CHAPTER VIII.

THE IRONMONGERS’ CHARITIES AND CHARITABLE IRONMONGERS.

Citizenship is the birthright of every man, but it is not every man who is worthy of the name of citizen. What makes the honourable distinction all the more valuable is when “a citizen of no mean city,” and the true representative of “a nation of shopkeepers,” so truly values his rights and privileges as to be ever ready to come forward when occasion requires to protect it from the ignorance and contamination of those whose only design must be to overthrow its virtues for the sake of personal gains. It was Lord Chancellor Selborne who some years ago publicly declared that his ancestors for four generations had been connected with one of the City Guilds, and he had never been ashamed of anything either of those ancestors had done, and never regretted his own connection with the City or its Companies. And another eminent man of earlier days most emphatically declared, “I would rather be born of the basest and meanest of mankind, and rise to fame and distinction by my own exertions, than that, being born of noble ancestry and high degree, I should bring disgrace on an exalted name, and cross with a bar sinister the proud escutcheon of my father’s house.”

To the humble traders of old London their richer brethren left their trusts, their charities, and their blessings. Their estates had been obtained by hard work and hard-earned money in a great many instances, and having been associated with the zealous and careful men of their own Guilds they left to them the carrying out of the designs expressed in their wills. No one would have left to a Government department such a trust then, and no one will do so now.

The Government inspector, in his evidence before the Companies Commission, declared that he considered William Thwaytes’ bequest of 20,000_l._ “to make the Society comfortable”—and that Society was the Clothworkers’ Company, to which he belonged some half a century ago—really meant “to make the traders comfortable”! Or that every clothworker in the kingdom—shall we say the world?—ought to participate. On the same principle, if a workman in a shop left “to the workmen in the shop” 5_l._, every shop in that trade should have its share. Pray what would be the value of the bequest?

The City Companies, as we have shown in the history of the Ironmongers, had a terribly uphill battle to fight with early monarchy. Whenever there was a chance to rob the citizens, down pounced the Government or Royalty. Henry VIII. commenced by dissolving the religious houses, and the good King Edward VI. seized the properties left to the Companies by the wills of benefactors on the plea that they were for superstitious uses. Having taken possession he was glad enough to sell the property back to them, so that he made a very profitable business of the transaction. The result of this “clever” and “sharp” practice was that the Ironmongers had to sell their private property to buy back the trust estate. Having done this, is it not creditable to a City Company to be still administering that trust of which the King himself had originally deprived them?

Coming down to more modern times, Thomas Betton, Hoxton Square, Shoreditch, left the Ironmongers’ Company, in 1723, the residue of his estate for the purpose of redeeming slaves in Barbary. Other notable citizens had done a similar good deed before then, for so long previous as 1641 Roger Abdy, merchant, had left 120_l._ “for or towards the ransoming and redeeming of sixe poore English Protestant captives out of the bondage and slavery of the Turks.” Thomas Betton’s bequest was a noble one, for just about the date of it all the world was suffering from the terrors of slavery. Between 1734 and 1825 the Company appears to have paid away in redemption money something like 21,000_l._, or as much as the whole estate had been originally worth, but the Ironmongers, having been good trustees, had “improved” the estate, and the result was that after Lord Exmouth’s great victory, no more slaves being likely to be redeemable, and there being a large balance at the bank, the Company desired to utilise the surplus for the benefit of charity, reserving a certain sum per annum for future redemptions and contingencies. This was serious, so down came the Government and popped the whole into Chancery. The Company believed they were right, and did not want the interference; but they had to fight against the Crown, and from 1829 to 1845 did the battle last. Several thousands of pounds did Government law cost the charity, but that the Company was right is evident, because the highest tribunal, the House of Lords, decided that what the Company had proposed so many years before should now be carried out—bequests to the poor of the company and to every national school in the kingdom.

The Ironmongers’ charities are not so extensive as many of the other City Guilds’, but they represent a variety of really good and seasonable benefactions. Among these are two almshouse foundations (Geffery and Lewen), scholarships to schools and exhibitions to universities, a small free school in Cornwall, the poor of the City wards, loans to poor young freemen to help them on in life, bequests to hospitals, to poor maids upon their marriage, to poor prisoners in debt, to the poor freemen and their widows, to poor ministers and clergy, to the national schools of the kingdom, &c. The charity trusts amount to about 12,000_l._ a year, half of which, being from rents, have of late years fluctuated. The Company does not possess any ecclesiastical patronage, except the appointment of a chaplain, who is also the minister to the almshouse poor. There was a priest of the company 400 years ago, but the present chaplain, the Rev. H. M. Baker, is the fourteenth since 1715, when the first appointment to the almshouses in the Kingsland Road was made.

Through the changes of the times and the “compulsory” sales by Act of Parliament for modern improvements, some of the old property has changed hands and new property has been purchased. This has been specially the case under the Geffery and Betton trusts, and round about East and West Ham and the Isle of Dogs. The Company now possesses houses and premises in Old Street, St. Luke’s (Mitchell), Basinghall Street, Philpot Lane, and Fleet Street. It also possesses the site of the famous New Park Street Chapel, Southwark, where the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon first preached when he came to London; also, farms in the counties of Bucks, Essex, and Surrey. When in the good old times—so says a newspaper in July, 1769—the Company went on tour to view their Essex estate, they “held their annual feast at the Devil’s House” (now Duval’s House), near East Ham, a house of entertainment at that date. The sign of the house is suggestive to the disciples of St. Dunstan. In recent years two great districts have grown up in and around East and West Ham—Beckton, which takes its name from the worthy clerk of the Company (S. Adams Beck), who died in 1883, and Silvertown, from a recent Master of the Ironmongers’ Company (S. W. Silver), who has proved most energetic in promoting the Company’s welfare. One word more about the old estates. The great fire of London of 1666 burnt down nearly all the City property of the Companies, and the loss to the Ironmongers was serious. Fortunately, the Hall was saved.

Charitable Ironmongers, whether we view them as donors of land, of houses, of plate, or other things, or for the time they have given towards promoting the welfare of the Company, have been in many ways worthy benefactors to the City and the citizens. We have been curious in one inquiry—to what extent the donations of some classes of plate have been made, and we find that in the 400 years ending 1865 “brother” Ironmongers have given twenty-nine silver gilt cups and covers, many very large and valuable, seventeen basins and ewers, and seven salts; besides many other descriptions of plate, such as silver spoons, ornaments, candlesticks, and the like. Of course, the Company does not possess all the valuables now. Our former Monarchy, who had the citizens’ welfare so much at heart, took good care (as we have already shown) not to allow these valuables to remain too long in the hands of “the City Fathers,” and so to-day the Ironmongers have but a small collection of plate. When the charitable Ironmongers left these cups for their brethren “to make themselves comfortable,” whether at a dinner or other feast, they never thought that their radically-inclined descendants would object to the good old English greeting: “The Master and Wardens drink to you in a loving cup, and bid you all a hearty welcome.”

Eminent Ironmongers, by their portraits, still adorn the Ironmongers’ Hall. Thirteen are in the banqueting-room, and eight in the court-room. Armorial shields round the Hall give us the names of our worthy Masters from the earliest times, while there are two statues of great interest, Edward IV., the founder, and Lord Mayor Beckford—this latter being in a niche on the grand staircase.

Abstracts of most of the Ironmongers’ wills are in our collection, and the series is most curious. We cannot do justice to the subject now, but some time we hope to give some interesting details. One, however, is worth quoting, and that is of Alderman Richard Chamberlin, 1567. He was a good benefactor, he remembered the poor, he gave the Company 50_l._ “to helpe them oute of debte,” he left 10_l._ for “a dynner at oure halle,” desiring the members’ wives should be present, and he then put down on paper, “I praye God make us merye in Heaven!”

We will now, in alphabetical arrangement, give a few of the names of those Ironmongers worth remembering. We do not profess to give a complete list, for such would form a volume by itself, so numerous are they, and so many notes do we possess about them.

BATE, John, 1500, and Felys his wife, gave to the Company a cup and other things, “ther with to do God and us worship, and not to be solde while they will last.”

BECKFORD, William, Alderman, and Lord Mayor 1762 and 1770, when he died; was made free of the Company 1752, was born in Jamaica, his father being Peter Beckford, Speaker in the Assembly. The Lord Mayor made himself famous by his celebrated speech to George III., as engraved on the monument in Guildhall. Another statue, formerly at Fonthill, was presented to the company by his son William in 1833. See pedigrees and other details in Britton and Rutter’s two descriptions of Fonthill, Wilts. Richard, brother of the Lord Mayor, was also Alderman and M.P., but he was a member of the Clothworkers’ Company.

BETTON, Thomas, a Turkey merchant, admitted to the freedom by redemption 1696, lived in Hoxton Square; will dated 1723. He died 1724; buried in the Ironmongers’ Almshouse Grounds, Kingsland Road. Portrait presented to the Company in 1728. Gave the residue of his estate for the redemption of slaves in Barbary (as already noted).

BLUNDELL, Peter, although not an Ironmonger, but from a poor errand boy had grown to be a rich clothier, and one of “the worthies of Devon” (Prince), and “a man very Godly and Christianly disposed all his life time” (Stow), left charities to the extent of about 40,000_l._, including 150_l._ to each of the twelve great Livery Companies of London. He died 1601, aged eighty-one.

BICKNELL, Elhanan, of Herne Hill, Dulwich, a citizen and Ironmonger, and great patron of the arts. He died 1861. His will was proved at 350,000_l._ His pictures sold at Christie’s for 56,499_l._; the sculpture, 2,145_l._; drawings, 15,947_l._; prints, 444_l._; his houses and lands, 18,000_l._ He had no fewer than ten Turners in his collection. He left several charitable bequests.

CAMBELL.—Several of this family have proved to be eminent Ironmongers. Sir Thomas, Lord Mayor 1610, Master 1604 and 1613; Sir James, Lord Mayor 1629, and three times Master; Robert, a merchant, and Master 1631. Sir James was the principal benefactor, leaving nearly 50,000_l._, as may be seen in Strype’s “Stow.” He died 1641, and his portrait is in the Hall.

CANNING.—Of this family William was Master 1617 and 1627, when he died. George (who died 1646) was for many years the Company’s agent in Ireland, and was the ancestor of the Prime Minister George Canning.

CARRE, John, 1571, his son in 1573, and Mrs. Carre in 1583, left many bequests to the Company.

CHAMBERLIN.—This family was well represented on the Company. There were Richard, George, and Robert. Alderman Richard, Master 1560 and 1565, died November 19, 1566, and was buried in St. Olave, Old Jewry. His epitaph stated:—

To the poore he was liberall and gave for God’s sake, But now his fame is plentifull and he a Heavenly make; He was like one of vs, according to our mould, But now he unlike vs in Heaven where he would; His time was short in sicknesse rare as to all is knowne, But now his time shall long endure and never be cast downe.

CLITHEROW.—Alderman and Lord Mayor Sir Christopher; Master 1618-1624; died 1642. He was son of Henry, three times Master, who died 1607. See pedigree in the “History of Hertfordshire.” A worthy benefactor.

DANE, William, Alderman and Sheriff 1569, Master 1570-1573; died November, 1579. Margaret, his widow, 1579, was “a good woman.” She left many charities, including the 12,000 faggots to the poor for firewood, which has been made by the ignorant the more serious gift to burn them with. Her portrait hangs in the Hall.

DENHAM, Sir William, descended from the Dinhams of Normandy. Sheriff 1534, Master 1531 to 1548. Died August 4, 1548. By a curious error in the codicil to the will the Company were compelled to purchase the properties previously bequeathed to them, including that known as the Old Jewry Chambers. His portrait hangs in the Hall. Curiously enough, a branch of the Denham family were copyholders of Hackney in the reign of James I., and removed to Plumstead. Of later years another branch resided in Hackney, and the wife of the present writer is a descendant of that branch, descended from the Alderman Denham, and from the Thomas Denham, a City Corporator early this century, and a member of the Court of the Ironmongers’ Company.

DOWNE, Robert, in 1556, gave premises in St. Sepulchre; also for dinners, obits and plate. The site “Ironmongers’ Buildings” is now covered by the Holborn Valley Viaduct.

DRAPER, Sir Christopher, Lord Mayor, 1566. Eight times Master, the last time in 1581. A window formerly existing at the Hall, with his portrait on it, was removed in 1845.

EAST, Robert, 1606, gave tapestry to the Hall, and 10_l._ for “a drinckinge” at his burial.

FRENCH, George Russell, son of John French, Master 1823. The son was chosen surveyor to the Company May, 1849. He was a Shakespearean antiquary, and wrote many interesting works, especially the compilation “Catalogue of Antiquities” we have so often alluded to. He compiled a very curious list of the Ironmongers’ Company, applying to each a Shakespearean quotation. He died in October, 1881.

GEFFERY, Sir Robert, Lord Mayor 1686, Master 1667 and 1685. He died 1703, and was buried in St. Dionis, Fenchurch Street, and when that church was pulled down his remains were removed, July, 1878, to the Ironmongers’ burial-ground, Kingsland Road. By will, after many charitable bequests, he left the residue of his estate for the purchase of land, and the erection (in 1714) of the present chapel and fourteen almshouses. The old twenty-nine rules for the government will be found in Strype’s “Stow.” At the date of their erection the almshouses were in “the suburbs.”

GRINSELL, Thomas, “Citizen and Ironmonger,” a well-known parishioner of St. Dunstan’s-in-the-West, Fleet Street, and famous for having been the Master of “the gentle angler,” Izaak Walton, who became a member of the Company in 1618. The Grinsell family subsequently resided in Westminster. About Thomas, see “Memorials of Temple Bar and Fleet Street,” 1869, p. 80.

GYVA, John, about 1515 gave to the Company the hearse-cloth or funeral-pall. It is of crimson velvet and cloth-of-gold tissue, ornamented with fruit and flowers for centre-piece. In the centre of each sides the Blessed Virgin Mary in glory crowned as Queen of Heaven, with figures of Saint Elizabeth of Hungary, St. John Baptist, and St. John Evangelist. Beyond the figures on each side the Company’s arms, and at each end in cloth of gold a monstrance, representing a silver-gilt shrine, jewelled, inscribed with the name and date of John Gyva and Elizabeth, his wife. This pall was long used for funerals. In 1532 it was only to be used by members and their wives, but this exception was relaxed, for in 1678 40_s._ was to be the fee for its use by strangers generally. Elizabeth Gyva in 1534 gave the Company a tenement, directing them to “remember” her in their prayers for 100 years.

HALLWOOD, Thomas, 1622, gave plate, exhibitions to universities, &c. His portrait hangs in the Hall.

HANBEY, Thomas, 1782, provided for the education of two children in Christ’s Hospital, and Mary, his wife, 1796, left the interest of 300_l._ to provide for the repairs of the tomb of her husband in St. Luke’s Churchyard, Old Street, and residue of the interest among the poor.

HANDSON, Ralph, clerk to the Company, was a good benefactor and kindly disposed, leaving in 1653 to the poor members, to hospitals, and to the yeomanry for their half-yearly repast, as already mentioned. His portrait hangs in the Hall. He was cousin to Nicholas Leat.

HEYLIN, Rowland, Sheriff 1624, Master 1614 and 1625, died 1629. He gave 300_l._, out of which a dinner and a sermon were to be annually provided to commemorate the Powder Plot deliverance, and loans made to poor young freemen. His portrait is in the Hall.

HARVEY, Sir James, Alderman; Lord Mayor 1582; four times Master. His son, Sir Sebastian, was Lord Mayor 1618, Master 1600; wrote his name “Harvye.” Lady Harvey, 1620, gave 21_l._ for a dinner at the funeral of Sir Sebastian.

HOOD, Samuel, first Viscount, was presented with the freedom 1783 in honour of his great victory. He died 1816. His portrait by Gainsborough (presented by Lord Hood) hangs in the Hall. We possess a characteristic letter written by Lord Hood in 1811 with his left hand.

HUMFREYS, Sir William, Bart., Lord Mayor 1714, Master 1705, and gave a silver cup and cover. He acted as chief butler at the coronation of George I. Died 1735, buried at St. Mildred’s, Poultry, and when that church was pulled down (1875) the Company desired to give him a “proper” reinterment at Ilford, but, although the character of the coffin showed that the body inside was possibly his, all the silver plates and handles and ornaments had been stolen long before, and so Sir William could not be identified, and the remains were taken with the others.

LANE, Ralph, Turkey merchant, gave to the Company, in 1712, a silver-gilt cup, upon which is engraved a coat of arms, with thirty-two quarterings. It is interesting to note that John Lane, the elder, in 1457, was one of the Company who advanced 10_l._ towards purchasing the Hall property. His son John gave 40_s._

LAWRENCE.—A well-known and respected name in the City. Several have been members of the Company. John Lawrans, about 1500, gave “a grete maser which hath sent Lawrans in the bottom.” It weighed over 60 oz. Another John Lawrence, in 1731, gave a tankard. We may here mention that

ST. LAWRENCE is the patron saint of the company. The old barge “head” represented the saint with the gridiron in his hand. In the early churchwarden’s accounts of the parish of St. Lawrence, Reading, are numerous curious entries between 1520 and 1530, such as:—“For gildyng of Seynt Lawrence gredyron, viij_d._”; “to the peynters Wyff, dew for gilding of Seynt Lawren, vj_s._ viij_d._,” &c.

LEAT, Nicholas, Alderman, three times Master, died 1631, captain of the trained bands. He was an authority in agriculture (_see_ Gerard’s “Herbal,” 1597, p. 246). The sons presented his portrait now in the court-room.

LEWEN, Thomas, Alderman and Sheriff, Master 1535, died 1557, founded the almshouses in Bread Street, now in St. Luke’s. A good benefactor. His portrait is in the Hall.

MITCHELL, Thomas, died 1527, gave “a croft of garden enclosed by ditches and wall” outside Cripplegate (now St. Luke’s) of about 10 acres, which, with about an acre purchased in 1595, comprises now 11½ acres, covered with some 360 houses. St. Luke’s Church was built and churchyard formed on part of the ground. Portrait in Hall.

MORRIS, Richard, was Master in the Armada year, 1588. Many members of the family have been in the Company between 1568 and 1718. He died 1592. His daughter married first Sir William Cockayne (Lord Mayor, 1619), and, secondly, Henry Carey, Earl of Dover. From both husbands peerages descend. Samuel Morris, in 1680, gave an iron box, with keys, to hold the Company’s seal.

MILNE, Sir David, K.C.B., admitted to the Freedom of the Company with his superior officer, Lord Exmouth, in 1817.

NEWELL, Mrs. Ann, in 1544, gave a table and napkins—a seasonable gift in those days. Her namesake, William J. Newall, who died a liveryman of the Company in 1888, and worth 257,000_l._, seems to have forgotten in his will his poor “brother-ironmongers”!

NICHOLL.—This is an old family name on the company. John Nicholl, of Canonbury, Master 1859, was a good friend to the Company (and to the writer). He compiled a magnificent account of the history of the Ironmongers, 1851 and 1866, and the original MS. “Records,” in six volumes, are in the Company’s library. He died February 7, 1871, aged eighty-one, and his portrait appropriately hangs in the court-room next to that of Mr. Beck. His son, Edward Hadham Nicholl, Esq., is the senior warden of the Company this year.

PELLATT.—Many representatives of this Sussex family have been in the Company, including Apsley Pellatt, M.P., died 1863 (who gave a silver-mounted snuff-box), and Thomas Pellatt, Clerk of the Company, died 1829. Apsley Pellatt, of Lewes, grandfather of the M.P., was Master 1789.

PELLEW, Edward, created Viscount Exmouth, 1816. The hero of Algiers and the terminator of slavery there. Presented with the freedom of the Company, January 31, 1817, and with a sword by the City. The original grant of the Company’s freedom, signed by T. Pellatt, the clerk, is in the possession of a member of the Company. Portrait by Sir William Beechey hangs in the Hall.

PRICE.—This family has had many representatives in the Company. John Price was buried at Clapham 1739; his wife 1760. Sir Charles Price, Bart., Lord Mayor 1803, was Master 1798. In his mayoralty he gave the magnificent cut-glass chandelier now hanging in the Hall. His portrait also hangs there. Among other papers the writer has the original Privy Seal for the grant of the baronetcy. Sir Charles died 1818. His son was Master 1819 and died 1847. He was succeeded by Sir Charles Rugge Price, who had a splendid collection of engravings, including a choice copy of Rembrandt’s “Hundred Guilder Piece”—Christ Healing the Sick—which at the sale in 1867 sold for 1,180_l._, the highest sum ever paid for a single engraving.

SHAKESPEARE, John, Alderman and Sheriff 1768, translated to the Ironmongers’ from the Broderers’ 1767, Master 1769. A large ropemaker at Shadwell. Buried at Stepney, 1775. Gave silver candlesticks to the Company. He was supposed to be descended from a branch of the dramatist’s family.

SLADE, Felix, son of Robert, of Doctors’ Commons, and Walcot Place, Lambeth; Master 1803. The son was a collector of choice articles and a great benefactor to the British Museum and the nation. He died March 29, 1868. He founded the Slade Professorship.

THOMPSON, William, Alderman, M.P. Lord Mayor 1828 A wealthy ironfounder. Master 1829 and 1841; died 1854 His only daughter married the Earl of Bective, now Marquis of Headfort. Among his gifts were two large silver candlesticks.

THOROLD.—Several members have been on the Company and served offices of Master, &c.; also benefactors to the poor. The family were of Harmeston Hall, county Lincoln, which was sold in 1884 for 115,000_l._

WALKER, Henry, made free in 1634, having served apprentice to Robert Holland, was so extraordinary an individual that John Taylor wrote and printed his “Life and Progress of Henry Walker the Ironmonger,” 1642, and it is now a very rare tract. Captain William Walker, Master 1684, gave in 1694 a large set of knives and forks, with silver handles, for the Company’s future use.

WALTON, Izaak, “the gentle angler,” apprentice to Thomas Grinsell, was, on November 18, 1618, “admitted and sworne a free brother of this companie and payd for his admittance xiij_d._ and for default of presentment and enrollment x_s._”. His portrait hangs in the Hall. He was warden of the Yeomanry 1627, died December 15, 1683, and buried at Winchester. A full account of him and his family will be found in the “Memorials of Temple Bar and Fleet Street,” 1869, p. 82, and Pink’s and Wood’s “Clerkenwell,” p. 107. The writer possesses a large amount of curious and original matter relating to “good Izaak,” which he intends one day to publish.

WESTWOOD.—Several have been members. While Robert was Master, 1828, among the eighty-five liverymen were Lord Exmouth, Sir David Milne, two baronets, and two aldermen. Robert, Master in 1861, gave a silver-gilt cup and cover. William Henry, in 1878 and 1882, proved himself very kindly disposed to the Company’s poor.

WOODWARD, Mistress Katherine, in the seventeenth century, left 200_l._ for poor scholars, prisoners, hospitals, and poor maids’ marriages.

YOUNG, Richard, 1675, gave a silver salt, a caudle cup and cover, and was excused serving office of Master. John, in 1695, gave the Company six pictures.

Such, then, are a few of the names of Ironmongers worthy to be remembered. We have not exhausted, by a very long way, our list, but we think the selection will prove that the Ironmongers have had many good and true citizens in their roll. Our wish is this: May they increase as years roll on, and, as the toast is periodically given by the Master of the Company, so do we echo it three times three—“The Worshipful Company of Ironmongers, Root and Branch, and may it Flourish for Ever!”

* * * * *

The writer having so far completed the task he has set himself, and briefly chronicled some of the most interesting facts connected with his ancient Company, thinks it but right to say that what he has now printed is only a small portion of a larger history, which some time hence he intends to produce for the benefit of the public at large, if his life is spared to undertake the work. Having been honoured by his brother freemen, as already stated in the last chapter, he determined to prove he was not unmindful of his duty, or the rights and privileges of his brethren, whatever some persons may think to the contrary. He has, therefore, ventured to print as succinct an account of their history as it is possible to give in a small compass, and Herbert’s “History,” and the “Some Account” of his old friend John Nicholl being either out of print or too expensive, probably the present will do as a temporary substitute for the members until another is ready for publication.

T. C. NOBLE, Warden of the Yeomanry, 1888-1889.

APPENDIX.

THE BLACKSMITHS’ COMPANY.

The advance of technical education, the inauguration of another trades exhibition promoted by a City Company, and that Company the ancient Blacksmiths’ Guild, must be our excuse for placing upon record some account of its history from the earliest date known about it as a fraternity.

Of the origin of Guilds we have already had occasion to speak in our history of the Ironmongers. Mr. Nicholl, the historian of that Company, gives us some interesting facts in his notes, and we cannot do better than quote his preliminary words:—

The art of working in metals was more highly esteemed than any other by the Anglo-Saxons. Their best artisans were the clergy. Edgar established a law that every priest, to increase knowledge, should diligently learn some handicraft. Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, to the arts of music, engraving, painting, and writing, added the craft of a smith, and was an expert workman. Stigand and Ethelwold, both bishops, were celebrated for their mechanical skill. The chief smith was a man of considerable distinction in the courts of the Anglo-Saxon kings and his privileges and weregild exceeded those of any other craftsman. Towards the period of the Conquest the manufacture of iron had considerably increased, and the art of working it was better understood. Steel and iron armour were common. At the time of the Domesday Survey the City of Hereford had six smiths, who paid each one penny for his forge, and made 120 pieces of iron from the king’s ore, receiving in return a customary payment of three pence, and being free from all other service. The City of Gloucester paid to the king 36 dicras of iron and 100 ductile rods to make nails for the king’s ships. Iron had now become the principal manufacture of Gloucestershire, and in the reign of Edward I. there is stated to have been no less than 72 furnaces in the Forest of Dean for smelting it. The largest establishments of the Romans for the manufacture of iron in Britain were in this county, but the method, whatever it may have been, which they employed was imperfect and the cinders of their numerous forges, wherever they are discovered, are found to contain a very considerable portion of unsmelted metal. The first smelting-furnace, and that which in all probability was used by the Romans for the manufacture of iron, is supposed to be the air-bloomery; it is described as a low conical structure, with small openings at the bottom for the admission of air and a large orifice at top for carrying off the gaseous products of combustion. It was filled with charcoal and ore in alternate layers, and the fire applied to the lowest part. How long this simple contrivance continued in use we have no means of ascertaining, the period to which it belongs being so very remote; there is no doubt, however, that the next era of improvement in the manufacture of iron was the introduction of bellows, and the construction of the blast-bloomery, which greatly facilitated the process of smelting, and, by allowing the construction of larger furnaces, considerably increased the manufacture. The blast-bloomery, in process of time and the constant progression of the arts, was superseded by what is denominated the blast-furnace. This last improvement is supposed to have been introduced during the early part of the sixteenth century; for in the seventeenth century the art of casting in metal had arrived at a great degree of perfection, and in the reign of Elizabeth there was a considerable export trade of cast-iron ordnance to the Continent.

As “by hammer and hand all arts do stand,” so was the origin of the Blacksmiths’ Guild in the nineteenth year of the reign of Edward III., 1325. Like many others it is a fraternity by prescription, subsequently incorporated by Royal Charter. “The Articles of the Blacksmiths,” dated the 46th of Edward III., A.D. 1372, are enrolled in Letter-book G, fo. 285, preserved among the Guildhall records, and a most interesting and concise translation will be found in Mr. Riley’s “Memorials of London,” 1868, p. 361. The Articles specially provide against the introduction into the City of inferior foreign-made work, and the forging of trademarks was, of course, a serious matter. “Every master in the said trade shall put his own mark upon his work, such as heads of lances, knives and axes, and other large work, that people may know who made them in case default shall be found in the same.” Forgers of such mark were dealt with without delay, and it is interesting to know that one of the earliest of the overseers appointed resided near Holborn Bridge (now the Viaduct), close to the Charity Trust Estate of the present Company. No one was to be made free of the Guild unless he was skilled in his work as an apprentice should be, so that we may be sure the early blacksmiths truly represented their “art and mystery.”

“The Ordinances of the Blacksmiths” are enrolled in the Guildhall “Letter-book” H., fo. 292, and will be found translated in Mr. Riley’s “Memorials,” p. 537. They are dated the 18 Richard 2nd, 1394. No smith was to work throughout the night, or to annoy his neighbours, and the hours of work were to be from 6 o’clock in the morning to 8 o’clock in the evening in winter, and from the beginning of daylight to 9 o’clock at night in summer. None to work in his shop on a Saturday, or on the eve of a feast or holy day after the first stroke of the vesper bell, under heavy fines and penalties. Two wardens to be annually elected for their government, and strict search to be made in the City and suburbs for the detection of false wares. No one to make a key for a lock unless he have the lock to make it by, and nothing to be exposed for sale at any fair until the wardens have certified it “good and lawful.”

Forty years afterwards we find another enrolment, and among records where such an entry would never be looked for—the Register Book of the Commissary of London, labelled “Liber 3 More, 1418-1438,” folio 455, now preserved in the Probate Registry, Somerset House. We are indebted to Mr. J. R. Daniel-Tyssen for the discovery in 1852, and to Mr. H. C. Coote for editing and printing them in the “Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archæological Society,” Vol. IV., pp. 32-35. They are entitled—

Ordynances articulis, and constituciones ordeyned and grarnted by the Worshypfull Maistres and Wardeynes in the Worship of the Bretherhed of Saynt Loye, att the Fest of Ester, with alle the hole company of the crafte of blaksmythes, who assemble in Seynt Thomas of Acres and thence to the Grey Freres of London. Founded and ordeyned atte the Fest of Ester, 1434, 12 Henry VI.

These ordinances provide—that every servant (brother) pay 2_d._ quarterly, and every sister 1_d._ Strangers “for yncomyng,” pay 2_s._ A beadle of the Yeomanry to be appointed who was to receive from every brother “for his salari” one-halfpenny quarterly. “And whaune eny brother other sisster be passed to God the seyd bedell to have for his traveyle ij_d_.” Any member disobeying the orders “to be corrected be the Oversseer,” and disobeying the second time he “schalbe put oute of the crafte for evere.” New masters were to be chosen at the feast of St. Loy. “If therbe eny brother that telleth the Counseyle of the seyd Brethered to his master prentis or to eny other man he shall paye to the box ij_s._” Any brother scandalising another to be fined 12_d._ “Also at the quarter dai we will have baken conys as hit was be gonne.” Any master breaking the rule to pay 6_s._ 8_d._ All fines were halved—a moiety each to “the Mastres box,” and the Yeomen’s box. After some other orders follow a list of the fellowship members, sixty-seven in number, headed by John Lamborn, who was then, or had been, “Master of the Yomen.” Two of those signing the rules were the wives of two of the brethren, Stephen Manne and William Mapull.

Although the Blacksmiths’ Guild was not in existence when St. Dunstan played his harp, and worked at his forge and anvil, we cannot forbear saying something about a prelate who has, more than any other, raised the reputation of the “art and mystery,” which after 500 years still flourishes within the boundaries of great London City, and at the time we are writing this gives a splendid proof that it is not wanting in will or way to attempt the improvement of the trade by advocating and supporting technical education.

Dunstan, to whose memory so many churches have been dedicated, was born near Glastonbury, in county Somerset, and educated at the Abbey. In subsequent years, when he passed a retired life, he built himself a small cell, and enacted there (if tradition holds its own) one of, if not the greatest miracle upon record. He was a favourite with King Athelstan, whom he much pleased by musical performances on his harp, and many astounding tales have been handed down to us about this instrument playing without being touched, and rendering such musical and hitherto unknown melody as enabled the humbler classes to be much imposed upon. Dunstan died May 18, A.D. 988, so that he has been dead just 900 years. And yet to-day is still recorded that marvellous meeting he once had with “the evil one,” or, as we were told in our youth, the Devil. Many a time did this tempter “try his hand” upon our musical blacksmith. He appeared to him in every shape and form, even as a beautiful female, and certainly to our mind the most likely “to draw.” Poor Dunstan in his little cell at Glastonbury, whenever at his devotional practice as harpist, or using his forge and anvil as blacksmith, was certain to receive a visit, and his sweet song drowned by the black visitor’s unholy jeers. At last the day of reckoning came, Dunstan seized a golden opportunity when his tyrannical tormenter put in appearance at the very time his forge was at work and his pincers hot. Little was said, no doubt, but the doings were great—the greatest ever recorded of man’s work—for

St. Dunstan, so the story goes, Seized his sable Majesty by the nose, And made him loudly roar; So loud, indeed, from North to South, From East to West, like from thunder’s mouth It echoed a thousand miles and more.

But the pulling of the evil one’s nose was but a part of the transaction, for our blacksmith then and there pulled out his parchment and made the enemy sign that famous declaration, never in future to molest Holy Church or Holy men, and keep aloof of all buildings in which hang the horseshoe. It is not many years ago that in two streets in London this emblem of protection or “luck” may have been seen—Dudley Street, St. Giles’s, and Dean Street, Fetter Lane—the latter place not a thousand miles, but only a few yards, from where this account is printed. As for the hammer, anvil and tongs of St. Dunstan, Mr. Lower in his notices of the ironworks of Sussex, gives woodcuts of the three articles, said to be “the famous originals, preserved at Mayfield in that county, so noted for its iron. The anvil and tongs are of no great antiquity, but the hammer with its iron handle may be considered a mediæval relic.” A few years ago we attended a sale of curiosities of more than the usual interest, and which were the lifelong attention of Mr. Snoxall, Charterhouse Square. One of the lots was the original anvil and hammer of the “Harmonious Blacksmith,” from which Handel composed his celebrated song, and we can endorse, from a trial we made, the assertion of the MS. description that Powell’s anvil produced B and E notes, as few anvils have done, or are likely to do again.

St. Dunstan is the patron saint of the Goldsmiths’ Company, and he figures in their hall both in picture and in statue. The legend was a favourite one in their Lord Mayor’s Show, especially in that of 1687, when in the trade pageant the prelate seated on a chair of State, having a golden mitre on his head, a crozier in one hand and tongs in the other, surrounded by forges and anvils and blacksmith at work, taught the devil the oft-repeated lesson not to intrude on forbidden ground. We might multiply evidences of the popularity of the famous legend, but we have said enough, and must proceed with our Company’s history.

In the first year of the reign of Henry VII. (1485) both the Blacksmiths’ and Spurriers’ guilds will be found in the list given by Campbell, vol. i. p. 4; and a few years later, in 1502, standing in precedency the 36th Company, the Blacksmiths had a livery of sixteen, and the Spurriers, standing the 46th, had six. When Henry VIII. and Queen Katherine “shall pass by towards their Coronation,” the same Companies sent members to represent them, and in the eighth year of that King’s reign, 1517, it was settled that in precedency in the future the Blacksmiths should be the 41st Company and the Spurriers the 46th. There were then about sixty Companies in the City, but of these ten were not in the “clothing,” that is to say, had a livery.

It was by Charter, dated April 20, 1571, that the two Companies were united under the usual conditions of a body corporate and with the powers and privileges of making ordinances for the government of the Company. The Charter was confirmed by James I. in his second year, March 21, 1604-5. Meanwhile the precepts poured into the Blacksmiths as they did to other Companies, and in May, 1595, out of 12,000 quarters of corn stored at the Bridgehouse in the preceding November by the City Guilds, only some 779 quarters remained, and ten of these belonged to this Company. The Corn Custom, as described by Herbert, was a heavy tax, and often so tyrannical was the system of levy that some of the wardens were sent to prison in 1632 for neglecting to obey orders.

In 1609 King James I. submitted to the City of London his scheme for the plantation of the forfeited lands of the O’Neills and the O’Dohertys in the province of Ulster in the North of Ireland; and the same King founded a new order of Knighthood, purchasable by those desirous of helping to maintain the authority of the King in future against the rebels in Ireland. That order of Knighthood is the present Baronetage, and in proof of its origin every person so titled bears in his shield of arms the red hand of Ulster. The citizens of London paid James I., from first to last, for their Ulster estates more than 60,000_l._ The difficulty then arose as to the management, and so, in 1613, the whole property was partitioned off into twelve shares (according to the sum subscribed by each of the twelve principal Guilds, who, having raised 40,000_l._, showed that each of the twelve had paid 3,333_l._ 6_s._ 8_d._). With the twelve principal companies certain minor ones, having paid a certain sum, joined in the scheme, and accordingly, the Blacksmiths, subscribing 64_l._ with seven others, became associated with the Vintners, who held possession until the year 1736, when they sold the whole estate, reserving only a rent charge.

There are many interesting documents extant relating to the Blacksmiths and the Blacksmiths’ Company. We do not lack the will to publish all the information we could give about their progress, but for the greatest of all reasons—want of room, our space being but limited—we must limit our notes to a few of the most important events.

In 1607 Thomas Bickford, Master of the Company, prosecuted Nicholas Lowe for carrying on the trade of a smith, he not being free of the City; and in March, 1612, the curious controversy about Daubigny’s patent set all the machinery of the Royal Commissioners and the City into high-pressure activity. It appears that Clement Dawbney, _alias_ Daubigny, desired to have a renewal of his patent for cutting iron into small rods, and that restraint should be placed upon the importation of foreign iron so cut. His petition to the Commissioners of Suits was backed by shipwrights, masters, and nailmakers, who particularly condemned foreign iron. The Commissioners, being unable to decide, referred the matter to three of the City Companies, the Ironmongers, Blacksmiths, and Carpenters. The record books of the Ironmongers contain many interesting details of the inquiry made by that company into the question in dispute, and two of the most active members in the debate were two of the Chamberlyn family—George (then Master, in 1612) and Richard (who had been Master two years previous). The Nailmakers reminded the Commissioners, “as the fathers of the Commonwealth,” that a private patent deprived the poor of their trade and labour; that one or two enriched themselves at the cost of the many. “Wee allwaies have in evrie C. weight eleven or twelve pounds of ends or refuse iron and pay for that after 2_d._ the lb., whereof we make againe ever hardly a halfpenny for everie pound.” Also, “We affirme as workmen that especially it is that the Flemmish iron is as good and servicable and worketh as well as or owne English iron.” The result was a temporary benefit, for the patent was called in; although Sir Francis Bacon, one of the Commissioners, having made a special report subsequently, in 1617, that the monopoly, or patent, would benefit not only the Blacksmiths but the Nailmakers, and was only opposed by Burrell, who had set up a similar ironworks at Danbury, the King renewed the patent, December 11, 1618. The granting of similar monopolies caused no end of bickerings and ill-feeling, and ruin was by no means uncommon among those who neither had capital with which to defend their rights, nor interest at Court to prevent that “bribery and corruption” so common in the surroundings of our seventeenth century monarchy. When, in the previous reign, the Earl of Oxford had endeavoured to obtain one of these patents of privilege against the Company of Pewterers, “whereby he would have undone the pewterers, their wives and families,” Queen Elizabeth acted with discretion—not always a virtue with all-powerful royalty—for she actually granted the Earl’s desired privilege to the company itself!

We will now give a full copy of a petition which the Blacksmiths sent to the Privy Council in December, 1631. It is directed to “The Right Honᵇˡᵉ the Lords and others of His Maᵗʸˢ most Honᵇˡᵉ Privy Counsell,” by “the Mʳ Wardens and Assistants of the Society of Blacksmiths, London”:—

Humbly sheweth—

That notwᵗʰstanding yoʳ petʳˢ great care and good endeavʳ by making searches and orders, according to their oath and charter, whereby to suppress disorders and abuses in deceitfull working and making of ironwork, yet by the evill example and refractorie of some ill-affected persons of their society, whose names are here under menconed, their authority and orders are slighted and disgraced, and many who have been heretofore obedient and conformable doe now by their meanes continue refractory and disorderly, and yoʳ petʳˢ and their charters are so notoriously scandalised and abused that of themselves they cannot reforme the same, nor have they any hope of redresse therefore but by yoʳ honoʳˢ favor.

They therefore most humbly beseeche yoʳ honoʳˢ to take their great wrong and just grievance into yoʳ hoᵇˡᵉ considerations. And to be pleased to send for the said disorderly and obstinate persons hereunder named before you. And to take such order wᵗʰ them for their conformity and obedience to the ordinances made and to be made for the good governmᵗ of the said society and prevencon. of deceits & abuses as to yʳ grave and hoᵇˡᵉ wisdome shall seem meete.

And they shall ever praye for yoʳ honoʳˢ.

The names of the six disorderly Blacksmiths appear to have been:—George Johnson, William Bickford, Hanns Garrett, Leonard Berars, William Browne, and Henry Baily. Whether their nonconformity and other troubles led the Company to obtain a new charter we know not, but it is quite clear they did obtain one of Charles I., in his fourteenth year, and dated February 16, 1638-39. By this new grant all persons carrying on the business or trade of a blacksmith or spurrier within the City of London or suburbs four miles round were incorporated as “the Keepers or Wardens and Society of the Art or Mystery of Blacksmiths, London,” to have four keepers or wardens and twenty-one assistants, and to make by-laws and ordinances, to examine all spurs, ironwork made, &c., within the City and four miles round, and to hold lands to the extent of 30_l._ above the former charter allowance of 30_l._ In accordance with this grant and power the Company framed new orders (confirmed by the Judges), dated in December, 1640, and one of these allowed the Company to “call, nominate, choose, and admit into the yeomanry of the said Society such and so many persons being freemen of the said Society as they should think meet, honest, and of ability to be called and admitted into the said yeomanry.”

This shows that the Company anciently comprised the Livery, yeomanry, and freemen, and the clerk believes that the freemen were the journeymen and the yeomanry the master blacksmiths. Under the _Quo warranto_ writ of Charles II. the Company surrendered with the other Guilds, but were reinstated to their rights and privileges by James II. in the first year of his reign by a charter dated March 18, 1684-85.

The Act of Common Council of June 9, 1658, compelled all persons carrying on the trade to be free of the Company. Fifty years later the Company took special means to enforce it; but, like many of the other rights and privileges of the Guilds, through the altered conditions of trading the power of the Company has not been exercised for many years. The following entry from the books of the Founders’ Company, as extracted by Mr. Williams and printed in his “Annals,” is sufficiently interesting to merit a place in our present notice of the Blacksmiths:—

1660, Sept. 3. Memorandum.

That upon this day the mastʳ and wardens did visit all the ffounders shopps in Bartholomew Lane and Lothebury—as well of them that were free of the ffounders company as those of the coppersmiths, and found in the shop of John Lucas one lock of brass fitted in wᵗʰ 20 oz. of lead and one 4-lb. weight unsealed, unsized, and unmarked with the owner’s stamp, which work was brought into the Hall.

Founders’ Hall stood in Lothbury (hence the name of Founders’ Hall Court), and was let to the Electric Telegraph Company in 1853. The Founders of Bartholomew Lane and Lothbury have long since departed to other quarters of the City, and the sites of their ancient trading are now occupied by the great monetary fraternities, the Bank of England and other banks, and the Capel Court of the Stock Exchange.

In May, 1750, the Committee of the Corporation of London specially reported on several petitions presented by masters and journeymen freemen, and it was resolved that the matters complained of required some regulation; that the Court of Aldermen any Tuesday may have the power to grant to any master freeman liberty to employ non-freemen, but under certain restrictions; and that all proceedings and prosecutions rest in the name of the Chamberlain, who, however, only represents the City, and does not obtain any personal benefit under such action.

According to the returns made to the Royal Commissioners, the Blacksmiths’ Company now comprises four keepers or wardens, twenty-one assistants, the Livery, and the yeomanry. The freedom of the Company is obtainable by servitude (as an apprentice), by patrimony, and by redemption. Formerly a quarterage of 4_s._ per annum was collected, but this caused much trouble in the collection. Females were formerly admitted, but none during the last twenty years. For thirty years previous to 1833 the admissions or calls to the Livery were often one or two only a year, the highest years being 1805, 1810, and 1818, when ten, eleven, and ten respectively were admitted. During the same period the freemen numbered from six to twenty a year; in 1813 and 1818 the actual admittances were twenty-one. In 1834 about three-fifths of the Livery were, or had been, smiths, and of the whole Company nearly one-half were of the trade.

There is one advantage in this Company—the calls to the Livery go by rotation from the lists of the yeomanry, and according to seniority. In 1882 there were eighty-three freemen and eighty-one liverymen. As deaths take place a fresh “call” is made, although in the nine years ending 1879 only thirty-two were admitted freemen. Another difficulty has arisen as regards apprentices; only three were admitted in the past ten years. Persons, even freemen, have been led astray by the “know-nothings” of society, and have simply been persuaded to believe that the City apprenticeship is now of no value. We know different; and hence we heartily applaud the endeavours of the Company of Blacksmiths and their energetic clerk, Mr. W. B. Garrett, in holding the exhibition in 1889 in the Ironmongers’ Hall, and promoting technical education among the rising generation of the trade, art, or mystery. The Corporation of London also proposes to make the “indenture” more conformable to the times, and this, too, is a step in the right direction.

The Blacksmiths’ Company now holds its meetings at Guildhall. Formerly they met in the Blacksmiths’ Hall standing on Lambeth Hill, Doctors’ Commons, which in Hughson’s time (1806) was “a much neglected structure,” and yet “a good brick building with very convenient and stately apartments.” This building formed part of the City lands of the Corporation of London, and by indenture dated in February, 1746, was granted on a forty years’ lease by the City to “the Wardens, Keepers, and Society of the Mystery or Art of the Blacksmiths.” It is described as situate in the parish of St. Mary Magdalene, Old Fish Street, having a frontage to Lambeth Hill of 76 feet 6 inches, and then used by the Company as their hall, &c. When the lease expired, the Blacksmiths held their meetings, as we have said, at Guildhall, and do so still.

The return made to the Commissioners of 1880 states, “The Company is not possessed of plate, pictures or furniture,” but a loving cup, in private hands, of silver, was presented to the Company by Christopher Pym, upon his admission as clerk in 1665. The front of the stem that supports the bowl is occupied by a figure of Vulcan as a smith at his anvil, on which is engraved the motto of the Company, “By Hammer and Hand all Arts doe Stand.” On the outside of the bowl are also engraved the Company’s arms, which were confirmed by Sir William Segar, Garter, June 24, 1610.

_Arms_: Sa. a chev. or. between 3 hammers ar. handled of the second, ducally crowned of the last.

_Crest_: On a wreath a mount vert; thereon a phœnix with wings indorsed proper, firing herself with the sunbeams of the last.

The motto of the Company in ancient times was: “As God will so be it.”

The Blacksmiths’ is not a rich corporation, and the only charity it possesses is that founded by Edward Prestyn in June 1557. He left five houses in Fleet Lane and Old Bailey, charged with the simple trust for the bestowal of 4_s._ per annum among “the poor artists” of the Company. As a proof that the Company carry out the trust in accordance with the spirit which prompts right-minded citizens, the Blacksmiths receive a rental from these premises of 136_l._ a year, and yet pay away in charity 12_l._ per annum each to twelve poor persons of the Company, being 8_l._ more than the amount received! This would appear to be a mystery were it not explained that the Company privately purchased some other small properties, the rents from which help to keep themselves in existence, and enable them to augment the pensions of their poorer brethren.

We cannot omit to say a word or two about another society which bears the arms and the motto of the London Guilds, but is known as the Smiths’ Company of Newcastle-on-Tyne. Like the Blacksmiths, the Smiths are an ancient fraternity, for its earliest ordinance is dated 1436, and among the peculiar enactments was that no Scotchman should be taken as an apprentice, or allowed to work for a member under a penalty of 40_s._—a large sum in those days. In 1664 the branches of the trade represented on the Company were numerous, and in 1677 they were incorporated, having four wardens (one to be an anchor-smith), and twelve assistants, four of each to represent anchor-smiths, locksmiths, and farriers’-blacksmiths. Their hall adjoined the Blackfriars in Newcastle; the ground-floor room, a chapel, was the room in which homage was done by the Scottish King to the King of England. In 1824 there were seventy-seven members belonging to this Smiths’ Company.

There have been many noteworthy members of the Blacksmiths’ Guilds, although the custom of the City in olden time compelled the chief Magistrate to be “one of the twelve.” Consequently the names of those citizens in this Company who have served the offices of Lord Mayor and sheriffs have been limited, and so far as we can learn the earliest only dates back to the end of the last century, when Thomas Baker, exactly a century ago—in 1789—was one of “the eyes of the Mayor” (as Stow quaintly describes the sheriffs), serving in the mayoralty of the celebrated William Pickett, who originated the grand improvement without Temple Bar, a full account of which will be found in the “Memorials” of that edifice published in 1869. The late Alderman James Abbiss was a Blacksmith, and one of the sheriffs in 1859, and in turn would have served as Lord Mayor had not illness compelled him to resign his gown.

We have numerous interesting references to the wills and other evidences of the Blacksmiths of old London, but want of space prevents even a summary. Two only, and these a century apart, are sufficiently curious to mention. William Reason, in 1568, left his livery-gowns to his brother and cousin, and to his apprentice William one of the vices in his shop and half of his files and tools. Industrious apprentices were thought of by their masters in those days. “And furder,” continues Mr. Reason, “I bequeathe to the Company of Blackesmythes being of the lyvery that shall attende upon my bodye to the buriall for a repaste or drincking to be had and bestowed amongst them twentie shillings.” The citizens of old London never expected their brethren to work for nothing, and funerals with the City Companies, especially with those who possessed halls, were of daily occurrence, as a reference to the “Diary of Henry Machyn,” 1550-1563, printed by the Camden Society in 1848, will amply prove. In 1674 William Rawlings, who requested to be buried in St. Stephen’s Church, Coleman Street, and possessed much property about London, was a benefactor to the poor of Bromley and Bow, Middlesex. Joseph Thornhill, also a Blacksmith, who was buried at Hampstead, left by will in 1718 all his property adjacent to the well-known “Pindar of Wakefield,” St. Pancras, and in which house he some time dwelt, in trust for the benefit of his two daughters. An account of this celebrated tavern and tea-gardens will be found at page 58 of Pinks and Wood’s “History of Clerkenwell.”

Finally, we can but echo the sentiments expressed in the return to the Royal Commissioners in 1880:—“The objects of the establishment of the Blacksmiths’ Guild were (1) the promotion of good fellowship; (2) the protection and encouragement of the trade the name of which is borne by the Company;” and that the present Company “do all that is in their power” to attain the objects of such foundation whenever opportunity presents itself. The opportunity has been given them in A.D. 1889 to promote technical education by holding an exhibition at Ironmongers’ Hall, and, as it is their first effort, so do we sincerely hope it is the forerunner of many successful ones in the future.

THE EXHIBITION.

(_Reprinted from THE IRONMONGER, March 30, 1889._)

The exhibition of articles specially applicable to the blacksmith’s art has been held this week in the Ironmongers’ Hall, Fenchurch Street. When a month ago (February 23) we called attention to the competition that had been opened by the Worshipful Company of Blacksmiths, we expressed a hope that, although it was their first effort, it might prove a successful one; and it is a pleasure to us to be able to chronicle that a most valuable and interesting proof has been given that on English soil there are still to be found journeymen and industrious apprentices who can turn out “by hammer and hand” some very creditable work.

Like most of the first exhibitions that have been held for the promotion of technical education, the Blacksmiths’ has not been an extensive one. Only twenty-eight exhibitors sent in specimens, and only two dozen of these were competitors. But, if the quantity was small, the quality was good, and, we must say, far exceeded our expectations. Each exhibit was limited in weight to 20 lbs., so that the entire collection was easily arranged upon tables, &c., in the court-room of the Ironmongers’ Company, who had willingly lent their brother-blacksmiths a most interesting apartment, which effectively added to the exhibition.

The exhibits comprised works by apprentices or youths, and works by journeymen—in the former three sections, and two prizes offered in each; in the latter three prizes. The apprentices or youths were in the respective sections not to exceed seventeen, nineteen, or twenty-one years of age, “the work to be pure hammer-work of his own production of any article of ornament or utility.” The journeymen’s work was to be specially “table ornamentation or panel,” the three prizes being 10_l._, 7_l._ 10_s._, and 5_l._, both apprentices and journeymen to have a certificate of merit in addition. The majority of the exhibitors were of the metropolis, but in a few instances the North, even as far off as Midlothian, sent competitors.

The judges met at Ironmongers’ Hall on Tuesday last to inspect the exhibits, and were in several instances sorely tried, for most of the work sent in was, as we stated, very creditable. The Blacksmiths called to their aid skilled practical craftsmen outside their own body, so that the decisions arrived at must be considered eminently satisfactory. The general public viewed the exhibits on Wednesday and Thursday, and on Friday (yesterday) afternoon the prizes were awarded to the successful competitors in the fine Hall of the Ironmongers in the presence of a numerous company. The following were the successful recipients:—

APPRENTICES AND YOUTHS.

1.—A. Harvey, 33 Marsham Street, Westminster, gas-bracket. First prize, first section, 3_l._

2.—Arthur Beaver, 4 Victoria Terrace, Kilburn, electric table-lamp. Second prize, first section, 2_l._

3.—J. B. Imison, 31 Rowena Crescent, Battersea, suspending-lamps. First prize, second section, 4_l._ and medal.

4.—C. Baker, 17 South Wharf Road, Paddington, three-candle bracket. Second prize, second section, 3_l._

5.—A. W. Elwood, 9 Kennington Park Gardens, two panels, 40 × 10½. First prize, third section, 5_l._

6.—F. Burkitt, 4 Great Suffolk Street, Southwark, three-candle stand. Second prize, third section, 4_l._ and medal.

JOURNEYMEN.

1.—G. Snailum, 66 Clarendon Road, Hornsey, panel, 36 × 13½. First prize, 10_l._

2.—H. Ross, 13 Melton Street, N.W., bracket and oil-lamp. Second prize, 7_l._ 10_s._

3.—T. R. Kendall, 11 Haymerle Road, Peckham, suspending-lamp holder, third prize, 5_l._

In the preface to their list of exhibits the Company (through their energetic clerk, Mr. W. B. Garrett) appeal to exhibitors:

The Blacksmiths’ Company initiate this exhibition in the hope that British workmen will once more come to the front, and show that they can make as good and as elegant articles, both for use and ornament, as can the foreign artisan. Many persons who visited the Italian Exhibition last year saw what that country could produce, and must have been struck by the number of articles in ornamental ironwork sold, and, in many instances, in which copies were ordered. Why does not the English workman endeavour to follow—shall I not say lead?—in such work, and so retain in this country a growing and profitable industry?

We can endorse this appeal, and hope that the first exhibition may be but the forerunner of many others, each to be more successful than its predecessor.

The Blacksmiths expressed their best thanks to the Ironmongers for so kindly lending their hall, as also to Sir P. C. Owen and his staff at the South Kensington Museum for sending on loan a most interesting and valuable collection of ancient ironwork, chiefly of the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth century. Among the articles exhibited were:—

Keys of various countries. Fire-dog (Venetian), sixteenth century. Prow of a gondola, fifteenth century. Knocker (Italian), fifteenth century. Knocker (German), about 1600. Candlesticks and snuffer-stands. Locks, various dates.

One of the wardens of the Blacksmiths’ Company, Mr. J. F. Clarke, sent for exhibition several interesting articles, including a large representation of the armorial shield of the Company, whose motto is: “By Hammer and Hand all Arts do Stand.”

SPOTTISWOODE & CO., PRINTERS, NEW STREET SQUARE, LONDON, E.C.