Part 10

To all trew crysten people to whom thes present lettris shall come. ROBERD HALIDAI[69] mastur of barbours and of surgeon barbours of london, and Willm̄ Okeley, John Knote[70] and Thomas Dawes[71] wardens of the same gretyng, knowe ye that wher as the moste excellent Pryns in cryst and soũeyn lord Edward by the grace of god kyng of ynglõd and of ffraunce, lord of Ierlond, for many pˀfounde cos̃ideracyons his gc̃e movyng, hathe grauntyd the well to hym ĩ cryst, the approuyd fremen the coiãlte of barbours and of surgeon barbours of the cyte of londõ, The serche and oũsyght correcyon and ponyshement, examinacon & approbacion of all fremen usyng or hauntyng the conyng of surgery and barbory, And of all maner of men foreyns usyng or hauntyng any pˀticuler pˀte of surgery withyn the seyde cyte or subbers ther of, As a bowte new woundys, olde soris, and other lesyons what so eũ they be, Also in drawyng of teeth ventosyng scarificacons and suche othˀ manwall operac̃ons, lyke as the lettres patentes of owre seyde lege lord the kyng ther upon made planyly may apere. We therfore the saide Roberde, Willm̄, John̄ & Thom̄s at this tyme masturs and wardens of the saide felishyp, ffor the comyn pˀfyte weth[72] and relefe socour of owr lordis the kyngꝭ lege people, entẽdyng to pˀuyde men of good capasite and abill ĩ maners and conyng, sufficiently lerned, enfourmed, and labored by long experyens, and other in the seide craft of surgery,--haue prayed and requyred mastur John̄ Smyth doctour ĩ phesik, Instructour & examener of the seide feliship, and be[73] the same for that intent chosen and elect to entur & examynacyon for the cawses a boue saide, w{t} divers pˀsons whiche long tyme, w{t}owte auctorite, haue vsed and haunted w{t} experyens the conyng of surgery, wheruppon aftur dewe and dyuers monycions made in this be halue, ROBERD ANSON on of the seide coĩalte at the comyn hall of the same ĩ london appered, ĩ his pˀpyr pˀson, the first day of August last past, submyttyng hym selfe to the examync̃on and thaposicion,[74] wher and when the seide Roberd by the sayde John̄ Smyth, in a gret audiens of many ryght well expert men ĩ surgery & other, was op̃yly examyned ĩ dyuers thingꝭ cõcernyng the practise opˀatife and directif in the seyde crafte of Surgery. And the{r} albe it he hathe a fore this many tymys been well approuyd, ʒet now he is newly habelyd, be[75] the seyde doctour and felyship, and founde abyll and discrete to ocopy & vse the practise of surgery, as well a bowte new woundis, as cansers, fystelis, vlceracions & many other disessis & dyuers; & the same Robert thus aprouyd and abelyd we haue, as an expert man ĩ the seyd faculte, aprouyed and abeled to ocupy & practyse in the seyd faculte, ĩ eũy place, when and as ofte as hym best lyketh we haue lycensid hym and graũtid to hym by thes pˀsentes. ĩ witnes wherof we haue putte the comyn seale of barbours and of surgeon bˀbours of london, geuen at london ĩ the comyn hall of the seyd Comõnalte the viij day of August the zere of oure lord god M{t}CCCClxxxxvij.

[69] Master 1475, 1483, 1485, 1490, 1496. [70] Master 1510. [71] Master 1504. [72] Wealth. [73] By. [74] “The apposition”==the questioning. [75] By.

1499. In this year the Company obtained from Henry VII a confirmation of their Charter, paying but 20_s._ for the same. This Inspeximus Charter recites and confirms that of Edward IV with the very noticeable exceptions, that four Masters or Governors are named instead of two, and that they are described as of “the Mystery of Barbers and Surgeons,” and not “Barbers” only, as in Edward’s grant.

The original, in excellent preservation, with the great seal of England pendant, is at the Hall, and the text is as follows:--

HENRICUS dei gracia Rex Anglie Francie & Dominus Hibernie Omnibʒ ad quos pˀsentes littere pervenerunt, salutem. Inspeximus litteras patentes recolende memorie domine E. quarti nuper Regis Anglie progenitoris nostri factas in hec verba. EDWARDUS dei gracia . . . . . . . . Teste me ipso apud Westmonasteriũ vicesimo quarto die Februarii Anno regni nostri primo. NOS AUTEM litteras predictas ac omnia & singula in eis contenta rata habentes et grata ea pro nobis et heredibus nostris quantum in nobis est acceptamus & approbamus ac dilectis ligeis nostris Rico Haywarde Jacobo Holand Johanni Robertson et Johanni Boteler nunc Magistris sive Gubernatoribʒ mistere BARBITONSOꝜ et SIRURGICOꝜ infra Civitatem nrãm predc̃am & eoꝜ Successoribʒ per pˀsentes ratificamus et confirmamus sicut lrẽ predc̃e rõnabilis testantˀ IN CUJUS rei testiom̄ has lr̃as nr̃as fieri fecimus patentes. TESTE me ip̃o apud Westm̄ quinto die Decembris Anno regni nostri quinto decimo.

CLERK. pro viginti solidis solutis in hanaperio.

(Endorsed.)

Intratur in libro signato cum lr̃a. m. tempore Nich̃i Alwyne maioris Civitatis londoñ Anno Regni Regis Henrici septum quinto decimo.

PAKENHAM.

TRANSLATION.

HENRY by the grace of God, King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland, To all to whom these present letters shall come, health. WE have inspected the letters patent of the Lord Edward the fourth, of gracious memory, late King of England, our progenitor, made in these words, “EDWARD by the grace of God . . . . . . . . Witness my self at Westminster the 24th day of February in the first year of our reign.” WE ALSO, the aforesaid letters, and all and singular therein contained ratifying and granting, for us and our heirs, as much as in us lies do accept and approve, and to our beloved lieges, Richard Haywarde, James Holand, John Robertson, and John Boteler, now Masters or Governors of the Mystery of BARBERS and SURGEONS within our City aforesaid, and to their successors, by these presents, do ratify and confirm, as in the aforesaid letters is reasonably testified. IN WITNESS whereof, we have caused these our letters to be made patent. WITNESS myself at Westminster the fifth day of December in the fifteenth year of our reign.

CLERK. for twenty shillings paid into the hanaper.

(Endorsed.)

Entered in the book marked with the letter m. in the time of Nicholas Alwyne, Mayor of the City of London, in the fifteenth year of the reign of King Henry the Seventh.

PAKENHAM.

1511. In this year an Act of Parliament was passed, which infringed on the privileges of the Barbers’ Company, inasmuch as it placed the approbation and licensing of Surgeons in the hands of certain clerical dignitaries, to wit, the Bishop of London and Dean of St. Paul’s (while for the country the several Bishops or their Vicars general were nominated). This Act was possibly the outcome of some laxity on the part of our Company, or of an intolerable growth of quackery, with which it could not cope, the pretenders to surgical knowledge being a “great multitude” of ignorant persons, and women, using sorcery, witchcraft and noxious remedies. This Act of Parliament (3 Hen. VIII, cap. XI) as given below, is from an original copy in the possession of Mr. Charles J. Shoppee (Master 1878).

¶ AN ACTE CONCERNYNG THE APPROBATION OF PHISICIONS AND SURGIONS.

To the kyng our souerayne lorde, and to all the lordes spiritual and temporall, & comoñs in this present parlyament assembled. FORASMOCHE as the science and connynge of phisike & surgerie (to the perfet knowlege whereof, be requisite both great lernyng and rype experience) is dayly within this realme exercised by a great multitude of ignorant pˀsons: of whome the great part haue no maner of insight in the same, nor in any other kynde of lernynge, some also can no letters on the boke, so farforthe that common artificers, as smythes, weauers, and women, boldely and customably take upon them greate cures and thinges of greate difficultie: in the whiche they partly use sorcerye, and witchcrafte, partly apply suche medicines unto the disease, as be very noyous and nothyng metely therfore to the highe displeasure of god, great infamye to the facultie, and the greuous hurte, damage, and destruction of many of the kynges liege people: most specially of them that can not discerne the unconnynge from connynge. Be it therfore (to the suertie and comforte of all maner people) by auctoritie of this present parliament enacted, that no persone within the citie of London, nor within seuen myles of the same, take upon hym to exercise and occupie as a phisition or surgion, excepte he be fyrst examyned, approued, and admytted by the byshop of London, or by the deane of Paules, for the tyme beinge, calling to hym or them foure doctours of phisike, and for surgery, other experte persons in that facultie, and for the fyrste examination suche as they shall thynke conuenient, and afterwarde alway foure of them that haue ben so approued, upon the peine of forfayture, for euery moneth that they do occupie as phisitions or surgions, not admytted nor examyned after the tenour of this acte, of v.li. to be enployed the one halfe therof to thuse of our soueraine lorde the kynge, and the other halfe therof to any person that wyll sue for it by action of dette, in whiche no wager of lawe nor protection shalbe alowed.

¶ And ouer this, that no persone out of the sayd citie and precinte of vii. myles of the same, except he haue ben (as is aforesayd) approued in y{e} same, take upon hym to exercise and occupie as a phisition or surgion, in any diocesse within this realme, but if he be fyrste examined and approued by the bysshoppe of the same dyocese, or he beynge out of the dioces by his vycare generall: either of them callyng to them suche experte persones in the sayde faculties, as their discretion shal thynke conuenient, and gyuyng theyr letters testimonials under theyr seale to hym that they shall so approue, upon lyke peyne to them that occupie contrary to this acte (as is above sayde) to be leuied and employed after the forme before expressed.

¶ Prouyded alway, that this acte nor any thynge therin contayned, be preiudiciall to the uniuersities of Oxforde and Cambrydge or eyther of them, or to any priuileges graunted to them.

This Act seems to have invested the Bishops, etc., with the power of licensing _all_ Surgeons, and if so, would have taken away that privilege from our Company; the point is however doubtful, and I am inclined to think that the Act did not operate to the prejudice of the Company, only in so far as it suffered from the existence of another licensing authority.

Mr. D’Arcy Power has pointed out that the Act very soon became unpopular, and that it was almost immediately practically repealed by another one, which provided that it should be “lawful to any person being the king’s subject, having knowledge or experience of the nature of herbs, etc., to minister in and to any outward sore or wound according to their cunning.” (Memorials of the Craft of Surgery, p. 85.)

This latter Act, which in its effect would flood the land with quacks, must however have remained the law until the Act of 32 Hen. VIII, whereby the Barber-Surgeons were reinstated in their ancient rights; and it is the fact, that down to the 18th Century the Ecclesiastics claimed and enforced their rights (under the Act 3 Hen. VIII) to license Surgeons, notwithstanding other Acts passed since then, which although not expressly extinguishing their power, certainly did not save it. The Barber-Surgeons’ Company seem to have examined the Surgeons, and, if approved, to have given a certificate under Seal, which was presented to the Bishop who thereupon issued his licence. This practice was not however universal, and I think only applied to some Surgeons who were not free of the Company. In some cases the Bishop licensed Surgeons, without reference to the Company, and thousands have been licensed by the Company without regard to the Bishop. It is almost impossible to say now what course was followed, the practice certainly varying with the times (see Surgery).

1513. In this year an Act of Parliament was passed exempting Surgeons from juries, inquests, etc. This must have been passed in the interest of the Surgeons’ Guild, as the Barber-Surgeons were surely exempt under their Charter from Edward IV.

1512. The Barbers’ Company having applied to the King (Henry VIII) for a confirmation of their Charter, their request was acceded to. Henry is, on more than one occasion, spoken of in the books as “our patron,” and there is no doubt but that he was very friendly both to our Company and to individual members of it, as witness his gift of the grace cup, and the legacies in his will to various members of the Company, with some of whom, as Pen, Harman, Ayliff, etc., he was on as intimate terms as a king could be with a subject; there would therefore be, we may be sure, but little difficulty in obtaining an Inspeximus.

In one of our Minute Books, Thomas Knot (Master 1555) has transcribed what purports to be a copy of Henry’s Inspeximus Charter with the date 12{th} of May “in the xviij{th} yere of our Reigne” (_i.e._, 1526), and he appends a certificate that he has compared and agreed it with the original! Now we possess the original at Barbers’ Hall and it is dated 12{th} March 3{rd} Henry VIII (_i.e._, 1512), and it would indeed be a strange thing for Henry VIII in 1526 to recite and confirm Henry VII’s Charter, when he had already done so in 1512. Moreover I have searched the Patent Rolls and whilst there is no record in 1526, there is the entry of the 1512 Charter, and further to fix the date, both Philip and Mary, and Elizabeth in their Inspeximus Charters recite the 1512 Charter.

It has been necessary to enter into this detail, as the date of the Charter is important when we come to consider Holbein’s picture; and as my friend Mr. D’Arcy Power has (p. 338) quoted this pretended Charter not having seen the real one, he, very naturally trusting old Thomas Knot’s statement, has fallen into the pit dug some three hundred years ago.

The following is the Text of the Charter, and it will not be necessary to append a translation, as it follows much on the same lines as that of Henry VII:--

HENRICUS dei gracia Rex Anglie et Francie et Dominus Hibernie OMNIBUS ad quos presentes Irẽ pˀvenerunt saltmˀ INSPEXIMUS litteras patentes domini H. nuper Rˀgis Anglie septum patris nostri precarissimi de confirmacione factas in hec verba HENRICUS dei gracia . . . . . . Teste me ip̃o apud Westmonasterium quinto die Decembrˀ Anno regni nr̃i quinto decimo. NOS AUTEM litteras predictas ac omnia & singula in eisdem contenta rata hentẽs & grata ea pro nobis & heredibus nr̃is quantum in nobis est acceptamus & approbamus ac dilectis ligeis nr̃is Johĩ Peerson Wil̃l̃o Kyrkeby Thome Gybson & Thome Martyn nunc Magistris sive Gubernatoribus mistere BARBITONSORUM et SIRURGICORUM infra Civitatem nrãm predictam & eorum successoribus per presentes ratificamus & confirmamus sicut lrẽ predicte rõnabiliter testantur. IN CUJUS rei testimonium has lrãs nrãs fieri fecimus patentes. TESTE me ip̃o apud Westmonasterium duodecimo die Marcii Anno regni nr̃i tercio.

YONG.

pro viginti solidis solutis in Hanapˀio.

The Great Seal, though still pendant, has been considerably damaged.

1525. This year the Company received a Precept from the Mayor, ordering them to provide for the “Midsummer Watch.”

TO THE WARDENS OF THE BARBER SURGEONS,

We woll and charge you that for the hounour of this Citie ye do ordeyne & pˀpare ageinst the watches to be kept within this Citie in the nightꝭ of the vigilles of Sent John Baptist & Seint Peter nowe next comynge iiij honest & comely pˀsones suche as ye will answere for, w{t} Bowes & arrowes clenely harneysed and arrayed yn Jakettꝭ of whytte, havynge tharmes of this Citie, to waytte and attende uppon us in the said Watches, And to come to Blackwell Hall and there to be, for the not fayllynge hereof as ye tendre the honour of this Citie and also will answere at your pẽlls. Gyven in the Guihall of the said Citie the xiiij day of Junij the xvij year of the Reigne of our Soveraigne lorde King Henry the viij{th.}

An Act of Parliament was passed in the 20th Henry VII, which provided that the governing bodies of Guilds should not make any by-laws or ordinances, without the same should be approved by the Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer, and the Chief Justices of the King’s Bench and Common Pleas, or any three of them, etc., and in 1530 our Company, being desirous of settling many points for the government of the mystery, drew up a long set of interesting Ordinances, which were presented to Sir Thomas More the Chancellor, Sir John Fitzjames and Sir Robert Norwiche the Chief Justices, and were signed by them on the 14th May, 1530. The original (with More’s autograph) is at the Hall, and after reciting the Act of 20th Henry VII, ordains the following oaths and articles:--

The oath of a freeman. The oath of the Masters and Governors with directions as to searches. Ordinance as to attending on summons. " " quarterage. " " presentation of apprentices. " " number of servants to be kept by freemen and liverymen. " " wages of servants. " " enticing away of servants. " " opening shop. " " teaching the mystery to any but apprentices. " " sueing brother freemen at common law. " " “opprobrios condicions or dishonest wordes.” " " refusal to come on the Livery, and admission into the Livery. " " Sunday trading. " " presenting patients in danger of death. " " reading Lectures concerning Surgery. " " supplanting another of his patient. " " the Dinners. " " excess of words in debate. " " departing from the Common assembly. " " seniority. " " Barbers setting up shop.

Sir Thomas More’s Ordinances, as above, will be found in full in the Appendix B, the transcript being made from the original.[76]

[76] The copy of these Ordinances given by Mr. D’Arcy Power (p. 339) is taken from one made by our old friend Thomas Knot, and is not literally, though it is substantially, accurate.

1540. This year is one of the most memorable in the annals of the Barber-Surgeons, as it witnessed the union of the unincorporated Guild of Surgeons, with their more accredited fellow-craftsmen, the incorporated Company of Barbers. It has been suggested by more than one writer that such an union is shrouded in mystery, difficult of explanation, and that in those days, with science advancing (slowly, it is true), it might have been expected that we should read of a divorcement, rather than a combination of two crafts, which then, as now, were dissimilar both in their operations, and in the training and intelligence necessary for their practice.

But it is essential to bear in mind that though the Charter of Edward IV was ostensibly to the Barbers, it really was granted to a fraternity, which to a great extent practised as Barber-Surgeons, some of whom were Surgeons pure and simple, others combined both branches, while others still carried on the more humble craft of Shavers and Hair-Dressers; those of the Company who practised Surgery did no doubt consider it a reproach to be dubbed “Barbers,” and for distinction sake called themselves and were well known as “Barber-Surgeons,” indeed they had so far established this title to themselves and to their Company, as to get it recognised and so named in the Inspeximus Charter of Henry VII (less than forty years after their original Charter as “Barbers” had been granted to them). This is to a great extent confirmed by the words of the Act now about to be referred to, which distinctly says that there was then a Company of “Surgeons occupyinge and exercisynge the sayde scyence and faculty of surgery . . . . . . commonly called the Barbours of London.”

The Union therefore was not a joining of Barbers with Surgeons (THAT had existed from the earliest times), but was the consolidation of the “Guild of Surgeons” with another body of Surgeons who were incorporated, and practised under the name of “Barbers” in conjunction with actual working Barbers; and, as the Act provided what the Surgeons should and should not do, and the like as to actual Barbers, limiting their operations also, most if not all difficulty and apparent incongruity in the union seems to vanish.

The Act (32 Hen. VIII, cap. 42) which will well repay perusal, settled the Barber-Surgeons in their corporate capacity for many a long year; under it the old rival society disappeared, it being declared that the two Companies should be united, so that by their assembling together, the science of Surgery might be fostered and improved; whereupon it was enacted that they should be incorporated under the style of “THE MAISTERS OR GOVERNOURS OF THE MYSTERY AND COMMINALTE OF BARBOURS AND SURGEONS OF LONDON.” The property of the old Company of Barbers was handed over to the new Corporation (the Guild of Surgeons are not said to have had any property to bring into the new concern). The usual grant of a common seal, of power to plead and to be impleaded, to hold lands, etc., will be seen at large in the Act. The Surgeons of the Company were to be exempt from bearing armour or being put into watches and inquests. The dead bodies of four malefactors were assigned to the Company yearly for dissections. And, inasmuch as various persons exercising the faculty of Surgery used to take into their houses for cure, people afflicted with the pestilence and other contagious diseases and “do use or exercise barbari, as washynge or shavyng and other feates thereunto belonging,”[77] the same was declared “veraie perillous,” and it was enacted that no one using the faculty of Surgery should practise Barbery, and that no Barber should practise any point in Surgery, the drawing of teeth only excepted. The Surgeons were to exhibit a sign in front of their houses, and no Barber was to exercise his calling unless free of the Company. Four Masters were to rule the Company, whereof two were to be Barbers and two Surgeons. A penalty was named for offenders against the articles, all were to pay scot and lot, and private persons might keep their own Barber or Surgeon, without interference by the Company.

[77] Here we have the common practice of the joint craftsman, the “Barber-Surgeon,” clearly indicated.

The Act was passed on the 24th July, 1540, and will be found in Appendix C. being taken from the original Black-letter copy in the Author’s possession.

We now refer to the Company’s chief treasure, the Holbein picture, and are at once met with a difficulty; does it represent the _granting of a Charter_ to the Company? if so, the year was 1512; or does it illustrate the union of the Barbers and Surgeons by _Act of Parliament_? if so, the year was 1540.