ i.e. in the product itself. Accordingly, the
+hay-merchants owed a box of new hay every time the King entered the city.
+The wooden-utensils makers furnished seven casks, two feet long, towards
+the up-keep of the King’s cellars, and for this service they were excused
+from the watch. The farriers owed at first the _fers du Roi_; i.e. they
+had to keep the saddle-horses of the court well shod. But later this
+function was compounded in terms of money, due to the royal maréchal in
+consideration of which he had the horses shod.
+
+Another feudal obligation irksome to some of the gilds was the personal
+“duty of the watch”—the _guet_. As the masters of the gilds were alone
+responsible for this important service, it was also called the _guet
+de métiers_. Each gild had its turn about every three weeks, when the
+masters must go at nightfall to the Châtelet and answer the roll. The
+watch then lasted from curfew till the next sunrise. Usually the gilds
+which served the aristocracy most directly were exempt from this duty.
+Among these were the goldsmiths, _barilliers_, armorers, painters,
+sculptors, bow-makers, flower- and plumed-hat makers, and haberdashers.
+How irksome this duty had become may be inferred from two statutes in the
+_Livre des Métiers_. The garment-cutters say:
+
+“The _prud’hommes_ of the said gild beg that they be relieved from (the
+duty of) the watch, if it please the King, on account of the fine clothes
+which they have to make and keep over night which belong to gentlemen,
+and on account of the large number of strange workmen whom they could not
+entirely trust to take care of things, and because they have to cut and
+sew clothes for gentlemen both day and night in view of the gentlemen and
+strangers going away at once, and because they have to return the garment
+which they make in the evening, on the morning of the next day.”
+
+The old-clothes dealers have two intimate and vivid articles. Art. 33:
+“No one who is 60 years old, nor those whose wives are with child, so
+long as they be ill, and no one who has been bled, if he has not been
+summoned before he had himself bled, and no one who is going out of the
+city, if he has not been summoned before he goes out, need to share the
+watch. But they must inform him who has charge of the watch for the King,
+by means of their men or their neighbors.”
+
+Art. 34: “And the _prud’hommes_ of the gild say that they are grieved
+that, for 10 years back, those who have charge of the guard for the King,
+have not been willing to receive the excuse from the above-mentioned
+service from their neighbors and their workmen, but make come their wives
+themselves, either fair or ugly, either young or old, or feeble or fat,
+to convey the excuse to the lord, a thing which is most ugly and most
+grievous—that a woman should stay and sit at the Châtelet from curfew so
+long as the watch is out, and then go away with her son or her daughter,
+or without either of them, through strange streets to her home, and
+through this message-bearing wrong, sin, yea, villainy has been done.”
+
+_Confrérie_ is a word not very widely used in the _Livre_. Seventeen of
+the gilds display this organism. It served to systematize the religious
+impulses of the gild-men’s lives and also to control the benevolent
+activities of the older structure. The tablet-makers require all salaried
+workers to join the _Confrérie_, and at a death in the gild, a man or
+woman from each workshop must follow the corpse or pay a fine of ½ pound
+of wax. The _confrérie_ usually centered its activity in a church or
+chapel in the district where most of the members lived. The _confrérie_
+of the furriers and the upholsterers shared _l’Église des Innocents_;
+the masons attended the _Chapelle de St. Bleive_; the bakers _St. Pierre
+aux Liens_, and the wine-merchants and brass-shield makers St. Léonard’s
+chapel of church _St. Merri_. The confraternity usually put itself under
+the protection of a particular saint. The goldsmiths chose _St. Éloi_,
+and the confraternity had a seal inscribed “Sigillum confratrie sancti
+Elegii auri fabrorum.”
+
+The _confrérie’s_ resources were usually derived from initiation fees,
+subscriptions and legacies from members, and a share of the fines
+collected in the gild. The organization also derived benefits from
+holding real estate. It could transact business and fall in debt. The
+_confrérie_ of the wool-weavers owing 600 pounds, put a tax of 12
+_sous_ on every piece of cloth manufactured in Paris. A statute of the
+plasterers reads: “If he finds that the proportion is not good, the
+plasterer shall pay five _sous_ as a fine: to the Chappelle Bleive
+aforesaid, two _sous_, to the master who guards the gild, two _sous_, and
+to the one who has measured the plaster 12 _deniers_.” When a plasterer
+took an apprentice for less than six years, he paid 20 _sous_ to the
+Chapelle.
+
+Part of the funds acquired by the _confrérie_ were used for common
+expenses, and part for benevolent work. For every piece of cloth sold
+the wool-merchants were supposed to give a _denier_ to buy grain for
+the poor. The rich confraternity of the goldsmiths gave every Easter
+a dinner to the poor of the Hôtel Dieu, while the cooks set aside a
+third of their fines to maintain “les pouvres vieilles gens du mestier
+qui seront decheuz par fait de marchandise ou de vieillece.” In 1319
+the vair-furriers formed an association[12] with an initiation fee of
+10 _sous_ (8 fr. .40) and 6 _deniers_ for the secretary, and a weekly
+subscription of one _denier_, the funds of which were to aid members in
+case of sickness or infirmity at the rate of 3 _sous_ per week during
+illness, and 6 _sous_ in convalescence. The curriers mention the use of
+funds from “la boîte” to support the orphans of the gild or children of
+poverty-stricken masters.
+
+At the first appearance of the _confrérie_, the Church opposed it,
+suspecting in its secrecy, antagonism or some outcroppings of pagan
+ritualism.[13] Later, however, both Church and _confrérie_ profited by a
+close relationship. The monastery of St. Trond, in return for the right
+to fall heir to the properties of members of the shearmen and fuller’s
+_confrérie_ who died without wife or child, maintained a hospital for
+the care of its sick, and conducted funerals, while the sacristan and a
+priest arbitrated on the occasion of disputes within the gild.
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+Conclusion. The trade-gild régime was a defensive one against the
+confused powers of feudalism and the conflicting activities of
+competition. It protected the apprentice against his own folly and his
+master; it protected the artisan against diminution in the pay-rate,
+illegal dismissal, and the usurpation of other trades on his field.
+It guarded the master from insubordination, idleness, bad measure and
+adulteration, and by the limitation of the number of workmen assured the
+sale of his goods.
+
+Some of the principles implied in the organization we may agree with M.
+Lespinasse[14] are “relatively true,” such as the protection of infant
+industry, guarantee of work and property, examinations and probations
+to make certain the skill of the candidates; prohibition of combination
+of several professions to prevent the abusive use of them; supervision
+of manufacture to assure the soundness of the product; an industrial
+jurisdiction from apprenticeship to mastery, lack of division in a craft
+such as to train in time a fully equipped workman and a future master;
+suppression of any parasitic intermediary between producer and consumer;
+work in common and in the public eyes, and solidarity of the industrial
+family.
+
+On the other hand, there are shadows in the picture, and among them we
+may distinguish—the immoderate extension of term of apprenticeship,
+difficulties set in the way of becoming a master; arbitrary fiscal
+measures and dues; meticulous regulation and too frequent cessation from
+work; a routine transmission of methods of manufacture; maintenance of
+a fixed price, and prohibitions of combinations such as would encourage
+inventions and stimulate a wider economic unit.
+
+We have studied a particularly agreeable phase of gild growth. Far off
+still is the bad opposition between employee and employed, though the
+pessimist may see the seeds of the present in this past. Though one
+hesitates to call with M. Fagniez the spirit of the gilds “fundamentally
+Christian,” he is glad to recognize such alertness of intelligence, such
+elaborate industrial devices and purposes, such thoughtful humanitarian
+interests, so complex a system of checks and balances in our supposedly
+naïve mediaeval precursors.
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+[1] Throughout this paper I shall translate the French word métier by the
+more usual word _gild_ when it refers to the organization and not the
+craft.
+
+[2] Fagniez: Documents rélatifs à l’Histoire de l’Industrie, etc. Intro.
+
+[3] Levasseur: _Hist. des classes ouv._ p. 251.
+
+[4] For a list of these gilds with their ancient French names and their
+modern English equivalents, see _Appendix_.
+
+[5] Fagniez: Études sur l’industrie à Paris, p. 67.
+
+[6] Réglemens sur les arts et les mét. ed. Depping, p. 366.
+
+[7] “Coutumes de Beauvaisis.” Beaumanoir, éd. Beugnot; p. 429.
+
+[8] It has been estimated that four _sous_ of Paris of this period are
+equivalent to one franc at present.
+
+[9] Comm. d’Amiens, Doc. inédits, p. 387, p. 370.
+
+[10] Lev.: Hist. des classes ouv., vol. I, page 116.
+
+[11] Ordonnances touchant les mét., 1312. Art. 5.
+
+[12] Fagniez: “Études sur l’industrie,” p. 290. Text in _Doc. rélatifs_,
+No. 19.
+
+[13] M. Lespinasse quotes the text of a decree against _confrérie_ from a
+Council at Rouen, 1189.
+
+[14] _Liv. des Mét._ Avant Propos par M. Lespinasse, p. xiv.
+
+
+
+
+APPENDIX.
+
+
+  Archiers = bow-makers.
+
+  Barilliers = case-makers.
+
+  Batéeurs d’or = gold-beaters.
+
+  Batéeurs d’éstain = pewter-beaters.
+
+  Batéeurs d’or en feuilles = gold-beaters.
+
+  Batéeurs d’archal = brass-beaters.
+
+  Baudraiers = curriers of shoe-leather.
+
+  Blatiers = corn-merchants.
+
+  Blasenniers = saddle-fixtures.
+
+  Boîtiers = locksmiths.
+
+  Boucliers de fer = iron-shield-makers.
+
+  Boucliers d’archal = brass-shield makers.
+
+  Bourreliers = harness-makers.
+
+  Boursiers = purse-makers.
+
+  Boutonniers = button-makers.
+
+  Brachiers = breeches-makers.
+
+  Cavesonniers = slipper-makers.
+
+  Cavetiers = cobblers.
+
+  Cervoisiers = ale-brewers.
+
+  Chandliers de sieu = tallow-chandlers.
+
+  Chanevaceriers = hemp-cloth-makers.
+
+  Chapeliers de fleurs = flower-hatters.
+
+  Chapeliers de coton = cap-makers.
+
+  Chapeliers de paon = plumed hatters.
+
+  Chapeliers de feutre = felt-hatters.
+
+  Chapuiséeurs = saddle-bow makers.
+
+  Charpentiers = carpenters.
+
+  Chauciers = hose-makers.
+
+  Couréeurs = belt-makers.
+
+  Cordiers = rope-makers.
+
+  Corduaniers = shoe-makers.
+
+  Couteliers = cutlers.
+
+  Couteliers serves = knife-blade-makers.
+
+  Crespiniers = head-dress-makers.
+
+  Crieurs = criers.
+
+  Cristâliers = jewellers.
+
+  Cuisiniers = cooks.
+
+  Cyrugiens = barbers.
+
+  Déeciers = playing dice-makers.
+
+  Drapiers = woollen-weavers.
+
+  Escueliers = pottery-sellers.
+
+  Espinguiers = pin-makers.
+
+  Estuvéeurs = bath proprietors.
+
+  Faiseurs de clous = nail-makers.
+
+  Fainiers = hay merchants.
+
+  Fermailleurs = clasp and buckle-makers.
+
+  Fripiers = old-clothes men.
+
+  Feseresses de chap d’orfois = modiste.
+
+  Fourreurs de chapeliers = fur-hatters.
+
+  Fevres = iron-workers.
+
+  Fileresses de soie = spinners of coarse silk.
+
+  Fileresses de soie à petits fuseaux = spinners of fine silk.
+
+  Fondeurs = smelters.
+
+  Foulons = fullers.
+
+  Fourbéeurs = sword-cutlers.
+
+  Gantiers = glovers.
+
+  Gueiniers = sheath-makers.
+
+  Haubergiers = coats-of-mail-makers.
+
+  Huiliers = oil-makers.
+
+  Jaugéeurs = gaugers.
+
+  Laciers = braid-makers.
+
+  Lampiers = lamp-makers.
+
+  Lanterniers = lantern-makers.
+
+  Liniers = linen merchants.
+
+  Lormiers = reins-makers.
+
+  Maçons = masons.
+
+  Marchante chanvre = hemp + thread sellers.
+
+  Maréchaux = iron-farriers.
+
+  Merciers = haberdashers.
+
+  Mesuréeurs = measurers.
+
+  Meuniers = millers.
+
+  Orfèvres = goldsmiths.
+
+  Ouv. de menues œuvres d’éstain = pewterers.
+
+  Ouv. de tissus de soie = workers in silk-stuffs.
+
+  Ouv. de drap de soie = silk-cloth.
+
+  Peintres + imagiers = painters and illuminators.
+
+  Paternostriers d’os = bone-bead makers.
+
+  Paternostriers de corail = coral-bead makers.
+
+  Paternostriers d’ambre = amber-bead makers.
+
+  Paternostriers + faiseurs de boucles = brooch and bead-makers.
+
+  Pechéeurs = fishermen.
+
+  Poisonniers d’eau douce = fresh-water-fish-merchants.
+
+  Poisonniers de mer = salt-water-fish-merchants.
+
+  Potiers de terres = potters.
+
+  Potiers d’éstain = pewterers.
+
+  Poulailliers = poulterers.
+
+  Regrattiers de pain de sel = retailers of salt and bread.
+
+  Regrattiers de fruits = green-grocers.
+
+  Selliers = saddlers.
+
+  Serruriers = locksmiths.
+
+  Tabletiers = tablet-makers.
+
+  Tapiciers de tapiz sarrasinois = Oriental carpet-makers.
+
+  Tapiciers de tapiz nostrés = carpet-makers.
+
+  Taverniers = wine-shop-keepers.
+
+  Tisserands de queuvrechiers = kerchief-makers.
+
+  Trefilliers de fer = iron-wire-drawers.
+
+  Trefilliers d’archal = brass-wire-drawers.
+
+  Ymagiers = painters.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY.
+
+
+1. Réglemens sur les Arts et Métiers de Paris, Redigés au XIII_ᵉ_ siècle
+et connus sous le nom du Livre des Métiers d’Étienne Boileau; Publiés
+pour la première fois en entier ... avec des notes et une Introduction,
+par G. B. Depping à Paris. De l’imprimerie de Crapelet, 1837, pp. xxxvi +
+474. [Collection de Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France].
+
+2. Le _Livre des Métiers_ d’Étienne Boileau, publié par René de
+Lespinasse et Francois Bonnardot. [Histoire Générale de Paris—Les Métiers
+et les corporations de la Ville de Paris, XIII_ᵉ_ siècle, pp. cliv + 420.
+Paris, Imprimerie Nationale, 1879].
+
+
+_References_:
+
+_Blanqui_, Jêrome-Adolphe: History of Political Economy in Europe. Trans.
+from 4th Fr. Ed. by Emily J. Leonard, pp. xxxviii + 590. 1880.
+
+_Brentano_, Luigi: Essay on the History and Development of Gilds: Early
+English Text Society: Vol. 40.
+
+_Dendy_, F. W., & Boyle, J. R., editors, Extracts from the Records of
+the Merchant Adventurers of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Vol. I, pp. lii + 315.
+Surtees Society Publ. xviii, 1895.
+
+_Fagniez_, Gustave: Documents rélatifs à l’Histoire de l’industrie et du
+Commerce en France. Vol. I, with an Introduction. pp. lxiv + 349. Paris,
+Alph. Picard et Fils. 1898.
+
+_Fagniez_, Gustave: Études sur l’industrie et la Ind. à Paris aux XIII_ᵉ_
++ XIV_ᵉ_ siècle. pp. x + 422. Paris, F. Vieweg. 1877.
+
+_Felibren_, D. Michel: Histoire de la Ville de Paris, 5 vols. in folio.
+Paris, 1725.
+
+_Forrest_, J. Dorsey: “The Development of Western Civilization.” pp. ix +
+406. U. of C. Press. 1907.
+
+_Gross_, Charles: The Gild Merchant. Vol. I, pp. xxii + 332. Vol. II, pp.
+xi + 447. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1890.
+
+_Labarte_, Jules: Histoire des Arts ind. au moyen âge et à l’epoque de la
+Renaissance, 2_ᵉ_ Ed. Paris, 1873. 3 vols.
+
+_Lambert_, Rev. J. M.: “Two Thousand Years of Gild Life,” etc., etc. pp.
+xi + 414. Hull, 1891.
+
+_Levasseur_, Emile: Histoire des Classes ouvrières de l’industrie en
+France avant 1789. 2_ᵉ_ Ed. Paris, 1900. Vol. I, pp. lxxxviii + 715.
+
+_Luchaire_, Achille: Social France at the Time of Ph. Auguste, trans. by
+E. B. Krehbiel. pp. viii + 441. New York, 1912.
+
+_Palgrave_, Sir R. H. J., ed., Dictionary of Political Economy. 3 vols.
+Macmillan & Co. London, 1910.
+
+_Pigeonneau_: Histoire du Commerce de la France. 2_ᵉ_ Ed. pp. vii + 468
+(Vol. I). Paris, Librairie Léopold Cerf. 1885-89.
+
+_Seligman_, E. R. A.: Two Chapters on the Mediaeval Guilds of England.
+Publ. of Am. Econ. Associ. Vol. II, No. 5. pp. 389-493, Nov., 1887.
+
+_Toulmin Smith_: Ed. English Gilds: The Original Ordinances of more than
+100 Gilds. E. E. T. S. Vol. 40.
+
+                                                            F. B. MILLETT.
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78623 ***
diff --git a/78623-h/78623-h.htm b/78623-h/78623-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..87ea488
--- /dev/null
+++ b/78623-h/78623-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,1433 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html lang="en">
+<head>
+    <meta charset="UTF-8">
+    <title>
+      Craft-Gilds of the Thirteenth Century in Paris | Project Gutenberg
+    </title>
+    <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover">
+    <style>
+
+a {
+    text-decoration: none;
+}
+
+body {
+    margin-left: 10%;
+    margin-right: 10%;
+}
+
+h1,h2 {
+    text-align: center;
+    clear: both;
+}
+
+h2.nobreak {
+    page-break-before: avoid;
+}
+
+hr.chap {
+    margin-top: 2em;
+    margin-bottom: 2em;
+    clear: both;
+    width: 65%;
+    margin-left: 17.5%;
+    margin-right: 17.5%;
+}
+
+div.chapter {
+    page-break-before: always;
+}
+
+ul {
+    list-style-type: none;
+}
+
+li {
+    margin-top: .5em;
+    padding-left: 2em;
+    text-indent: -2em;
+}
+
+p {
+    margin-top: 0.5em;
+    text-align: justify;
+    margin-bottom: 0.5em;
+    text-indent: 1em;
+}
+
+.footnotes {
+    margin-top: 1em;
+    border: dashed 1px;
+}
+
+.footnote {
+    margin-left: 10%;
+    margin-right: 10%;
+    font-size: 0.9em;
+}
+
+.footnote .label {
+    position: absolute;
+    right: 84%;
+    text-align: right;
+}
+
+.fnanchor {
+    vertical-align: super;
+    font-size: .8em;
+    text-decoration: none;
+}
+
+.hanging {
+    padding-left: 4em;
+    text-indent: -4em;
+}
+
+.larger {
+    font-size: 150%;
+}
+
+.mt2 {
+    margin-top: 2em;
+}
+
+.noindent {
+    text-indent: 0;
+}
+
+.pagenum {
+    position: absolute;
+    right: 4%;
+    font-size: smaller;
+    text-align: right;
+    font-style: normal;
+}
+
+.right {
+    text-align: right;
+}
+
+.smaller {
+    font-size: 80%;
+}
+
+.smcap {
+    font-variant: small-caps;
+    font-style: normal;
+}
+
+.allsmcap {
+    font-variant: small-caps;
+    font-style: normal;
+    text-transform: lowercase;
+}
+
+.titlepage {
+    text-align: center;
+    margin-top: 3em;
+    text-indent: 0;
+}
+
+.transnote {
+    background-color: #E6E6FA;
+    color: black;
+    text-align: center;
+    font-size: smaller;
+    padding: 0.5em;
+    margin-bottom: 5em;
+}
+
+.x-ebookmaker img {
+    max-width: 100%;
+    width: auto;
+    height: auto;
+}
+    </style>
+  </head>
+
+<body>
+<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78623 ***</div>
+
+
+<div class="transnote">
+
+<p>Transcriber’s Note: Although the title page of this book reads “Craft-guilds
+of the thirteenth century in Paris”, the text consistently uses the spelling
+“gild”.</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<p class="titlepage">BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF HISTORY AND<br>
+POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE IN QUEEN’S<br>
+UNIVERSITY, KINGSTON, ONTARIO, CANADA.</p>
+
+<p class="titlepage">NO. 17, OCTOBER, 1915.</p>
+
+<p class="titlepage larger">CRAFT-GUILDS OF THE<br>
+THIRTEENTH CENTURY IN PARIS</p>
+
+<p class="titlepage"><span class="smaller">BY</span><br>
+F. B. MILLETT.</p>
+
+<p class="titlepage smaller"><i>The Jackson Press, Kingston</i></p>
+
+<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop">
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2 class="nobreak" id="BULLETIN"><span class="smaller">BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF HISTORY AND
+POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCE IN QUEEN’S
+UNIVERSITY, KINGSTON, ONTARIO, CANADA.</span></h2>
+
+</div>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 1, The Colonial Policy of Chatham, by W. L. Grant.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 2, Canada and the Most Favored Nation Treaties, by
+O. D. Skelton.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 3, The Status of Women in New England and New France,
+by James Douglas.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 4, Sir Charles Bagot: An Incident in Canadian Parliamentary
+History, by J. L. Morison.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 5, Canadian Bank Inspection, by W. W. Swanson.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 6, Should Canadian Cities Adopt Commission Government,
+by William Bennett Munro.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 7, An Early Canadian Impeachment, by D. A. McArthur.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 8, A Puritan at the Court of Louis XIV, by W. L. Grant.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 9, British Supremacy and Canadian Autonomy: An Examination
+of Early Victorian Opinion Concerning
+Canadian Self-government, by J. L. Morison.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 10, The Problem of Agricultural Credit in Canada, by
+H. Michell.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 11, St. Alban in History and Legend: A Critical Examination;
+The King and His Councillors: Prolegomena to
+a History of the House of Lords, by L. F. Rushbrook
+Williams.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 12, Life of the Settler in Western Canada Before the War
+of 1812, by Adam Shortt.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 13, The Grange in Canada, by H. Michell.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 14, The Financial Power of the Empire, by W. W. Swanson.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 15, Modern British Foreign Policy, by J. L. Morison.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 16, Federal Finance, by O. D. Skelton.</b></p>
+
+<p class="hanging"><b>No. 17, Craft-Gilds of the Thirteenth Century in Paris, by F.
+B. Millett.</b></p>
+
+<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop">
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[1]</span></p>
+
+<h1>CRAFT-GILDS OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY IN PARIS.</h1>
+
+</div>
+
+<p>The gild as it appears in Paris in the 13th century, M.
+Lespinasse in his Introduction to Étienne Boileau’s <i>Livre
+des Métiers</i>, defines as “a combination of individuals having
+the right to carry on an industrial profession, composed of
+masters, <i>valets</i>, and apprentices, and bound by oath to observe
+the prescribed regulations, and to respect the authority of the
+Jurés in their supervisory functions.” The gilds in documents
+of the time are called somewhat loosely <i>corporations</i>, <i>corps de
+métier</i>, <i>métier</i>, <i>commun du métier</i>, <i>ghilde</i>, and less correctly
+<i>charité</i> or <i>confrérie</i>.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> The gild was a fortress to which the
+workman rallied and from which he beat off assailants in the
+form of feudal lords or foreign trade competitors. Its primary
+function was to safeguard the rights of labor, at any period
+none too stable, and in the complicated social organization of
+the later Middle Ages, decidedly precarious. Privileges had
+to be fought for and wrested from the overlord of the community,
+be he king or noble, and a definite regulation, though
+still in its prescriptions onerous, was preferable to a haphazard
+system of ‘taxation,’ subject only to the sanity or rapacity of
+count, king or bishop. Foreign laborers and merchants, too,
+the narrow economic vision of the period pointed out as hostile
+to the well-being of the city-gild, and so exclusion by legislation
+is an important article in its “foreign policy.” Against
+enemies within their own ranks a sharp guard had to be maintained;
+ignorant practitioners or a superfluity of apprentices
+might sadly damage the gild’s reputation for work which was
+“good and loyal.” The organization of the 13th century gild
+seems to find its motives in the desire to establish a definite
+and firm control over the <i>métier</i>, and to establish, so far as
+custom and law would sanction it, a monopoly over the commodities
+produced.</p>
+
+<p>The question of the political significance of the gild may
+be set aside at the start. It has been a difference of opinion
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[2]</span>which came first, the gild or the commune, and whether there
+was a causal relationship between the two. The fact is that
+most of the gilds—as organizations—had no political share in
+such activities as elections. The gild was not the cause of the
+commune; the commune did not originate the gild. M. Fagniez&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>
+has said “Le mouvement communal ne fut pour rien dans cette
+émancipation de la classe ouvrière; elle était terminée quand il
+commença.” It is interesting to note, however, the prominence
+which, under the gild régime, certain <i>bourgeois</i> and tradesmen
+attain. For example, the provost of the watermen of Paris
+came to rival in power the king’s provost of Paris.</p>
+
+<p>It is outside the province of this paper to discuss the somewhat
+vexed question of the origin of the gild. Various theories
+have been vigorously championed, and a mere mention of them
+with a few facts as to the early appearance of the gilds will
+suffice. One theory maintains a survival from the Roman <i>College</i>,
+another as an analogue to the Germanic <i>guild</i>, and the
+third as an organization under the direction of the feudal lord.
+It is curious to note how in 1725 M. Félibién in his “Histoire de
+la Ville de Paris,” misinterpreted the origin of the <i>Livre des
+Métiers</i> on the basis of this latter theory, attributing too much
+of the slow development of an <i>organism</i> to the shaping hand of
+Boileau. He says: “E. B. <i>rangea</i> tous les marchands et les
+artisans en differens corps de communautez, sous le titre de
+confrairies. Ce fut le premier <i>qui leur dressa</i> des Statuts,
+qu’il fit ensuite approuver dans une assemblée des principaux
+bourgeois de Paris. Les prévosts successeurs de Boileau
+adjoustèrent de nouveaux réglemens aux premiers, et il en fut
+fait en recueil.”... The prevalent theory of the gilds’ origin
+is that they were born spontaneously from the needs of the
+people, that they were a natural line of development for youthful
+industry, in self-protection, to take.</p>
+
+<p>Charters or privileges claimed by the gilds date from the
+11th century, though they are most abundant in the 13th. The
+most ancient charter published in the <i>Recueil des Ordonnances</i>
+is that of the chandlers of Paris, dated 1061. This document,
+however, is now supposed to have been forged in the 15th century.
+From 1121 dates the first charter of the <i>marchands de
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[3]</span>l’eau de Paris</i>. In 1160, Louis the VII gave to Thèce, wife of
+Yrves Lacohe, and her heirs, the ‘mastery’ of five gilds which
+dealt with leathers, the tanners, the curriers, the shoe-makers,
+the leather-dressers, and the purse-makers. In 1162 come new
+privileges granted in regulation of the bakers. In 1183 Philip
+Augustus rented <i>a cens</i> four houses which he had confiscated
+from the Jews, to the drapers’ gild. A lord in 1219 sold the
+confrérie of cloth-merchants a house, and gave them the leases
+of several adjoining houses.</p>
+
+<p>The book which is the object of this study—the <i>Livre des
+Métiers</i>, owes its origin to a capable official of Louis IX,
+Étienne Boileau. He was appointed prévôt of Paris about
+1260.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> This official had the rank of the first bailiff of France.
+His ‘office’ was the Châtelet, where he judged in person the
+greater part of the civil and criminal cases in Paris and the
+<i>vicomté</i>; he was judge of appeal from the feudal nobles and
+ecclesiastics who still had fiefs in Paris. He had charge of the
+military service, of the policing, the finance and ‘justice’ of
+Paris and its suburbs. This official, or the holder of this office,
+“who administered with firmness and loyalty,” wished to correct
+the faults incident to the jurisdiction over the gilds, by
+establishing in writing the ‘constitution’ of each gild. The
+masters of the gilds accordingly presented their regulations,
+and the result is a register of the laws and customs of 101
+craft-gilds of Paris.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> Some of the privileges or implied immunities
+pretend exceeding antiquity. The stone-cutters claim
+immunity from the duty of the watch from the time of Charles
+Martel. Upholsterers cite privileges granted by Louis the VII,
+and the bakers claim from Philip Augustus the right to exclude
+‘foreign’ bakers (i.e. bakers from outside Paris), from the
+markets except on Saturdays. What we have then in this invaluable
+<i>Livre</i> is a cross-section of the commercial and industrial
+life of Paris in the third quarter of the 13th century. A
+study of this manuscript will show a vivid and complete picture
+of the working class, and, by implication, of the upper nobility’s
+commercial habits.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[4]</span></p>
+
+<p>The gilds were composed of three grades of individuals:
+apprentices, <i>valets</i>, and masters. The term <i>ouvrier</i> was applied
+in general to all the divisions, even more loosely than our
+term <i>workman</i>.</p>
+
+<p>The apprentice, though considered as a member of the
+gild, was not of the corporation until his apprenticeship was
+over. The term was begun by a contract between master and
+aspirant. Usually this contract was oral, because the writing
+of a document was too expensive a process. At any rate, it
+was always a mutual engagement, sworn to, before the Jurés,
+an engagement which imposed on both parties mutual duties
+which neither should attempt to evade. A regulation concerning
+the agreement runs as follows: “The master who takes
+an apprentice should summon to the ceremony of the contract
+two masters and two <i>valets</i>, to hear the agreement made between
+master and apprentice, and it is fitting that the <i>master
+who guards the gild</i> should be called also.” The Jurés before
+authorizing the contract, were supposed to make careful inquiries
+as to the ability and the financial position of the master.</p>
+
+<p>About forty of the gilds were allowed to have as many
+apprentices as they liked. Among these were the corn-dealers,
+the gold-beaters, the ale-brewers, green-grocers, farriers,
+drawers of iron wire, millers, shoe-makers and the <i>barilliers</i>.
+Usually, however, the number was limited to one or two. The
+mercers, the fullers, weavers of silk-stuffs, knife-handle and
+blade makers were allowed to have two, while the rope-makers,
+pewterers, precious stone dealers, braid-makers, drapers, goldsmiths,
+and shield-makers contented themselves with one.
+The motives for such limitation were at least <i>double</i>: the altruistic
+reason was that the master should not have too many to
+teach well; the self-protective reason was that the gild should
+at no time be swamped in competition by too many (prospective)
+masters.</p>
+
+<p>The term of apprenticeship was also most scrupulously
+fixed. The conditions are usually a definite term without payment
+of fee or a term gradually lessened according to the increase
+in the size of the fee. The haberdashers and the pewterers
+could fix the duration of apprenticeship at will; other
+terms vary from 3 to 8, to 10-12 years, with fees varying from
+20 Parisian <i>sous</i> (5 fr.) to 100 Parisian <i>sous</i> (20 fr.), by
+means of which the apprentice could buy off part of his time
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[5]</span>of service. There seems, however, to have been no attempt to
+make the time directly proportionate to the costliness of the
+raw material and the difficulty of the process, or the skill required
+in the craft. The rope-makers require an apprenticeship
+of 4 years, the brass-wire drawers 6 years, the chest-makers
+7 years, the makers of iron shields 8 years, the curriers
+of shoe-leather 9, the jewellers 10, and the coral and shell bead-makers
+12 years. The wool-weavers demand 4 years plus 4
+<i>livres</i>, 5 years and 3 <i>livres</i>, 6 years and one <i>livre</i>, or 7 years
+without fee. Power over the length of term resided of course
+in the hands of the masters, and the rules contain only the
+minimum requirement. We read, “No one can or ought to take
+or have more than two apprentices, and he cannot take them
+for less than 7 years of service and twenty <i>sous</i> of Paris, which
+apprentices must give to the masters; or at 7 years without
+money, but more money and longer service he can require if
+need be.” How irrational the terms were may be seen from
+the fact that while the goldsmith’s term is 10 years, the brass-wire
+drawers (a far less “skilled” gild) required 10 years and
+20 <i>sous</i>, or 12 years and no fee, and that of three bead-making
+gilds, one demanded 6 years and 46 <i>sous</i>, another 10 years and
+46 <i>sous</i>, and the third 12 years without possible shortening of
+the term. If the apprentice, however, bought off part of his
+regular term, the master was not permitted to take another
+apprentice till the complete period was over. An extra apprentice
+was sometimes allowed if the wife of a master knew
+the trade. “No one of the craft aforesaid can have more than
+one apprentice, and if he has a wife, can have only one if she
+does not know the trade, but if the man and the woman know
+the trade, they can have two apprentices, but they can have as
+many <i>valets</i> as they wish.” Among the masons, a Juré could
+have two apprentices, the other masters could employ only one.</p>
+
+<p>Exceptions to rules of apprenticeship were made for the
+sons of masters, or of their wives, and in this beginning of
+family privileges, we see foreshadowed the tyranny of the
+close-corporation control of the gild in latter centuries. All
+the sons of the master and his wife, if she knows the trade,
+may rise to the ‘mastery’ usually with no fixed term of apprenticeship.
+If the children were illegitimate, no privileges
+were granted them. In the case of the goldsmith we see still
+wider family privileges, for we read “of his lineage and of the
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[6]</span>lineage of his wife, whether distant or close, he can have as
+many (apprentices) as he wishes.” The wool-weaver was
+allowed in his house two large looms and one small one for
+himself and for each of his married sons, and one loom each
+for a brother and a nephew, if they “knew how to work with
+their hands.” In the gild of the iron shield-makers and several
+others, appears the obligation of teaching the son of a poor
+master or his orphans free.</p>
+
+<p>The conditions of the contract of apprenticeship shed
+much light on the lives of these little workmen, and the statutes
+recognize the possibility of their being led astray by “leur
+folour et leur joliveté.” The apprentice, we are told, should
+obey all the orders of the master, and not complain without
+justice of the master’s oppression to the <i>prud’hommes</i> of the
+gild. He had to clean the workshop, run errands for the family
+and for the business. That apprentices were not always
+docile, nor their circumstances congenial, the many rules dealing
+with their flight suggest. An apprentice who had taken
+flight from his master could not be received into the workshop
+of another member of the gild until the complete period of his
+apprenticeship contract had elapsed. The pâter-notriers had
+to wait a year and a day after the flight of an apprentice, and
+the tablet-makers 26 weeks, before taking in another. After
+three attempts to escape, all obligation between gild and apprentice
+ceased. “And this regulation the <i>prud’hommes</i> of the
+gild make to restrain the folly and jollity of the apprentices,
+for they do great harm to their masters and themselves, when
+they run away; for when the apprentice is enrolled to learn,
+and runs away in a month or two, he forgets as much as he
+has learned, and thus he wastes his time and does harm to his
+master.” The wool-weavers and the locksmiths insisted that
+the escaping apprentice pay the master what his training had
+cost.</p>
+
+<p>The statutes recognize the right of the master to sell the
+apprentice to another master under certain circumstances.
+“No cutler can sell his apprentice unless he (the master) lies
+on a bed of sickness (<i>lit de langueur</i>), or is going across seas,
+or is leaving the gild for good or does it because of poverty.”</p>
+
+<p>The master’s obligations to the apprentice consisted in
+lodging, feeding and clothing him and in teaching him the
+trade. That masters did not always scrupulously abide by
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[7]</span>these duties, various law-suits and <i>régles</i> attest. Only the
+tablet-makers and the important wool-merchants, provide, in
+their statutes, for a defence of the apprentice’s rights. There
+we find that if the master fails in his duties, the gild masters,
+upon complaint of the apprentice, “must admonish the said
+master, and if he does not comply, they must seek out a new
+master for the apprentice.” In another place, we learn of a
+fine imposed on the master who provoked his apprentice to
+flight.</p>
+
+<p>A decree from the Châtelet: 3 Sept., 1399, gives a living
+vignette of these domestic relations a century after our period.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>
+“We have enjoined and commanded the said master that he
+treat the said Larin, his apprentice, as the son of a <i>prud’homme</i>
+should be treated, and that he abide by the matters contained
+in the said contract, without having him beaten by his wife,
+but that he should beat him himself if he misbehaved.” In the
+same year also a father succeeded in breaking his son’s contract
+because the goldsmith, the boy’s master, by hitting him
+with a bunch of keys, had “made a hole in his head.”</p>
+
+<p>The possible marriage of an apprentice during the term
+of his service is provided for thus: “If any apprentice marries
+during the time that he has promised to serve his master, and
+does not wish to eat dinner and supper with his master, he
+ought to have four <i>deniers</i> every working day for his support.”</p>
+
+<p>It is not very clear from our texts, whether an examination
+at the end of his term was usual or infrequent. Only
+rarely is the demand for a <i>chef-d’oeuvre</i> mentioned. The
+saddle-bow makers claim that after an apprentice has made
+his <i>chef-d’oeuvre</i> he should become more important in the
+workshop “so that his master may not send him out into the
+city to fetch his bread and his wine just like a boy.” The goldsmith’s
+statutes provide that if he becomes skilful enough to
+pay his expenses and to earn 100 <i>sous</i> a year, he may be freed
+from his contract and allowed to earn a salary. At the end of
+the period, however, <i>any</i> apprentice must declare before the
+Jurés on his oath that he had fulfilled his term according to
+contract.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[8]</span></p>
+
+<p>To our mind, the apprentice system here revealed does not
+seem devised for the best interest of the child. Too much
+power for good or ill lies with the master. If he so wishes,
+there seems to be little to prevent his letting his charge remain
+in a state of childish and unprofessional ignorance. The long
+term of service, the wide power of master upon man seem devised
+to add to the master’s profits, not to his charge’s skill.</p>
+
+<p>The <i>valet</i>, <i>sergent</i> or <i>aloué</i>, i.e. hired man, was an individual
+who had finished his term of service as apprenticeship
+but had not yet risen to the dignity, as master, of having an
+establishment of his own. Women of this grade, in gilds to
+which they were admitted, were called <i>chambrières</i> or <i>meschinettes</i>.
+Usually the master could have as many <i>valets</i> as he
+wished, but occasionally the number was limited so as to prevent
+rich and attractive workshops getting many <i>valets</i>, and,
+accordingly, something approaching a monopoly of the trade.</p>
+
+<p>A <i>valet</i> who had been trained outside Paris had to present
+evidence that he had done the preliminary term elsewhere. Of
+such a man, too, it was possible to require a kind of surety or
+testimonial of a fair dismissal from a former employer. Evidently
+the narrow mediaeval view of protection of home industries
+led to the discriminations against workmen from outside,
+for we read, “It is ordered and decreed that no person of the
+said gild should hire any foreign man so long as he can find a
+workman who is a member of the gild.” Care was taken too
+that disgrace and scandal should not fall upon the gild through
+<i>valets</i> of bad character. “<i>Rêveurs</i>, scoundrels, murderers,
+knaves, thieves, men of ill fame” are stipulated as improper
+candidates, and a wool-weaver whose relations with a woman
+were a by-word “was sent out of the city and forbidden the
+trade until he should amend his character.”</p>
+
+<p>The length of the term of hire is not definitely stated in
+our regulations, and it varied from a day, a week, a month, to
+a year. In the morning all unemployed <i>valets</i> assembled early
+in a designated street or square. There they were to stay until
+the bell from a certain church sounded. No private individual
+could hire an artisan. If a bargain was made, the <i>valet</i> went
+to the house of his employer at dawn and stayed under usual
+conditions till sunset. The hours accordingly varied largely,
+from 14 hours in summer to 8 in winter. Very few <i>valets</i>
+lodged and ate with their patron. They ‘went out’ in search of
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[9]</span>their noonday-meal with the provision that, after it, they
+should not loiter to wait for a fellow-workman. If the gild
+was one which allowed night-work, and the master desired it
+of him, the <i>aloué</i> must comply for a raise of pay. Sometimes
+the <i>valets</i> rebelled against this compulsion, and were threatened
+by the magistrates for this attempt at industrial freedom.
+In only one case is vacation mentioned, but as we shall see in
+discussing the <i>chômage</i>, there was little need of it. The brass-wire
+drawers stipulate, however, that the workmen may have
+a vacation in the month of August if they wish.</p>
+
+<p>Women were admitted to membership in gilds where
+their delicate skill and taste made them useful. In 1292 the
+group dealing with embroidery was composed of 81 women
+and 12 men.</p>
+
+<p>Occasionally conditions of employment are stated with
+more detail. A rule of the sword-cutlers runs this: “No&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a>
+master should take a <i>valet</i> to work unless he has five sets of
+clothes with him in order that the workmen may look neat in
+case the nobles, counts, barons, knights, and other good folk
+should at any time come into the work-room.” The <i>valet</i> could
+not be dismissed unreasonably, and rarely the provision is
+made that two <i>valets</i> and two masters must agree upon the
+dismissal before it could take effect. After a year and a day,
+the <i>valet</i> could have his wife come and work with him, if the
+gild admitted women.</p>
+
+<p>A considerable distinction between masters and <i>valets</i>
+already existed, though in the smaller organizations the gulf
+was less apparent. There were no large factories in the modern
+meaning, and in a small workshop conditions of equality
+were more likely to obtain. Several facts show, however, that
+the <i>valets</i> in some places were beginning to feel themselves
+a distinct industrial class. Infrequently they had their own
+confrérie and their own jurés. The masters in some cities
+already foresaw the possibilities of a kind of class-struggle,
+and at&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> Beauvais punished with imprisonment and fine men
+who attempted combinations in the hope of raising wages. In
+1280 at Ypres, workmen rebelled against an ordinance adding
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[10]</span>one hour to their working day, and in their rioting killed the
+mayor. Of course they were severely punished. (But how
+modern these actions prove our industrial class of the Middle
+Ages to be.)</p>
+
+<p>The obtaining of the mastership or mastery of a gild, i.e.
+the right to set up a workshop, to go into business, depended
+on certain qualifications in the aspirants, and certain formal
+ceremonies, necessitated by the organization of the gild, and
+its (frequent) feudal relationship to the king or his official.
+The first requirement was skill, acquired during service as apprentice
+and <i>valet</i>, capital, upright character and good conduct.
+Most of the sections have such an article as “Quiconques veut
+estre de tel mestier, estre le peut pœrtant qu’il sache le mestier,
+et ait de coi,” and an article of the <i>drapiers</i> reads: “Il conviendra
+qu’il sache faire le mestier de touz poinz, le soy, sans
+conseil au ayde d’autruy et qu’il à ce examiné par les gardes
+du mestier.” The cook’s regulations require that the son of a
+master have an expert in his bake-house until the masters
+judged the son skilful enough. This article was evidently designed
+to counteract the carelessness of regulation of the
+apprentice-work of sons. The formal requirement was the
+purchase of the right to trade. At the most 25 gilds were required
+to purchase this right, the rest were “free.” Among
+these who purchased were the bakers, the criers of wine,
+the retailers of bread and vegetables, the farriers, the cutlers,
+locksmiths, weavers of silk cloth, masons, hose-makers, poulterers,
+potters, old-clothes dealers, purse-makers, saddlers,
+shoe-makers, glovers, and fishermen. The necessity was
+created by the fact that about 30 of the gilds were fiefs of the
+king, and accordingly could be reserved for himself, or bestowed
+upon his favorite officers. In general, however, those
+the king retained for himself, notably, the dealers in food-necessities,
+were free of purchase.</p>
+
+<p>After purchasing the right from the king, the aspirant
+had usually to present himself within a week to be admitted to
+the corporation. At a solemn meeting the masters or jurés
+“read loudly” and explained the regulations. The recipient of
+the privilege then swore by the saints’ relics that he would
+keep the laws and carry on his profession carefully and loyally.
+Initiation fees were of course variable; the criers paid the
+jurés 4 <i>deniers</i> (0 fr. .45), the silk-cloth weavers and hose-makers
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[11]</span>10 <i>sous</i> (2 fr. .50); the <i>épiciers</i> paid 5 <i>sous</i>&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a>
+    <i>pour boire</i>
+to their companions. The time for paying this fee also varied.
+The curriers of shoe-leather were allowed to pay their fee a
+year and a day after establishment, while the bakers were restrained
+only by a limit of four years. The widow of a master
+was generously permitted to carry on the business in his stead,
+though usually if she remarried a stranger, i.e. a man outside
+the gild, she forfeited this right.</p>
+
+<p>M. Lespinasse makes an interesting distinction in affirming
+that the mastership was not a rank, but a privilege; it was
+not a case of ‘once a master, always a master.’ Upon the relinquishment
+of the activity and privileges implied, a master
+became an artisan, and, for instance, the hose-makers assert
+that 35 masters among them have fallen into poverty. The
+master with all his attempts to protect his position and rights,
+bore the not-light burden of taxation from which the <i>valets</i>
+were directly, at least, exempt.</p>
+
+<p>The internal administration of the gild was performed by
+officers called <i>jurés</i> or <i>prud’hommes</i>, and the external relation
+of the gild in its dealings with other gilds or the city was
+supervised by the Crown or the Crown official who held the
+gild in fief. The jurés were also called <i>gardes</i>, <i>syndics</i>, <i>éswards</i>,
+<i>élus</i>. The typical method of choice was the election of
+a certain number by the masters of the gild, and their ratification
+and investiture by the Provost of Paris or other Crown
+official. Sometimes, however, the Provost or Crown officer
+appointed the <i>guards</i> with no semblance of suggestion, in
+theory at least, from the gild itself. Occasionally the election
+was wholly in the hands of the <i>community</i>. Sometimes the
+departing <i>prud’hommes</i> nominated their successors. Among
+the haberdashers, failure to serve, if one were elected, called
+down upon him a fine of 10 livres (134 fr.). The term of office
+was usually a year. The goldsmiths, however, changed their
+officers only every three years. The fullers, who had two masters
+and two <i>valets</i> as officers, changed them at Christmas and
+at St. John’s Day. Before the Provost, the <i>valets</i> named two
+masters, and the masters two <i>valets</i>, for service, a <i>nice</i> balance
+in the interest of just administration. Women were allowed
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[12]</span>offices for such gilds as they were important in. The workers
+in silk-stuffs had three masters and three mistresses; the
+weavers of kerchiefs three <i>maîtresses</i>.</p>
+
+<p>In being invested with office, the jurés, for instance, of the
+bakers swore on the relics of the saints that they would ‘guard
+the gild’ carefully and loyally, and that in appraising bread,
+they would spare neither relatives nor friends, nor condemn
+anyone wrongly through hatred or ill-feeling. The chiefs of
+the gilds scrutinized the quality of the products, denounced
+frauds and infractions of the rules, presided at solemn conclaves
+of the gild, and represented it before the law. They
+presided at the contract of apprenticeship, received the oaths
+of artisans and masters, and administered the funds of the
+corporation. In case of appeal from the jurisdiction of the
+jurés, the Provost of Paris was the first authority, and above
+him was the <i>Parlement de Paris</i>. On the lands of a feudal lord,
+the latter usually retained the privilege of administering petty
+justice.</p>
+
+<p>The question of remuneration to the jurés for loss of time
+naturally arises. Usually a definite fraction of the fines was
+awarded to them. Besides, too, the honor which accrued to
+them, exemptions from the duty of the watch and from certain
+of the fines of the trade, are mentioned.</p>
+
+<p>Most gilds had officers of only one rank upon whom all the
+duties fell. Occasionally discrimination was made, and two
+superior officers chosen from the masters held the power of
+handing down decisions while their <i>valet</i>-assistants exercised
+supervision, and reported infractions of the rules to the masters.
+Perhaps the most frequent number of <i>jurés</i> in a gild was
+two or four. The armorers, the iron-shield-makers, the potters,
+the rope-makers, bead-makers, gold-beaters, braid-makers,
+spinners of silk, etc., had two, the fullers, the tallow-chandlers
+four. The brass-shield makers were so few that they did not
+elect a juré, but asked the Provost to hear their cases directly.
+Only one <i>guard</i> is mentioned in the statutes of the clasp-makers
+and the flower-hat makers. The curriers have three,
+the farriers six, the goldsmiths two or three, the head-dress
+makers eight, and later only four. The bakers and the retailers
+of fruit and vegetables had twelve officers.</p>
+
+<p>The most feudal feature of the craft-gild organization is,
+perhaps, the dependence of the gild on the Crown or its officials
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[13]</span>or vassals. Most of the gilds were dependent upon (relevaient
+à) the Prévôt de Paris. To him the <i>prud’hommes</i> carried
+complaints, against other gilds, for example, and it was
+he who appointed a <i>prud’homme</i> to execute for him the functions
+suggested above. We have seen that Louis the Younger
+granted to a woman the ‘mastery’ of five gilds, which remained
+enfieffed to the sixteenth century. The grand pantler was the
+judge of the bakers, and each year appointed a master to look
+after the gild. The grand chamberlain looked after the wool-weavers,
+haberdashers, tailors and upholsterers, and others
+who had to do with clothing and furnishings; the cup-bearer
+(<i>échanson</i>) had the wine merchants, and the <i>maréchal</i> the
+smiths, farriers, helmeters, locksmiths and other iron-workers.
+The grand butler tried to keep order among the wine-shop
+keepers. To his mason, Guillaume à Saint Patrie, the king
+confided the masons, stone-breakers, plasterers, etc.</p>
+
+<p>Exact hours for work were not set down; the time of the
+world in which the artisan lived was too entirely dominated
+by the custom of the Church to permit of hours being designated
+as 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. “No one of the gild,” we read, “ought
+to work on holy days which the people of the city keep, nor on
+Saturdays during <i>charnage</i> (i.e. the time during which it was
+permitted to eat meat) after Vespers, nor after Compline on
+Saturdays during Lent, nor at night at any time of the year.”
+During Lent, Vespers fell at 6 o’clock, and Compline at 9.
+<i>Charnage</i> was used loosely to mean not only the period during
+which meat could be eaten, but also the period of short days,
+while <i>Carême</i> meant the period of long days. Night work was
+expressly forbidden for goldsmiths, sheath-makers, weavers,
+braid-, chest-, buckles-, beads-makers, pewterers, lamp-makers
+and locksmith’s, “for the light at night does not suffice for the
+trade[s] aforesaid.” Millers and brewers could work day and
+night, and it was permitted to all farriers (but not to locksmiths
+and cutlers), to goldsmiths, lamp-makers, brass-wire drawers,
+to cast, if need be, during the night, inasmuch as the process
+sometimes lasted a day or a week. The restriction upon night
+work was ineffective if the work were for the household of the
+King, the Queen, the Princes of the blood, the Bishop of Paris,
+and other great Lords.</p>
+
+<p>The Church’s observance of Sundays and fast-days (holy
+days) caused among the gilds much cessation from work—<i>chômage</i>.
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[14]</span>The eve of Sunday and important holy days, work
+was stopped at <i>Nones</i> or <i>Compline</i>. On Sunday the baths were
+not heated, on Sunday the bakers did not make bread, and kept,
+besides, twenty-six fast-days and the day of their Patron Saint.
+The goldsmiths, the haberdashers, the felt-hat makers, took
+turns within the gild in keeping their shops open on Sunday.
+The <i>barilliers</i> and the armorers worked without restriction on
+the ground that their work was vitally important to noblemen.
+A saddler could repair a shield or a harness on Sunday, and
+rose-chaplets could be made at any time “during the season of
+roses.”</p>
+
+<p>Inasmuch as the policy of the gilds proscribed the action
+of free competition, it was necessary for them, in order to sustain
+their reputation, to provide in some way, that the products
+should be exactly what they pretended to be. To this end they
+legislated carefully as to the quantity and quality of raw
+material to be used, and provided for supervision through the
+stages of manufacture to the sale of the finished product. The
+<i>cervoise</i> (a drink somewhat resembling ale) should have no
+constituents save grain and water. The beater of metal-leaves
+must have a certain alloy of gold in his silver leaves. The bead-makers
+must not string beads which are not perfectly rounded.
+The haberdashers complain of the appearance of “several
+pieces of bad work to the damage of all the common weal, every
+day, by reason of the lack of proper restriction.” At Amiens,&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>
+the locksmiths were forbidden, for fear of thievery, to make a
+key unless the lock was produced, and the butchers to <i>souffler
+la viande</i>, to mix tallow in the lard, to sell dog, cat or horse
+flesh. In Paris, boxes whose locks were made with ‘hinges’
+were summarily burned, and fines were incurred for putting
+old locks on new furniture and new locks on old furniture.
+Trimmings of silver were forbidden on bone knife-handles for
+fear the makers should sell them for ivory, and knife-handles
+must not be covered with silk, brass- or pewter-wire, lead or
+iron, because inside, they were only deal, and might deceive an
+ignorant buyer. Hemp and flax must not be used in the same
+rope.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> If a tailor spoilt a valuable piece of cloth by bad cutting,
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[15]</span>and the <i>gardes</i> ascertained it, he had to make restitution
+to the client, and pay a fine, 3 <i>sous</i> to the king and 2 <i>sous</i> to
+the <i>confrérie</i>. If an artisan did the spoiling, he paid the master,
+and worked for one day, without pay, for the <i>confrérie</i>.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a>
+Chandlers seem to have been especially open to temptation.
+Too heavy a weight of wick is expressly regulated against in
+the provision that four pounds of tallow should carry only a
+quarter-pound of wick. Wax tapers must not be adulterated
+with tallow.</p>
+
+<p>Gilds in danger of usurping each other’s business were
+jealous of privileges. A tailor must not mend old clothes, nor
+a rag-man make new clothes. A curious controversy arose
+from the fact that clothes restored by the old-clothes dealers
+were frequently mistaken for new. It was finally decided that
+this latter gild must not press, fold and hang old garments for
+fear of this deception.</p>
+
+<p>The visits of the <i>gardes</i> were at unexpected times, and
+almost all the gilds require their inspection of saleable articles
+“poer sauvoir se il i a nulles mesprantures.” The <i>gardes</i> of
+the weavers carried an iron rule on which was marked the
+length of various kinds of cloth, as it was fixed by law. Goods
+which did not comply with the statutes were confiscated,
+burned or given to the poor, while the culprit paid a fine. To
+make sure that no bad product elude the vigilance of the
+guards, further regulations as to the place of manufacture
+appear. A wool-weaver could not have two shops on either
+side of the street, though we have seen how liberal he might
+be as to the number of looms. An armorer was not to get anything
+necessary for his trade made outside the shop, therefore
+he was forbidden to carry armor through the streets unless
+he were poor and lived in an out-of-the-way quarter
+where sales would be difficult. The tailor must not cut his
+cloth except at a window of the first floor of his shop.</p>
+
+<p>Fines ranging from three to ten <i>sous</i> were the natural consequence
+of faulty production. The corrupt gold-beater paid
+3 <i>sous</i>, the jewellers, who dared use colored glass, 10 <i>sous</i>, the
+dealers in silk-stuffs paid 8 <i>sous</i>, of which 5 went to the King,
+2 to the Master, and 1 to the <i>Confrérie</i>. In 1312, dealers in
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[16]</span>spices who purveyed <i>fausse merchandise</i> were condemned to
+lose their commodities, and to pay, besides, 60 <i>sous</i>: “40 to us
+(i.e. the King, or to the lord of the place where justice is done),
+and 20 <i>sous</i> to the master of the gild at or near the place where
+the offence is committed”—to pay the expenses of the gild. As
+a further guard against adulterated products, most of the
+gilds had a mark or a seal which carried a guarantee of quality
+commensurate with the reputation of the gild.</p>
+
+<p>Before goods could be sold, those who had the right to
+weighing and measuring apparatus in their own houses, must
+have these sealed by the measurers and gaugers’ gild. Others
+must use the scale of the king or his vassal. Most goods were
+sold on Friday and Saturday, when the merchants shut up shop
+and went to the <i>Halles</i> where markets were held. As a rule,
+the gilds were opposed to the hawking of their goods—<i>col-portage</i>;
+they preferred the more regular custom of the stalls
+of the market. Here, too, they succeeded in legalizing their
+privileges against foreigners. For example, the bakers succeeded
+in preventing the sale of all ‘foreign’ bread in the city
+except on Saturdays. The municipality also watched after its
+own interests in the interests of the crafts. Merchants were
+forbidden to leave the city before the opening of the Fairs, and
+sales must be transacted only in the square of the <i>Halles</i> after
+a stroke from the great bell. The craft organizations themselves
+were much afraid of possible monopolies. The weavers,
+dyers and fullers are expressly forbidden to enter into combinations
+to fix a price on goods or a monopoly on materials
+“so as to prevent the people of the gild from having work
+according to their means.” The retailers of produce were
+forbidden to arrange for commodities in advance. “Retailers
+ought not to buy in advance of any merchant carriage-loads or
+consignments of eggs and cheeses, deliverable at his next trip,
+or after any delay whatsoever”; such transactions are wrong
+because they offer too much uncertainty and too many frauds
+in the conditions of delivery. The mediaeval man feared
+‘corners,’ for he felt “the rich will sell back everything, as
+dear as it pleases them to do.”</p>
+
+<p>In the market “good form” must be observed between
+members of the same gild. One member must not intrude
+before a sale is consummated. “If anyone is in front of the
+stall or window of a cook to buy or bargain with the said cook,
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[17]</span>and if any of the other cooks call him before he has left the
+stall or window of his own will,” the fine will be 5 <i>sous</i>.</p>
+
+<p>For the privileges implied in the gild structure, the feudal
+authorities demanded a return in the form of taxes. The gild-masters
+bore the burden not only of the civil taxes which all
+citizens shared, such as the <i>taille</i>, the <i>conduits</i> and <i>péages</i>
+(tolls), but also special commercial taxes such as the <i>hauban</i>,
+the <i>tonlieu</i>, and the <i>coutume</i>.</p>
+
+<p>The <i>hauban</i>, according to <i>Livre des Métiers</i>, Section I,
+Art. 7, “is the name appropriate to a tax assessed from ancient
+times, by which it was established that whoever should be a
+payer of <i>hauban</i> would have more freedom and less taxes to
+pay for his right of trade and commerce.” It was a sort of
+agreement offering the advantage of combining in one payment
+a large number of daily dues. For this privilege the
+bakers owed 6 <i>sous</i>, the retailers of bread and salt, 3 <i>sous</i>, the
+butchers 6 <i>sous</i>, the fishermen, purse-makers and curriers 3
+<i>sous</i>, the glovers 3 <i>sous</i>, 8 <i>deniers</i>, and the old-clothes men 6
+<i>sous</i> and 8 <i>deniers</i>.</p>
+
+<p>The <i>tonlieu</i>, also called the tax of buying and selling, was
+the real tax on trade. At every sale, the merchant and the
+customer owed a small per cent. of the purchase to the city or
+lord who controlled the market. About twenty chapters of
+Part II in the <i>Livre des Métiers</i> are devoted to an elaborate
+schedule of this tax which varied according as the sale was at
+shop, fair or market. In general, M. Lespinasse estimates, the
+<i>tonlieu</i> equalled 4 <i>deniers</i> per wagon-load, 2 per cart-load, 1
+<i>denier</i> for beast-of-burden’s load, and 1 obole for a man’s load.</p>
+
+<p>The <i>coutume</i> was very irregularly shared; it usually fell
+due at several times through the year. So the bakers owed 6
+<i>deniers</i> at Christmas, 22 at Easter, and 5 at St. John’s Day, and
+a <i>tonlieu</i> of 1½ <i>deniers</i> in bread or money per week. The retailers
+of produce also owed these taxes if they dealt in bread.
+At any earlier period, the <i>coutume</i> was always paid ‘in nature,’
+i.e. in the product itself. Accordingly, the hay-merchants owed
+a box of new hay every time the King entered the city. The
+wooden-utensils makers furnished seven casks, two feet long,
+towards the up-keep of the King’s cellars, and for this service
+they were excused from the watch. The farriers owed at first
+the <i>fers du Roi</i>; i.e. they had to keep the saddle-horses of the
+court well shod. But later this function was compounded in
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[18]</span>terms of money, due to the royal maréchal in consideration of
+which he had the horses shod.</p>
+
+<p>Another feudal obligation irksome to some of the gilds
+was the personal “duty of the watch”—the <i>guet</i>. As the masters
+of the gilds were alone responsible for this important
+service, it was also called the <i>guet de métiers</i>. Each gild had
+its turn about every three weeks, when the masters must go
+at nightfall to the Châtelet and answer the roll. The watch
+then lasted from curfew till the next sunrise. Usually the
+gilds which served the aristocracy most directly were exempt
+from this duty. Among these were the goldsmiths, <i>barilliers</i>,
+armorers, painters, sculptors, bow-makers, flower- and plumed-hat
+makers, and haberdashers. How irksome this duty had
+become may be inferred from two statutes in the <i>Livre des
+Métiers</i>. The garment-cutters say:</p>
+
+<p>“The <i>prud’hommes</i> of the said gild beg that they be relieved
+from (the duty of) the watch, if it please the King, on
+account of the fine clothes which they have to make and keep
+over night which belong to gentlemen, and on account of the
+large number of strange workmen whom they could not entirely
+trust to take care of things, and because they have to
+cut and sew clothes for gentlemen both day and night in
+view of the gentlemen and strangers going away at once, and
+because they have to return the garment which they make in
+the evening, on the morning of the next day.”</p>
+
+<p>The old-clothes dealers have two intimate and vivid articles.
+Art. 33: “No one who is 60 years old, nor those whose
+wives are with child, so long as they be ill, and no one who has
+been bled, if he has not been summoned before he had himself
+bled, and no one who is going out of the city, if he has not been
+summoned before he goes out, need to share the watch. But
+they must inform him who has charge of the watch for the
+King, by means of their men or their neighbors.”</p>
+
+<p>Art. 34: “And the <i>prud’hommes</i> of the gild say that they
+are grieved that, for 10 years back, those who have charge of
+the guard for the King, have not been willing to receive the
+excuse from the above-mentioned service from their neighbors
+and their workmen, but make come their wives themselves,
+either fair or ugly, either young or old, or feeble or fat, to convey
+the excuse to the lord, a thing which is most ugly and most
+grievous—that a woman should stay and sit at the Châtelet
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[19]</span>from curfew so long as the watch is out, and then go away
+with her son or her daughter, or without either of them,
+through strange streets to her home, and through this message-bearing
+wrong, sin, yea, villainy has been done.”</p>
+
+<p><i>Confrérie</i> is a word not very widely used in the <i>Livre</i>.
+Seventeen of the gilds display this organism. It served to
+systematize the religious impulses of the gild-men’s lives and
+also to control the benevolent activities of the older structure.
+The tablet-makers require all salaried workers to join the <i>Confrérie</i>,
+and at a death in the gild, a man or woman from each
+workshop must follow the corpse or pay a fine of ½ pound of
+wax. The <i>confrérie</i> usually centered its activity in a church
+or chapel in the district where most of the members lived. The
+<i>confrérie</i> of the furriers and the upholsterers shared <i>l’Église
+des Innocents</i>; the masons attended the <i>Chapelle de St. Bleive</i>;
+the bakers <i>St. Pierre aux Liens</i>, and the wine-merchants and
+brass-shield makers St. Léonard’s chapel of church <i>St. Merri</i>.
+The confraternity usually put itself under the protection of a
+particular saint. The goldsmiths chose <i>St. Éloi</i>, and the confraternity
+had a seal inscribed “Sigillum confratrie sancti
+Elegii auri fabrorum.”</p>
+
+<p>The <i>confrérie’s</i> resources were usually derived from initiation
+fees, subscriptions and legacies from members, and a
+share of the fines collected in the gild. The organization also
+derived benefits from holding real estate. It could transact
+business and fall in debt. The <i>confrérie</i> of the wool-weavers
+owing 600 pounds, put a tax of 12 <i>sous</i> on every piece of cloth
+manufactured in Paris. A statute of the plasterers reads: “If
+he finds that the proportion is not good, the plasterer shall pay
+five <i>sous</i> as a fine: to the Chappelle Bleive aforesaid, two <i>sous</i>,
+to the master who guards the gild, two <i>sous</i>, and to the one who
+has measured the plaster 12 <i>deniers</i>.” When a plasterer took
+an apprentice for less than six years, he paid 20 <i>sous</i> to the
+Chapelle.</p>
+
+<p>Part of the funds acquired by the <i>confrérie</i> were used
+for common expenses, and part for benevolent work. For
+every piece of cloth sold the wool-merchants were supposed to
+give a <i>denier</i> to buy grain for the poor. The rich confraternity
+of the goldsmiths gave every Easter a dinner to the poor of the
+Hôtel Dieu, while the cooks set aside a third of their fines to
+maintain “les pouvres vieilles gens du mestier qui seront decheuz
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[20]</span>par fait de marchandise ou de vieillece.” In 1319 the
+vair-furriers formed an association&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> with an initiation fee of
+10 <i>sous</i> (8 fr. .40) and 6 <i>deniers</i> for the secretary, and a weekly
+subscription of one <i>denier</i>, the funds of which were to aid
+members in case of sickness or infirmity at the rate of 3 <i>sous</i>
+per week during illness, and 6 <i>sous</i> in convalescence. The
+curriers mention the use of funds from “la boîte” to support
+the orphans of the gild or children of poverty-stricken masters.</p>
+
+<p>At the first appearance of the <i>confrérie</i>, the Church opposed
+it, suspecting in its secrecy, antagonism or some outcroppings
+of pagan ritualism.&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> Later, however, both Church and <i>confrérie</i>
+profited by a close relationship. The monastery of St.
+Trond, in return for the right to fall heir to the properties of
+members of the shearmen and fuller’s <i>confrérie</i> who died without
+wife or child, maintained a hospital for the care of its sick,
+and conducted funerals, while the sacristan and a priest arbitrated
+on the occasion of disputes within the gild.</p>
+
+<p class="mt2">Conclusion. The trade-gild régime was a defensive one
+against the confused powers of feudalism and the conflicting
+activities of competition. It protected the apprentice against
+his own folly and his master; it protected the artisan against
+diminution in the pay-rate, illegal dismissal, and the usurpation
+of other trades on his field. It guarded the master from
+insubordination, idleness, bad measure and adulteration, and
+by the limitation of the number of workmen assured the sale
+of his goods.</p>
+
+<p>Some of the principles implied in the organization we
+may agree with M. Lespinasse&#x2060;<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> are “relatively true,” such as
+the protection of infant industry, guarantee of work and property,
+examinations and probations to make certain the skill
+of the candidates; prohibition of combination of several professions
+to prevent the abusive use of them; supervision of
+manufacture to assure the soundness of the product; an industrial
+<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[21]</span>jurisdiction from apprenticeship to mastery, lack of division
+in a craft such as to train in time a fully equipped workman
+and a future master; suppression of any parasitic
+intermediary between producer and consumer; work in common
+and in the public eyes, and solidarity of the industrial
+family.</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, there are shadows in the picture, and
+among them we may distinguish—the immoderate extension
+of term of apprenticeship, difficulties set in the way of becoming
+a master; arbitrary fiscal measures and dues; meticulous
+regulation and too frequent cessation from work; a routine
+transmission of methods of manufacture; maintenance of a
+fixed price, and prohibitions of combinations such as would
+encourage inventions and stimulate a wider economic unit.</p>
+
+<p>We have studied a particularly agreeable phase of gild
+growth. Far off still is the bad opposition between employee
+and employed, though the pessimist may see the seeds of the
+present in this past. Though one hesitates to call with M.
+Fagniez the spirit of the gilds “fundamentally Christian,” he
+is glad to recognize such alertness of intelligence, such elaborate
+industrial devices and purposes, such thoughtful humanitarian
+interests, so complex a system of checks and balances
+in our supposedly naïve mediaeval precursors.</p>
+
+<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop">
+
+<div class="footnotes">
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2 class="nobreak" id="FOOTNOTES">FOOTNOTES</h2>
+
+</div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> Throughout this paper I shall translate the French word métier by
+the more usual word <i>gild</i> when it refers to the organization and not the
+craft.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> Fagniez: Documents rélatifs à l’Histoire de l’Industrie, etc. Intro.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> Levasseur: <i>Hist. des classes ouv.</i> p. 251.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> For a list of these gilds with their ancient French names and their
+modern English equivalents, see <i>Appendix</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> Fagniez: Études sur l’industrie à Paris, p. 67.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> Réglemens sur les arts et les mét. ed. Depping, p. 366.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> “Coutumes de Beauvaisis.” Beaumanoir, éd. Beugnot; p. 429.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> It has been estimated that four <i>sous</i> of Paris of this period are
+equivalent to one franc at present.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Comm. d’Amiens, Doc. inédits, p. 387, p. 370.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> Lev.: Hist. des classes ouv., vol. I, page 116.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> Ordonnances touchant les mét., 1312. Art. 5.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> Fagniez: “Études sur l’industrie,” p. 290. Text in <i>Doc. rélatifs</i>,
+No. 19.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> M. Lespinasse quotes the text of a decree against <i>confrérie</i> from a
+Council at Rouen, 1189.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> <i>Liv. des Mét.</i> Avant Propos par M. Lespinasse, p. xiv.</p></div>
+
+</div>
+
+<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop">
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2 class="nobreak" id="APPENDIX">APPENDIX.</h2>
+
+</div>
+
+<ul>
+
+<li>Archiers = bow-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Barilliers = case-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Batéeurs d’or = gold-beaters.</li>
+
+<li>Batéeurs d’éstain = pewter-beaters.</li>
+
+<li>Batéeurs d’or en feuilles = gold-beaters.</li>
+
+<li>Batéeurs d’archal = brass-beaters.</li>
+
+<li>Baudraiers = curriers of shoe-leather.</li>
+
+<li>Blatiers = corn-merchants.</li>
+
+<li>Blasenniers = saddle-fixtures.</li>
+
+<li>Boîtiers = locksmiths.</li>
+
+<li>Boucliers de fer = iron-shield-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Boucliers d’archal = brass-shield makers.</li>
+
+<li>Bourreliers = harness-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Boursiers = purse-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Boutonniers = button-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Brachiers = breeches-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Cavesonniers = slipper-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Cavetiers = cobblers.</li>
+
+<li>Cervoisiers = ale-brewers.</li>
+
+<li>Chandliers de sieu = tallow-chandlers.</li>
+
+<li>Chanevaceriers = hemp-cloth-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Chapeliers de fleurs = flower-hatters.</li>
+
+<li>Chapeliers de coton = cap-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Chapeliers de paon = plumed hatters.</li>
+
+<li>Chapeliers de feutre = felt-hatters.</li>
+
+<li>Chapuiséeurs = saddle-bow makers.</li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[22]</span>Charpentiers = carpenters.</li>
+
+<li>Chauciers = hose-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Couréeurs = belt-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Cordiers = rope-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Corduaniers = shoe-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Couteliers = cutlers.</li>
+
+<li>Couteliers serves = knife-blade-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Crespiniers = head-dress-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Crieurs = criers.</li>
+
+<li>Cristâliers = jewellers.</li>
+
+<li>Cuisiniers = cooks.</li>
+
+<li>Cyrugiens = barbers.</li>
+
+<li>Déeciers = playing dice-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Drapiers = woollen-weavers.</li>
+
+<li>Escueliers = pottery-sellers.</li>
+
+<li>Espinguiers = pin-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Estuvéeurs = bath proprietors.</li>
+
+<li>Faiseurs de clous = nail-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Fainiers = hay merchants.</li>
+
+<li>Fermailleurs = clasp and buckle-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Fripiers = old-clothes men.</li>
+
+<li>Feseresses de chap d’orfois = modiste.</li>
+
+<li>Fourreurs de chapeliers = fur-hatters.</li>
+
+<li>Fevres = iron-workers.</li>
+
+<li>Fileresses de soie = spinners of coarse silk.</li>
+
+<li>Fileresses de soie à petits fuseaux = spinners of fine silk.</li>
+
+<li>Fondeurs = smelters.</li>
+
+<li>Foulons = fullers.</li>
+
+<li>Fourbéeurs = sword-cutlers.</li>
+
+<li>Gantiers = glovers.</li>
+
+<li>Gueiniers = sheath-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Haubergiers = coats-of-mail-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Huiliers = oil-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Jaugéeurs = gaugers.</li>
+
+<li>Laciers = braid-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Lampiers = lamp-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Lanterniers = lantern-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Liniers = linen merchants.</li>
+
+<li>Lormiers = reins-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Maçons = masons.</li>
+
+<li>Marchante chanvre = hemp + thread sellers.</li>
+
+<li>Maréchaux = iron-farriers.</li>
+
+<li>Merciers = haberdashers.</li>
+
+<li>Mesuréeurs = measurers.</li>
+
+<li>Meuniers = millers.</li>
+
+<li>Orfèvres = goldsmiths.</li>
+
+<li>Ouv. de menues œuvres d’éstain = pewterers.</li>
+
+<li>Ouv. de tissus de soie = workers in silk-stuffs.</li>
+
+<li>Ouv. de drap de soie = silk-cloth.</li>
+
+<li>Peintres + imagiers = painters and illuminators.</li>
+
+<li>Paternostriers d’os = bone-bead makers.</li>
+
+<li>Paternostriers de corail = coral-bead makers.</li>
+
+<li>Paternostriers d’ambre = amber-bead makers.</li>
+
+<li>Paternostriers + faiseurs de boucles = brooch and bead-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Pechéeurs = fishermen.</li>
+
+<li>Poisonniers d’eau douce = fresh-water-fish-merchants.</li>
+
+<li>Poisonniers de mer = salt-water-fish-merchants.</li>
+
+<li>Potiers de terres = potters.</li>
+
+<li>Potiers d’éstain = pewterers.</li>
+
+<li>Poulailliers = poulterers.</li>
+
+<li>Regrattiers de pain de sel = retailers of salt and bread.</li>
+
+<li>Regrattiers de fruits = green-grocers.</li>
+
+<li>Selliers = saddlers.</li>
+
+<li>Serruriers = locksmiths.</li>
+
+<li>Tabletiers = tablet-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Tapiciers de tapiz sarrasinois = Oriental carpet-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Tapiciers de tapiz nostrés = carpet-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Taverniers = wine-shop-keepers.</li>
+
+<li>Tisserands de queuvrechiers = kerchief-makers.</li>
+
+<li>Trefilliers de fer = iron-wire-drawers.</li>
+
+<li>Trefilliers d’archal = brass-wire-drawers.</li>
+
+<li>Ymagiers = painters.</li>
+
+</ul>
+
+<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop">
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[23]</span></p>
+
+<h2 class="nobreak" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY">BIBLIOGRAPHY.</h2>
+
+</div>
+
+<p>1. Réglemens sur les Arts et Métiers de Paris, Redigés au <span class="allsmcap">XIII</span><i>ᵉ</i> siècle
+et connus sous le nom du Livre des Métiers d’Étienne Boileau; Publiés
+pour la première fois en entier ... avec des notes et une Introduction,
+par G. B. Depping à Paris. De l’imprimerie de Crapelet, 1837, pp. xxxvi
++ 474. [Collection de Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France].</p>
+
+<p>2. Le <i>Livre des Métiers</i> d’Étienne Boileau, publié par René de
+Lespinasse et Francois Bonnardot. [Histoire Générale de Paris—Les
+Métiers et les corporations de la Ville de Paris, <span class="allsmcap">XIII</span><i>ᵉ</i> siècle, pp. cliv + 420.
+Paris, Imprimerie Nationale, 1879].</p>
+
+<p class="noindent mt2"><i>References</i>:</p>
+
+<p><i>Blanqui</i>, Jêrome-Adolphe: History of Political Economy in Europe.
+Trans. from 4th Fr. Ed. by Emily J. Leonard, pp. xxxviii + 590. 1880.</p>
+
+<p><i>Brentano</i>, Luigi: Essay on the History and Development of Gilds:
+Early English Text Society: Vol. 40.</p>
+
+<p><i>Dendy</i>, F. W., &amp; Boyle, J. R., editors, Extracts from the Records of
+the Merchant Adventurers of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Vol. I, pp. lii + 315.
+Surtees Society Publ. xviii, 1895.</p>
+
+<p><i>Fagniez</i>, Gustave: Documents rélatifs à l’Histoire de l’industrie et
+du Commerce en France. Vol. I, with an Introduction. pp. lxiv + 349.
+Paris, Alph. Picard et Fils. 1898.</p>
+
+<p><i>Fagniez</i>, Gustave: Études sur l’industrie et la Ind. à Paris aux <span class="allsmcap">XIII</span><i>ᵉ</i>
++ <span class="allsmcap">XIV</span><i>ᵉ</i> siècle. pp. x + 422. Paris, F. Vieweg. 1877.</p>
+
+<p><i>Felibren</i>, D. Michel: Histoire de la Ville de Paris, 5 vols. in folio.
+Paris, 1725.</p>
+
+<p><i>Forrest</i>, J. Dorsey: “The Development of Western Civilization.” pp.
+ix + 406. U. of C. Press. 1907.</p>
+
+<p><i>Gross</i>, Charles: The Gild Merchant. Vol. I, pp. xxii + 332. Vol. II,
+pp. xi + 447. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1890.</p>
+
+<p><i>Labarte</i>, Jules: Histoire des Arts ind. au moyen âge et à l’epoque de
+la Renaissance, 2<i>ᵉ</i> Ed. Paris, 1873. 3 vols.</p>
+
+<p><i>Lambert</i>, Rev. J. M.: “Two Thousand Years of Gild Life,” etc., etc.
+pp. xi + 414. Hull, 1891.</p>
+
+<p><i>Levasseur</i>, Emile: Histoire des Classes ouvrières de l’industrie en
+France avant 1789. 2<i>ᵉ</i> Ed. Paris, 1900. Vol. I, pp. lxxxviii + 715.</p>
+
+<p><i>Luchaire</i>, Achille: Social France at the Time of Ph. Auguste, trans.
+by E. B. Krehbiel. pp. viii + 441. New York, 1912.</p>
+
+<p><i>Palgrave</i>, Sir R. H. J., ed., Dictionary of Political Economy. 3 vols.
+Macmillan &amp; Co. London, 1910.</p>
+
+<p><i>Pigeonneau</i>: Histoire du Commerce de la France. 2<i>ᵉ</i> Ed. pp. vii
++ 468 (Vol. I). Paris, Librairie Léopold Cerf. 1885-89.</p>
+
+<p><i>Seligman</i>, E. R. A.: Two Chapters on the Mediaeval Guilds of
+England. Publ. of Am. Econ. Associ. Vol. II, No. 5. pp. 389-493, Nov.,
+1887.</p>
+
+<p><i>Toulmin Smith</i>: Ed. English Gilds: The Original Ordinances of more
+than 100 Gilds. E. E. T. S. Vol. 40.</p>
+
+<p class="right"><span class="smcap">F. B. Millett.</span></p>
+<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78623 ***</div>
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/78623-h/images/cover.jpg b/78623-h/images/cover.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..522a09c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/78623-h/images/cover.jpg
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6c72794
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This book, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..158cdde
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for eBook #78623
+(https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/78623)