Whether APPRENTISHIP extinguisheth GENTRY? THE FIRST PART.

THE present Question, whether Apprentiship ex­tinguisheth Gentry, being now not so much a Pa­radox, as grown in secret to be of late a common Opinion, I am bold to call it a weighty and important Question, unjustly grounded upon the learned folly of Erasmus of Roter­dam, and the incircumspection of Sr. Thomas Smith Knight, in his Book de Republica Anglorum, and out of certain wandring conceits hatcht [Page 2] among Trees and Tillage, as shall appear hereafter. Weighty and Important I call it, and it is so; be­cause in looking out upon the con­cernings of the Case, I find that pro­spect so specious, that within the compass thereof as well the greater as the lesser Nobility of England, are very notably and very inexplicably enwrapped: what do I say of the subalternate Nobility, when the Royal Name it self was deeply in­teressed in the Proposition? For Queen Elizabeth, though a free Mo­narch, and chief of the English in her turn, was a Party to the Cause, which she ingenuously and openly acknowledged, calling Sir Martin Calthrope Kinsman, as indeed he was, being at that time Knight, and Lord Mayor of London: as also Sir Godfrey Bullen Knight, and Lord Mayor of London, was lineal Ance­stor to Queen Anne, Mother to [Page 3] Queen Elizabeth, no longer before than in the Reign of Henry the sixth King of England. Both which Knights being also Gentlemen born, and of right worthy Families, ascen­ded by due degrees from the condi­tion of Apprentices, to the greatest Annual Honour in this Kingdom. It is Weighty and Important, be­cause without much impropriety of speech it may be called Quaestio status, which in the ancient phrase of the Emperor Justinian, is as much as to say, a Tryal, whether one is to be ad­judged bond or free, servile or inge­nuous, and implieth that odious and unnatural sequel, which by Tex­tuists is named Capitis diminutio; whereof though the Roman Laws make a threefold division, yet in this our question is but only, whe­ther the third and lowest degree were incurred, (which happeneth cum qui sui juris fuerunt, coeperunt ali­eno [Page 4] juri subjecti.) It is weighty and important, and can appear none other, because it directly tends to darken, and as it were to intercloud the luminous body of that beautious Planet Honour, with foul and la­sting Spots. For what can lightly be a more disparagement, than for the Free-born to become a kind of Bond-men, or to come of such? nay there is nothing without it, which can be of so great disparagement. Fi­nally, it is weighty and important, for very many other reasons, and particularly because it is not only fit that states of Opinions should be re­ctified in this kind, as breeding bad affections among people of this Nation, (from whence great mis­chiefs often arise, even to hatred, quarrels, and homicides;) but that such also as through vanity, or other distempers of the wit or judgment, disdain to seem either City-born or [Page 5] bred, or to own any thing of their Worship or Estate, either to the City or Citizens, may understand their own place and true condition, lest they be convinced to be among them, who are unworthy of so ho­nest either Original or Accession as the City yeildeth.

2. But let us first behold the Cities Honour in Arms, as it stands displayed in Ancient Heraldry, and as it is commented upon out of Au­thentick Monuments, in that com­mendable Survey of London, com­prised by its Chronologer and Ci­tizen, Stowe. The present figure, with the same words as here they stand, is a copy of that which an old imperfect Legier volumn at the Office of Arms containeth. ‘There needeth no greater demonstra­tion of the Cities ancient Honour, and of her peoples free quality than this, that a principal Baron [Page 6] of the Realm of England was by Tenure her Standard-bearer, being the Lord Fitz-Water, from whence the now Lord Fitz-Water is de­scended. The figure of St. Paul advanced it self in the Standard, and upon the Shield those famous well known Armouries of the Cross and Weapon.’ The like Pi­cture of which Apostle was also embroidered in the Caparisons of that Horse of War, which for the purpose of the Cities Service he received of Gift at the hands of the Lord Mayor. Upon the Stan­dard-bearers Coat Armour, are painted the Hereditary Ensigns of his own Illustrious Family, viz. Or a Fesse between two Cheverons Gules. Which kind of Field the An­cients called Clauric, perhaps à cla­ritate, because such Fields as were all of one colour made their Char­ges more cleerly seen and perspicu­ous. [Page 7] And as they gave to that spe­cies of Blazon a peculiar Name for the Dignity, so did they also assign to this manner of bearing two Che­verons the term Bialle, or a Coat Bialle, à numero binario. In which brave times had that noble Gentle­man but slightly and far off suspe­cted, that he displayed that Banner for a kind of Bondmen, or as for their Service, his great Heroick spirit would rather have troden such an offer under foot. In good Assurance therefore of this common Causes justice, we proceed.

3. Sound Opinion (meaning Doctrine) is the Anchor of the World; and Opinion (meaning a worthy conceit of this or that person) is the principal Ingredient which makes words or actions rellish well, and all the Graces without it are little worth. To take the fame from any man that is a Gentleman born, is a [Page 8] kind of disablement and prejudioe, at least wise among the weak, (who consider no farther than Seemings) that is, among almost all; conse­quently a wrong, and if a wrong, then due to be redressed. To find the Injury we must first enquire, Whether Apprentiship extinguisheth Gentry?

4. The main reason, certainly the most generally used, to prove it doth, is, That Apprentiship is a kind of Bondage, and Bondage specially voluntary; (in which case the Im­perial Law-rule, Non officit natali­bus in servitute fuisse, may be per­haps defective,) doth not extinguish Native-Gentry. But I deny that Apprentiship is either vera servitus, Or omnino servitus.

For explanation of this The Case in Question. difficulty, I will set be­fore your eyes the Case as it is. A Gentleman hath a Son, whom he [Page 9] means to breed up in an Art of thrift, not rising meerly out of a stock of Wit or Learning, but out of a stock of Money and Credit, managed ac­cording to that Art; and for this cause he brings his Child at fifteen or sixteen years of age, more or less, to the City of London, provides him a Master, and the Youth by his Fa­ther's counsel willingly becomes an Apprentice, that is, he interchange­ably seals a written Instrument, that he for his certain years of true and faithful Service, shall learn that precious Mystery of how to gain honestly, and to raise himself. Let the legal and ordinary form of that Instrument (extant in Wells's Presi­dents, and familiar every where) be duly pondered, and it will appear a meer Civil Contract, of which, as all the world knows, a Bondman uncapable. If you would know un­der what kind or species of Contract [Page 10] that doth fall, I answer, that it seems to be a Contract of Permutation or Interchange: in which mutual Obligation or Convention the act of Binding is no more, but that (as Reason and Justice would) the Master might be (determinately for the time, and sufficiently for the manner) sure to enjoy his Appren­tice. Apprentiship being therefore but an Effect of a Civil Contract, occasioned and caused by that prudent respect which the Con­trahents mutually have to their lawful and honest Commodity; and such only as are free-born, be­ing capable to make this Contract with effect, Apprentiship therefore doth not extinguish Gentry.

5. On the contrary it is urged, that although Apprentiship be not a true Bondage to all constru­ctions Except. and purposes, yet that it is a temporary Bondage, and equal (for [Page 11] the time it lasteth) to very Servi­tude. Of which Opinion Erasmus is, making his Etymology of our Apprentices to be, for that they are like to such as are bought with money, pares contisiis; which conceit, as it is more literate than right, so if it were set to sale, would find few Chapmen, but to smile at it. But we absolutely deny that Apprentiship is in any sort a kind of Bondage; for notwithstan­ding that to prove it be so, they make a parallel between the ancient Roman Servitude, and the London Apprentiship, yet will these compa­rata be found disparata, if not dispa­ratissima. For Servus among the old Romans was so called of servan­do, of preserving and saving, and not of serviendo, of serving, (saith the Law-maker himself, the Empe­rour Justinian) but the word Ap­prentice cometh of Apprenti, the [Page 12] French word, a raw Soldier, or young Learner, Tyro, rudis discipulus, or of the French verb which signi­fies to learn, or of the Latin word apprehendo, or apprendo, which is properly to lay hold of, and transla­tively to learn; which derivations are consonant to the thing, and true, however Sir Thomas Smith in his book de Republica Anglorum, not re­membring to distinguish between Servitude and Discipline, Bondage and regular Breeding, injuriously defined them to be a kind of Bond­men, (meaning meer Slaves,) and not, as in some places of England, Bondsmen are taken for such as are in bonds for actionable Causes) and such Bondmen, as differ only thus from very Bondmen, (whose like words for signification are those fou­lest ones, Slaves and Villains) that Apprentices are but for a time, is certain: An oversight of so grave [Page 13] and learned person, a privy Coun­sellor, and in place of Secretary to Queen Elizabeth.

Again, that which did consti­tute a Bondman among the old Ro­mans, was such a Power and Right vested in the Lord, over the very body of his Bondman or Slave, as descending to him under some re­ceived Title, or rather jure gentium, was maintained to him jure civili Romanorum; by virtue whereof he became Proprietary in the person of his Bondman, as in the body of his Oxe, Horse, or any other Beast he had: which Proprietaryship was indeterminable, but only by Manumission, and that act meerly depended upon the will of his Lord, without any Indentment or condition on the behalf of the Slave, which a right Roman would never indure from his Bondman.

Finally, (which in the quality [Page 14] of that Servitude was most base) Servus among them nullum caput ha­buit, had no Head in Law, and neither was in censu nor in lustro con­dito, as much as to say, that they were out of the number of Men, their Names being neither put a­mong such as had wherewith to pay in the Rolls of their Exchequer, or Tables of their Capitol, nor as Bodies wherewith to serve in the general Musters of their Common­weal, but in brief were reputed ci­viliter mortui, dead in Law; Death and Bondage being alike among them; without any more reputa­tion of being members in the Body Politick than brute Cattle, for Bondmen were reputed No-body, Servi pro nullis habiti.

And albeit the Authority of the Common-weal, upon the ground of State, Interest rei publicae nè quis re suâ malè utatur, and the Majesty [Page 15] of Soveraign Princes, meerly as in Honour, and as moved with the commiseration of Humane mise­ries, did sometime interpose it self upon just cause, as when the Lord did attempt to ravish his Bond­woman, or the Bond-man took Sanctuary at the Emperour's Statue and Image, or at the Altar of some one of their Gods, (an Example whereof is in Plautus;) yet the Bond-man after Manumission conti­nued in such relation to his late Lord, that in certain cases (as In­gratitude) he who was once infran­chised, was adjudged back to his Patron, and condemned again to a far more miserable Servitude, than ever before.

These things considered, and no­thing being like it in the matter of Apprentiship, who is there that lives so careless of the honour of the English Name, as to bring the Di­sciples [Page 16] of honest Arts, and Scho­lars of Mysteries, in civil Trade and converse for virtuous causes, all of them being called by the fair Ti­tle of Apprentices, into the state and quality of Bondmen? Fair I called it, because that title is com­mon to them with the Inns of Court, where Apprentices at Law are not the meanest Gentlemen. Apprenti­ship therefore is no voluntary Bon­dage, because it is no Bondage at all, but a Title only of Politick or Ci­vil Discipline. Apprentiship there­fore doth not extinguish Gentry.

So then Apprentices, whether Gentlemen of Birth, or others, whatsoever their Indentures do im­port, and howsoever they may seem conditional servants, are in truth not bound to do or to suffer things more grievous, than young Souldiers in Armies, or Scholars in rigorous Schools, or Novices in Noviceships, [Page 17] each of whom in their kind usually do and suffer things as base and vile in their own qualities, simply and in themselves considered, without respect to the final scope or aim of the first Institution, as perhaps the very meanest of five thousand Ap­prentices in London.

9, 10. The final cause therefore of every Ordination qualifies the course, and the end denominates the means and actions tending to it. For if that be noble, no work is base prescribed in ordine, or as in the way to that end; though, ab­stracting from that consideration, the work wrought, in the proper nature of it, be servile, as for a Sol­dier to dig, or carry Earth to a Ram­pire, or for a Student to go bare­headed to a Fellow of the House within the Colledge, as far off as he can see him, omitting the more de­formed necessity of suffering private [Page 18] or publick discipline; or for a No­vice in a Noviceship to wash Di­shes, or the like seeming base works, as is usual; If then the general scope, or final reason of Apprenti­ship be honest, and worthy of a Gentleman, (as will appear hereaf­ter that it is,) what can be clearer, than that Apprentiship doth not ex­tinguish Gentry?

I am the more fervent in this case, because this one false Conceit (at all times hurtful, but chiefly in these latter times, in which the means of easle maintenance are infinitely straitned,) that for a Gentleman-born, or one that would aspire to be a Gentleman, for him to be an Ap­prentice to a Citizen, or Burgensis, is a thing unbeseeming him, hath filled our England with more vices, and sacrificed more serviceable bo­dies to odious ends, and more souls to sinful life, than perhaps any other [Page 19] uncivil Opinion whatsoever. For they who hold it better to rob by Sea or Land, than to beg or labour, do daily see, and feel, that out of Apprentices rise such as sit upon them, standing out and pleading for their lives as Malefactors, when they (a shame and sorrow to their Kindred) undergo a fortune too un­worthy, even of the basest of honest Bond-men.

Whether APPRENTISHIP extinguisheth GENTRY?THE SECOND PART.

1. THese things considered, how should it fall into the mind of any good or wise Discourser, that Apprentices are a kind of Bond­men, and consequently, that Apprentiship extinguisheth Native Gentry, and disinableth to Acquisitive? For if that Opinion be not guilty of impiety to our Mother-Countrey, where that laudable policie of Ap­prentiship, necessary for our Nation, is exercised as a point of severe Di­scipline, warrantable in Christia­nity; [Page 23] certainly it hath in it a great deal of injurious temerity, and in­considerance, and why not impiety also, if they wilfully wrong the wisdom of England, their natural common Parent, whose Children are free-born? Surely, notorious inconsiderance is apparent, because there are but two main Pillars of Common-wealths, PRAEMIUM & POENA, Reward, and Punish­ment; and of the first Rewards, Ho­nour is the highest, according to that most eloquent Tully in his pe­rished Works, de republica, (as S. Au­gustin stileth them,) as that thing with which he would his Prince should be fed, and nourished; and in his Philosophy hath uttered that famous sentence concerning the same, Honos alit artes, omnesque ac­cenduntur ad studia gloriae. Among us therefore Coats of Arms, and Titles of Gentlemen (which point [Page 24] the Knight aforesaid, howsoever erring in Apprentices estate, hath truly noted to be commodious for the Prince) being the most familiar part of Honour. But they rip up and overturn the principal of those two Pillars of Common-weal from the very Basis: a strange oversight, specially of Professors of skill in the Art of publick Government; unless perhaps they speak it, because they would have things reformed, or changed in this particular of Ap­prentiship. But we do not remem­ber, that either Sir Thomas Eliot in his Governour, or Sir Thomas Chaloner (Leigier Embassadour for Queen Elizabeth in Spain) in his Books of Latin Hexameters de rep. Anglorum instaurandâ, (published with the Ver­ses of the Lord Treasurer Burghleys before it,) or any other Author, rightly understanding our England, and her generous People, did ever [Page 25] once tax our Countries Policy in this point. Yea some make it a Quaere, whether the Cities disci­pline had not more need to be redu­ced nearer to the ancient severity thereof, considering with what vi­ces London flows, and overflows, than that it should be altered, or removed, though but a little, from it.

2. Now then, let any one but rightly weigh with what consci­ence or common sense, the first In­stitutors or Propagators of the Eng­lish form of Government, could lay upon Industry and civil Virtue (whose subject are the lawful things of this life, and whose nearest ob­ject is Honour, and honest Wealth) so foul a note as the brand of Bon­dage, or any the least disparage­ment at all? Whereas to quicken and inflame affections in that kind, all wise Masters in the most noble [Page 26] civil Art of Government, and all Founders of Empires, and States, have bent their counsels and cour­ses to cherish such as are virtuously industrious, yea, God himself (the only best Pattern of Governors) hath made it known, that even Mechanical Qualities are his speci­al Gifts, and his infused, as it were, charismata.

3. For Moses, having put into eternal Monuments, that Jabal was pater pastorum, (the most ancient Art of increase,) and that Jabal was pa­ter canentium, (the first of which in­ventions was for necessary provisi­ons of food and rayment, and the second to glorifie God and Honesty, to solace men towards sweetning the bitter Curse which Adam drew upon humane life,) it is, thirdly, underadded in the accomplishment of the three main Heads, to which mortals use to refer all their world­ly [Page 27] endeavours (Necessity, Profit, and Pleasure,) that Tubal-Cain was malleator, and faber ferrarius, an Hammer-smith, or worker in Iron, that being one of those arch Myste­ries, sine quibus non aedificatur civitas, as the words are in Ecclesidsticus. Nay, there belonged in God's own judgment so great praise to the par­ticular excellency of some Artifi­cers, as that in building of Solomon's Temple, they are register'd to all Posterities in Scripture, and their skill is not onely made immortally famous, but a more curious mention is put down of their Parentage and Birth-place, than of many great Princes, as in Hiram's case, not the King, but the Brass-founder. And in the New Testament, S. Paul (be­ing a Gentleman born, of a noble Family, as the Ancients write, and a Lawyer bred up at the feet of Ga­maliel) learned, as an addition to [Page 28] that perfection, for the relieving of his necessities, the manual Art of Scaenopaea, commonly Englished, Tent-making: upon which place of S. Paul's Trade (whereof in his E­pistles he doth often glory) it is de­clared to us out of the Rabbins, that S. Paul (who himself tells King A­grippa, that he had lived a Pharisee, according to the most certain way of Jewism) was brought up so, by a Traditional precept, which did bind such as would study Sacred letters, to learn some one or other Mystery in the Mechanicks. And at this present, among other things which the Turks retain of the Jewish Rites, this seems one, when even the Sultan himself, or grand Seignior (as all his Progenitors) is said to ex­ercise a manual Trade, little or much, commonly once a day. And in fresh memory Rodulphus, the Em­perour of Germany,, had singular [Page 29] skill in making Dials, Watches, and the like fine works of Smith-craft, as had also a late Baron of England, which they practised; and other persons also, of Royal progeny, are at this day excellent in several Ar­tifices.

4. If then such honour be done by God himself (as aforesaid,) not onely to those that are necessary Handy-crafts, but to those also which are but the Handmaids of Magnificence, and outward Splen­dor, as Engravers, Founders, and the like; he shall be very hardy, who shall imbase honest Industry with disgraceful censures; and too unjust, who shall not cherish or en­courage it with praise and worship, as the ancient Policy of England did, and doth, in constituting Cor­porations, and adorning Compa­nies with Banners of Arms, and some special men with notes of No­bleness.

[Page 30] 5. And, as of all commenda­ble Arts all worthy Common­weals have their use, so in London they have as it were their Palace. But into the body of the City none generally are incorporated, but such only as through the straight gates of Apprentiship aspire to the dig­nity and state of Citizens. That the Hebrew Bondmen were not, in Moses's Law, among themselves, like to our Apprentices (howsoever the seventh year agrees in time with the ordinary time of our Appren­tices Obligations) is evident, both in the Books of Exodus and Deute­ronomy. For, first, their title to their Bondmen grew to their Lords by a Contract of Bargain and Sale, which was indeed a kind of Servi­tude. For, when the seventh year, in which the Bondage was to de­termine, and expire, if then he re­solved not to continue a Bondman [Page 31] for ever, he was compelled to leave his wife (if married in his Lord's house during bondage) together with his children, born in that mar­riage, behind him, though himself departed free, but withall rewarded also. So that voluntary Bondage is not only de jure gentium, (as the Roman Laws import, by which a man might sell himself, ad partici­pandum pretium,) but also de jure di­vino positivo. By which, notwith­standing it doth not appear, that such a Bondage was any disparage­ment, or dis-enoblement in Jewish blood, among the Jews, because in Exodus we read of a provision made for the Hebrew Bondwoman, whom her Lord might take in marriage to himself, or bestow her upon his Son, if he so thought good, but might not to violate her Chastity, as if he had jus in corpus. But the Condition of an Apprentice of Lon­don [Page 32] resembleth the Condition of no person's Estate in either of the Laws, Divine, or Imperial; for he directly contracteth with his Ma­ster to learn his Mystery, or Art of honest living, neither hath his Ma­ster (who therefore is but a Master, not a Lord) Despoticum Imperium o­ver his Apprentice, (that is, such a power as a Lord hath over a Slave) but quasi curaturam, or a Guardian­ship, and is in very truth a meer Discipliner, or Teacher, with autho­rity of using moderate Correction as a Father, not as a Tyrant, or other­wise. Immoderate Correction who­soever doth use, is (by a Gracious Statute of the fifth of Queen Eliza­beth) subject to be punished with the loss of the Apprentice, by abso­lutely taking him away.

6. Which things so often as I deeply ponder, I cannot but hold it as loose, and as wandring a conceit, [Page 33] and as uncivil a Proposition in civil matters, as any: that Apprentiship should be imagin'd either to extinguish, or to extenuate the Right of Native Gentry, or to disable any worthy or fit person to acquisitive Armories; for how can it in God's name work that effect, unless it be criminal to be an Apprentice? Because no man loseth his right to bear Arms, or to write Gentleman, unless he be attainted in Law, for such a cause, the Convi­ction whereof doth immediately procure corruption in Blood, which as in this case no man yet hath drea­med of.

Again, when by the old Com­mon Law of England, there are but onely two sorts of Bondmen, Villains in gross, and Villains regardant to a Mannour; and it is most certain, that our Apprentice or Scholar in City Mysteries, is neither one nor other of them: what ignorance then, [Page 34] or offence was Mother at first, of this, not Paradox, but palpable Ab­surdity, that Apprentiship extingui­sheth Gentry, or that Apprentices are a kind of Bondmen? when as the greatest and most famous Cities of Germany, which were or have been composed of Apprentices, or such as from them have become Masters, as Norimbergh, Lubeck, Magden­burg, &c. are as Imperial and free Cities, not thought unworthy to be matriculated into the Empire, or to have places in their Dyets, as some of the Estates thereof.

Whether APPRENTISHIP extinguisheth GENTRY? THE THIRD PART.

1. THough in the premises we conceive to have said e­nough for the establishing our Ne­gation in this Important Question, that Apprentiship is not a kind of Bondage, consequently, that it can­not work any such effect as is before supposed, yet to leave no tolerable Curiosity unsatisfied, we will set before us, as in a Table, the whole Condition of an Apprentice, mean­ing chiefly such an Apprentice, as being the Son of a Gentleman, is [Page 38] bound to a Master, who exerciseth the worthier Arts of Citizens, as Merchants by Sea, Whole-Sale­men, and some few others, which may more specially stand in the first Class of the most generous Histories, as those, in which the Wit or Mind of man hath a far greater part than Bodily labour.

2. Such an Apprentice therefore, when first he comes to his Master, is commonly but of those years, which are every where subject to Correction. His ordinary Servi­ces these: he goes bare-headed, stands bare-headed, waits bare-headed before his Master and Mi­stress, and while as yet he is the youngest Apprentice, he doth per­haps (for Discipline sake) wipe over night his Master's shooes for the morning, brusheth a Garment, runs of Errands, keeps silence 'till he have leave to speak, followeth his [Page 39] Master, or ushereth his Mistress, and sometime their young Daughters, (among whom, some one or other of them doth not rarely prove the Apprentice's Wife) walks not far out but with his permission, and now and then (as Offences happen) he may chance to be terribly chid­den, or menaced, or (which must sometime be) deservedly corrected; though all this onely in ordine, and in the way to Mastership, or to the estate of a Citizen, which last worst state of this Apprentice's Conditi­on continues peradventure for a Year, or two, and while he is com­monly but at the age of a Boy, or at the most but of a Lad, or Strip­ling; and, take things at the very worst, he doth nothing as an Ap­prentice under his Master, which, when himself comes to be a Master, his Apprentices shall not do or suffer under him. Such, or the like, is [Page 40] the bitterest part of an Apprentice's happy estate in this world, being honestly provided at his Master's charge of all things necessary, and decent. The Master in the mean while serving his Apprentice's turn with Instruction, and universal Conformation, or Moulding of him to his Art, as the Apprentice serves his Master's turn with Obedience, Faith, and Industry.

3. Here have we a Representa­tion of an Apprentice's being, or rather the well-being of a Child un­der his Father, who hath right of Correction. Upon view whereof we demand, why it should be sup­posed that Apprentiship extinguisheth Gentry? For if an Apprentice in Lon­don (since to have Apprentices is a power, not derived to Corporations out of Prerogative, Royal Privi­ledge, but out of Common Law) be in their conceits a kind of Bond­men, [Page 41] it must either be ratione gene­ris obsequii, or ratione temporis adje­cti, or contractûs, or conditionis, or for all together; a fifth Cause being hard to be either assigned or ima­gined.

For the first point, ratione gene­ris, (which is in regard of the Kind of Service,) that is but an effect of the Contract, or Bargain, and con­sequently depends thereon, or par­ticipates in nature with it; which not importing any kind of Bon­dage, neither can the Service it self, due by that Agreement, be the Ser­vice of a Bondman: so that as on the one side we grant, that Appren­tices, as Apprentices, do some things, which Gentlemen would not do, that lived sui juris, specially upon a necessity to obey; yet on the other side we constantly deny, that they do any of them, either as servile, or as servilely but propter finem nobilem, [Page 42] that is, to learn an honest Mystery, to enable them for the Service of God and their Country, in the sta­tion, place, or calling of a Citizen.

For the second, ratione adjuncti (which is in respect of a certain time, as of seven years at least, added and limited in the Contract) that is meerly but a Circumstance of the Question. For if Apprentices are not a kind of Bondmen, abstracting from the time which they are bound to serve, the addition of Time ad­deth nothing to the quality of the Contract, to make it servile.

For the third, the Contract (which is in regard of the Contract as it rai­seth a relation, or the titles between two, of Master, and Servant,) if the very Art of binding to performance be a sufficient reason to make Ap­prentices a kind of Bondmen, and so to disenable them to Gentry, either derivative, or acquisitive; the Ma­sters [Page 43] themselves are also a kind of Bondmen, because suo genere they as well were, and are bound as the Ap­prentices one to the other.

For the fourth, conditionis, (which is in respect of the Conditions, ei­ther literally or vocally expressed, or virtually implied in the Contract) there is in it no proof of Bondage, but the contrary; for in that the Obligation is mutual, it proves the Apprentice free as from Bondage, though (for the Apprentice's own good) not free from Subjection to his Master, or Discipline, because only Freemen can make Contracts, and challenge the benefit of them. The Verb is not, servire, but the Verb, deservire, (which is of far less weight) comprised in the Instru­ment, or Indenture, and containing the whole force of the Obligation, hath only in that place the sense of obsequi & facere, to obey and do, as [Page 44] an Apprentice, and not according to the ancient sense which it had a­mong the Romans. This ought not to seem a Paradox; for the word Dominus, to which Service is a rela­tive, and the word Servus have, in tract of time been so softned, and fa­miliarized, as they are grown to be words of singular humanity. And what so common among the Noble, as to profess to serve one another? But the relation constituted in this Case is peculiar, and proper. The word Dominus is not there at all, nor Servus, no nor famulus; the relation constituted is directly named be­tween Master and Apprentice, a clear case that all Injuries to Blood and Nature are of purpose avoided in the Interchangeable sealed Instru­ment it self: so clear a case, that in the Oath which all Freemen make in the Chamber of London at their first Admission, this Clause, among [Page 45] many others, is sworn unto by them, That they shall take none Ap­prentices, unless they are free born, that is to say, no Bondman's son, which are the very words of the Oath. And by an Act of Parliament, made in the fifth year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, it is expresly provided, That no Merchant, Mercer, Dra­per, Goldsmith, Ironmonger, or Clothier, shall take any Apprentice, except it be his Son, whose Father or Mother shall at the time of ta­king such Apprentice, have in Lands, Tenements, and Heredita­ments of Inheritance of the cleer yearly value of Forty Shillings, the Children of Labourers, and of per­sons not being Freemen or occupy­ing Husbandry. Thus carefully o­pen was the Eye of Institution in this Noble point of the Cities Po­licy, to prevent, that no stain, no blemish, nor indignity, should [Page 46] wrong the Splendor thereof; a thing which could not but follow inevitably, if when it was provided that no Bondmen's Issue into the estate of Apprentiship, should them­selves, by making Apprentices, make Bondmen; or should in any sort embase their Blood, whose Ma­sters they were to be, as to the pur­pose of coming to be Citizens in time. They never meant to make any man Bond, who would have none but the Sons of free-born per­sons bound Apprentices: and there­fore it shall be wilful ignorance or malice from henceforth to maintain the contrary.

4. A most memorable example in Scripture, to the purpose of the present Question, is that of Jacob and Laban, Genesis 29. where the time (seven years,) yea and the very word (servire) are plain in that Con­tract, which was made between the [Page 47] Uncle and the Nephew: yet who did ever say, that Jacob was for this a kind of Bondman? The reason why he was not, ariseth from consi­deration of the final Cause, or inten­tion of the Contract, which is re­corded to have been worthy and unblameable; the obtaining of a virtuous Wife, and of an Estate to maintain her with. Neither, when he was no longer defrauded of Ra­chel than seven days after his first seven years, and when for the fruiti­on of Rachel he served also other seven years, was he a Bondman; by, as it were a relapse or cessation of expecting his reward, which he en­joyed in enjoying her? Out of which it follows, that as Jacob was no kind of Bondman, though he served, and served out all his time twice over, so neither are Appren­tices. And from this place of Holy Writ it is unanswerably proved, [Page 48] that bodily service is a laudable means to atchieve any good or ho­nourable purpose, a means truly worthy of a Gentleman.

5. Hereunto we finally adde, and repeat, that as an Apprentice ties himself to his Master in the word deservire, that is, to obey and do restrictively to the ancient rea­son, and traditional Discipline of Apprentiship in London; so the Ma­ster ties himself to his Apprentice in the word docere, in lieu of his ho­nest service, to teach him his Art to the utmost. Which Master's part is grown to such estimation, as that Apprentices now come commonly like Wives, with treble more porti­ons than formerly to their Masters. If then Apprentiship be a kind of servitude, it is either a pleasing Bon­dage, or a strange madness to pur­chase it with so much money.

For proof of this Assertion, let me [Page 49] give a late Example. A Gentle­man of quality gave 300l with his younger Son, an Apprentice to a Merchant, and having continued together for three years, and the Servant not as yet imployed in the particular mystery of Merchandi­zing, himself complain'd to his Fa­ther of loss of time, and both of them referred their Case to another Merchant for rendition of such part of the 300l as might turn him over to a better Master. The Referrer rebuking the Master, urged this as a truth and ancient custom, defi­ning the Contract as we have inti­mated, and adding withall, that the Father had right in Law and Custom to be repaid all his 300l, and good dammage to his Son for the loss of so much precious time, without profit of the Art and My­stery contracted to be taught him, to the dishonour of the City, and [Page 50] the very intention of the Contract, and custom of London.

6. An Apprentice therefore, as an Apprentice, being neither ra­tione obsequii, temporis, contractus, nor conditionis, in any kind or any respect a Bondman: and hath there­fore no more lost his title and right to Gentry, than he hath done to any Goods, Chattels, Lands, Roy­alties, or any thing else, which, if he never had been an Apprentice, either had, might, or ought to have come to him. Nay, much less can Gentry be lost in this case, than right to Lands and Goods, how much more inherent the rights of Blood are than the rights of Fortune; for, according to the Law-rule, jur a san­guinum nullo jure civili dirimi possunt, unless in cases of Felony or Trea­son, whereas those other may be dissolved. And that Gentry is a right of Blood, may appear by this, [Page 51] that no man can truly alienate the same, or vest another in it, though legally he may in case of Adoption, which is but an humane invention of Nature, and therefore, in reive­ritate no Alienation at all, but a fi­ction, or an acception in Law, as if it were such. So that none can any more pass away his Gentry, to make another a Gentleman thereby, who was not a Gentleman before, than he can pass away any Habit, or Quality of the Mind, as Virtue, or Learning, to make another honest or learned, who was unlearned or dishonest before; for Gentry is a quality of Blood or Name, as Vir­tue and Learning are of the Mind. Upon which reason that rule of Law is grounded, which teacheth us, that annulus signatorius ornamenti appellatione'non continetur.

7. To all this if it be replied, that Apprentiship is a kind of Bon­dage; [Page 52] for that, if an Apprentice a­bandon his Master's service, his Ma­ster may both fetch him back again, as Lord for the time over his Ser­vant's Body, and compell him also to live under obedience. We an­swer thus: That such a power over the body of the Apprentice is not sufficient to constitute a Bondman, though the Service of the Appren­tice belongs to the Master, God's part in him and the Common­wealths being first deducted. Ari­stotle held, that only the Grecians were free, and all other barbarous, that is to say, all not being Grecians were Bond. Some among us seem Aristotelians in this point, who as he gloriously overvalued his Coun­trymen, so these overvalue their pa­ragon Gentry, and repute none worthy of Arms, and Honour, but themselves; we supposing on their behalf, that they are indeed not vain [Page 53] Pretenders, but true dependents from the most unquestionable No­ble Races, howsoever troubled per­haps with some little of the spirit of vanity, and of too too much scorn of others. But as the Italians, and their Nobility, in our time, (not­withstanding they think meanly of all who are not Italians, calling them (in Aristotle's humour) Tra­montanes, and in that word imply­ing them to be Barbarous) do com­mit an error as well as the great Philosopher, whilst they them­selves do take it to be no disparage­ment to merchandize; nor the haughty German Nobility, who al­though they do believe it to be dis­honourable to marry with the Daughter of a Burgher, or Citizen, do not refuse gain of Commerce or Merchandise: so these Gentlemen (how eminently Noble soever) will be likewise found to live in error, [Page 54] for that others may be truly Gentle­men, for any thing that as yet is spo­ken in the former Sophism, viz. that the Master hath power over his Ap­prentice's body, Ergo Apprentices are a kind of Bondmen; because if such a power be enough to constitute a Bondman, we will say nothing of those Free-born persons being in Minority, whose bodies their Guar­dians, in Lands holden by Knight­service, might (not long ago) not only by a right in Law fetch back, after escape or flight, but give away also in Marriage; nay, if for that reason, Apprentices, born Gentle­men, shall be thought to have for­feited their Gentry, in what estate are all the Sons and Children of all good houses in England? whose bo­dies in their Minority their Parents, by a right of Nature, may fetch back after flight, and exercise their pleasure or displeasure upon them, [Page 55] even to disinhereson of Lands not entailed. Scholars under their Tu­tors, or Schoolmasters, are not Bondmen. Nay, in what case are Soldiers, (to whom most properly, and most immediately the Honour of Arms doth belong) who for with­drawing themselves from their Banner, or Captain without leave, may not only be forced back to serve, but (according to the usual Discipline of War) may, by Martial Law, be hanged up, or shot at the next Tree, or wheresoever depri­ved at once of life and reputation together? so absurd it is to dispute, that the power of a Master, by the title of a Contract over the body of an Apprentice, in case of Discipline, doth convince a Servility of condi­tion in the Sufferer. For if the right to exercise corporal Correction should absolutely constitute a state of Bondage in the Subject, the injury [Page 56] of that untrue assertion would reach to persons of far higher mark than City-prentises, as is most plain­ly prov'd. And therefore they must alledged somewhat else besides subje­ction of Body, to draw the estate of Apprentiship into that degree of reproach; which as they cannot do, we having prevented those Obje­ctions, so must they leave it clear from taint or scandal.

8. We lay it down therefore, out of all the antecedences, for a clear Conclusion; That Apprenti­ces are so far from being a kind of Bond­men, as that in our Common-weal they then first begin habere caput, and to be aliqui: to be of account, and some body. For Apprentiship in London, is a de­gree or order of good regular Sub­jects, and out of whose (as it were) Nurseries, or Colledges, Citizens are supplied. We call them Col­ledges, according to the old Roman [Page 57] Law-phrase, or Fellowships of men, for so indeed they are comprehen­ded within several Corporations, or Bodies of free persons, intended to be consociated for Commerce, according to Conscience and Ju­stice; and named Companies, each of them severally bearing the Titles of their several worthy Compa­nies or Corporations, as Drapers, Salters, Cloth-workers, and so forth. And we say as before, that Appren­tices, in the reputation of our Com­mon-weal, when first they came to be Apprentices, then first begin to be somebody, and that Apprentiship is a degree, to which out of Youth and young men, who have no vo­cation in the World, they are ad­vanced; and that out of Apprenti­ces, by other ascents or steps, as do­nari civitate, to come to be free of LONDON, or Citizens, from thence to be of their Companies Li­very, [Page 58] the Governors of Companies, as Wardens and Masters, and Gover­nors in the City, as Common-Council­men, Aldermens Deputies, Sheriffs, and Aldermen; and lastly the prin­cipal Governor, or Head of the Ci­ty, the Lord Mayor; yea sometimes also Counsellors of State to the Prince (whereof Stow hath Exam­ples) are very orderly elected, and the whole Policy disposed after as excellent a form, as most at this day under Heaven.

9. True it is, that Apprentiship, as it is a Degree, so is it the lowest Degree, or Class of Men in London: lowest we say, that it may come to the highest, according to that of S. Augustin, and of common sense, That those Buildings rise highest, and stand fastest, whose Foundati­ons are deepest. And as Apprenti­ship is the first in order, and meanest in dignity, so can that be no title [Page 59] to embase the vocation, because there must be a first in all things.

Of this degree, anciently the flat round Cap, Hair close-cut, narrow falling Band, course side-Coat, close Hose, Cloth-stockings, and the rest of that severe Habit, was in Anti­quity not more for Thrift, and Use­fulness, than for Distinction and Grace, and were original Argu­ments or tokens of Vocation, or Calling; which point of ancient Discipline the Catoes of England, grave common Lawyers, to their high commendation therein, retain in their Profession, and Professors at this present, even to the parti­coloured Coats of Serjeants at Law, during the first year after they are made, or called; an object far more ridiculous among the new Mode of our time (enemies of rigor and di­scipline) than that of Apprentices. At which retained signs, and distin­ctive [Page 60] notes, as among Lawyers, though younglings, and frivolous Novices, may somewhat wonder, 'till the cause be understood, yet is the thing it self so far in it self from deserving contempt, as that they who should offer it, would them­selves be counted ignorant. For Sir Edward Coke, in the Preface of his third Book of Reports, hath affir­med, for the dignity of the word Apprentice, that a double Reader, whose degree is next to that of a Serjeant at Law, who is only infe­riour to a Judge, and to no other de­gree of Lawyers, is but an Apprentice at Law.

10. Here now let me be bold to say, that Apprentices of late seem to have drunk and sacrificed too deeply to their new Goddess Saint Fashion, a French Idol, which was always no­ted fatal to the English; as at the Periods, or universal concussions of [Page 61] Empire in our portion of Great Brit­tain, may in old Writers be obser­ved. This they do not without wrong, in our opinions, to the ho­nesty of their degree, at least wise in so far abandoning their proper Or­nament, the Cap, (anciently a note of Liberty among the Romans) as not to have, one day at least in the year, wherein to celebrate the Feast of their Apprentiship in the peculiar Garb thereof; which they should do well and wisely to frequent, for the suppression and beating down of that ungrounded Contumely and scorn, by making profession in this wise, that they glory in the En­signs of their honest Calling.

11. For revocation of which into use, though we see no man­ner of hope, yet are those late Ma­gistrates of the City, who laboured to reduce Apprentiship to practice this laudable point of outward Con­formity, [Page 62] not the less to be commen­ded. And it were to be wished, perhaps, that instead of scattering Libels, and of discovering Inclina­tions to Tumult, Apprentices had rather submitted their Understan­dings and resigned their wills in this particular to their loving Supe­riors, making humble and wise O­bedience the glory of their Persons, much rather than Apparrel in the fashion. For they who are not a­shamed of their Professions, ought not to be ashamed of the Ensigns and Tokens of their Profession, or De­gree. They indeed are out of fa­shion, who are not in the fashion which is proper to their quality; the flat round Cap, in it self consi­dered as a Geometrical figure, is far more worthy than the square, according to that ground in the Ma­thematicks, Figurarum sphaerica est op­tima, and in Hieroglyphicks is a Sym­bol [Page 63] of Eternity, and Perfection, and a resemblance of the World's rotun­dity: but I will make no Encomium for Caps. This I say, that as the square Cap is retained, not onely in the Universities, and Chancery, but also abroad among us, as well by Ecclesiastical persons in high places, as by Judges of the Land when they sit in Court; so the round Cap being but a note in London of Apprentices, and Citizens of London, as it is of Stu­dents, Barresters, Benchers, and Rea­ders in the Inns of Courts, and chief Officers in the Court-royal, so the wearing thereof by Londoners can­not be a Reproach, but an Orna­ment. But communis error facilius, and how freely soever these thoughts come from me, out of affection to the preservation of Virtue in that most Honourable City, which civil Discipline is ablest to do, and how­soever it may be to wish the best, yet [Page 64] some busy Censurer may think it to be a vanity to hope to stop the ge­neral stream of predominant Cu­stom by private wishes. Apprenti­ces moreover, and Citizens, because they are always conversant in the light of action and concourse, and not shut up in Colledges for Studies sake, may think by this contrary way, the more to honour their City, and to enjoy themselves.

12. Well may they in the mean time blush at their temerity, who by teaching that Apprentices are called Apprentices, as if they were pares emptisii, do dishonour and highly wrong the excellent old Po­licy of this Land: for they (as much as lyeth in the credit of their words) most dangerously discourage flou­rishing Industry, who cast such an aspersion upon any Civil Profession, and Order of men, (assembled to uphold a Kingdom by Commerce, [Page 65] according to the rules of Law and Justice,) as the least conceit of so hateful a Note as Bondage. And if it be Temerity to cast it upon any Renowned, or other Corporations unjustly, it is singular Iniquity (let it not be called Madness) to lay it upon LONDON, which shines a­mong all Cities within the Empire of Britain,—velut inter ignes Luna minores.

Whether APPRENTISHIP extinguisheth GENTRY? THE FOURTH PART.

1. THough thus I have been the Pleader, and Defender, of the credit of the City, yet I desire not to be mistaken. For it is very far from my Profession, a Courtier, and by Ancient Desent a Gentle­man, by this Apology, or Patroniza­tion, to confound Degrees in Com­mon-weal, so to set up as it were a new Babylon of my own; I am not ignorant therefore, that Citizens as Citizens, are not Gentlemen but Ci­tizens: to hold otherwise were to [Page 70] take one Order or Degree of men out of the Realm, or like Horace's Monster, (a Man's head, and a Hor­ses neck, shoulders, or body) to treat of a thing which had half one, and half another; and our Laws give a proper Name both to the Tenure and Person, calling the Tenure of Citizens in Cities, Burgage, and their Persons Burgenses, among whom the more eminent of them in Lon­don had of old, not only the Honour of the title of Citizens, or Burgesses, but their Aldermen were called Ba­rons; not honoured or priviledged as the Barons of England are, but as men of Reputation within the verge of their City, and have the Adorn­ment of Golden Chains, which, with other signals of Honour, was the ancient Reward of Merit among the Romans.

2. The ordinary Citizen there­fore is a degree beneath the meer Gentleman, as the Gentleman is a­mong us in the lowest degree or class of Nobility in England. And all Citi­zens, as Citizens, yea the Lord Mayor himself, simply as a Citizen, is not a Gentleman, but Burgensis. As the greatest Princes and Despots that e­ver were, or ever shall be in the World, considered in their first na­tural condition, are at most but In­genui, or free-born, in which respect all are equal, for omnes naturâ aequa­les, and their Civil degree or gene­ral [Page 72] estate, which either compre­hends all the Orders of Nobility, or is capable of them, is (among us) the Gentleman. In which respect he who shall say, that this or that King, or Emperour, is a Gentleman, speaks rightly, and as the thing is; for Gentleman is the Title, about which all other Titles, as they concern Ho­nour, and convey no Jurisdiction, are put as Robes and Ornaments. This therefore is my meaning; that some Citizen may be a Citizen, and yet truly a Gentleman, as one and the same man may in several re­spects be both a Lord, and Tenant; Citizen in regard of his Corporati­on in London, Gentleman in regard of his Birth, or of Armories assigned for encouragement of Industry, to ennoble his honest Riches and Titles of Honour or Worship in that City whereof he is a qualified Member. Neither is the communication of [Page 73] Rewards, which consists of painted distinctions, composed according to the received rules of Heraldry, in­jurious to ancient Gentry, any more than the promiscuous permission of wearing Gold-rings on their fin­gers alike to Freemen, as to Freemen granted by the Emperour in the Au­thenticks. Nor is it a new thing in our Common-weal, that some weal­thy and virtuous Citizen, not born to Armories, although the Sons of Yeomen, Husbandmen, and Cottagers, should have Arms assigned them, and some undoubtedly born by right of Blood, as descendents of Gentlemen; but other again as un­doubtedly assigned for Excellency in City-Arts. Of which number there are in this time not a few, whose seri nepotes, whose great Grand-children's Children are re­puted amongst some of the Ancient and worthy Families of their Coun­tries, [Page 74] without any relation to Lon­don, which notwithstanding raised them; Hence it follows, that as an Apprentice being a Gentleman born, remaineth a Gentleman, with edi­tion of Splendor and Title, as God blesseth his labours, so a worthy Ci­tizen is capable of the Honour of Arms, notwithstanding his former Apprentiship. And by this distincti­on made between a Citizen meerly as a Citizen, and of a Citizen as he may also be a Gentleman, that Obje­ction (which some bring out of a Statute, enacted under one of our Kings, which forbiddeth the dispa­ragement offered by the Guardian to marry the ward (born Gentile) to a Burgensis) may easily be salved, and answered: for in that Statute, the word Burgensis is spoken in the na­tive and more narrow sense thereof, which is of one who is simply Bur­gensis, without any consideration of [Page 75] him as he may otherwise be a Gen­tleman, Esquire, or Knight, which in some cases happens. As in the fa­mous Corporation of Droit-Wiche in worcestershire, where he that hath a property in a Salt-pan, or a certain Measure, or liberty of making salt, is ipso facto a Burgess of that Town, and hath a Vote there: Insomuch as an Earl of Shrewsbury, and some of the neighbouring Knights, Esquires, and Gentry, have deemed themselves ho­noured thereby, and at their deaths, though absent from the place, have the great Bell of Droit-Wiche rung out for them. And in conferring of Arms, or Coats of Arms upon Citi­zens not born Gentlemen, Reason requireth, that they should not have Coats of the fairest Bearing assign'd to them, but such as either in Canton, Chief, Border, or otherwise, might carry some Testimony, Mark, or Sign, to shew the Art by which [Page 76] they were advanced; as Merchants Adventurers to bear Anchors; Gro­cers, Cloves; Cloth-workers, a Tezel; Merchant-Taylors, a Robe; and so forth: which those Gentlemen ought in honesty and thankfulness to chose; and not only to accept, but rather to strive, to have such Acknowledgment reversed to their Posterity, who afterwards thriving may procure some change to be al­so made in the Coat for the bet­ter; specially considering what pretty riddance hath been in latter times made of Surcharges in Armo­ry, granted about the end of King Henry the Eighth, what Encroach­ments upon Gentlemen's Rights by new Ones; because their Names, or by the addition, or taking away a Letter or Syllable, have been made to be the same; and many o­ther Inventions to blanch or beau­tifie Newness. Which to rectifie, [Page 77] divers Coats of Arms have been delivered from their Original defor­mities, surfets, and surcharges, by their proper Physician, the Provin­cial King of Arms. So Sir Thomas-Kissons of Suffolk, whose Chief now simply Gold, was heretofore over­laden with three egresses, and they with an Anchor, (the Badge or Ar­gument of the Original,) and two Lyons rampant argent, as is publickly extant to be seen in Trinity Hall in Cambridge, whereunto he was a Be­nefactor. And besides that Gentle­mans, the Coat of Arms of some of the Gentry of this Land, do need the like relief or remedy. The rule of Proportion seeming carefully to be observed in Antiquities among us, where the principal and most Noble Charges were not appropria­ted but to Anological concretences of honourable quality.

3. Such therefore being the na­ture [Page 78] of Apprentiship, and such the condition of Citizens estates, as to the purposes of Honour and Arms; let Fathers, who are Gentlemen, put their Children, who are not in­clining to Arms or Letters, to Ap­prentiships, to the Discipline and Art of honest Gain, giving them a Title of being somewhat in our Countrey; for it is a Vocation, if not misused, simply honest, and may prove a stay to Posterity, and give Credit to their Names, when licentious and corrupted Eldest sons have sold their Birth-rights away; for albeit many Citizens thrive not, yet those Fathers, and such who are in place of Fathers, provide more probably, who put their Children or Orphans into a certain Method of Life, than others who leave them at large. And however some rio­tous, foolish or unfortunate Citizens miscarry, yet there are more than [Page 79] Ten to One, which do not; and many of those who are not Gentle­men born, and being put by their Parents to be Apprentices, that as God may bless their just, true, and virtuous Industry, so they may be Founders of a New Family, and both raise themselves and theirs to the title of Gentlemen, lawfully bearing Arms. For which cause, those who may perchance own their worldly estate, and the foundation of that greatness or amplitude of means to such as have been Citizens of London, are not free enough to bu­sie themselves in detracting from those, whose original Greatness was drawn from the others; nor those others, whose Originals were from Chivalrie and Martial Service, (the most pure and proper Noble­ness of all, as to the purpose of bear­ing Arms, and have since been mix­ed with Citizens) ought to think it [Page 80] the least disparagement to own their Ancestors or Benefactors to have been Citizens of London. But it will worthily become them freely and thankfully to acknowledge so honest Originals, and accession to Originals, as many parts of this Realm from thence have been filled with: because among them the Sinews of War and Peace, abun­dance of Treasure are stored up, as in the Chambers of the King, when they will be pleased either by Lone or Subsidy to afford their Soveraign and Great Benefactor the use of it.

4. Which acknowledgement, besides that it is in the laws of Ho­nour an act of bounden Duty, they may the rather take it for a Glory. Because some of our Princes have so far vouchsafed to grace them, as to be incorporated as Members of some of their Companies of Trade in the City. And King Henry the [Page 81] seventh (whom all of us will easily confess, to have well enough under­stood what he did) is credibly said to have been in Person at the Ele­ction of a Master and Wardens, and Himself to have sitten openly a­mong them in a Gown of Crimson-Velvet, City-fashion, with a Citi­zen's Hood of Velvet on his Shoul­ders a la mode de Londres, upon their solemn Feast-day, in the Common Hall of the Company of Merchant-Taylors. Moreover, his Grand­child, Queen Elizabeth (no way in­ferior to her Ancestors in high poli­cy) was free of the Company of Mercers. Lastly, (which is more to our present purpose) our late Solomon, Soveraign King James, being one of the most Learned of our Princes, (though Learning hath been a Royal Ability in our Ancient Soveraigns, and so flourishing in sebert King of the East-Angles, that Venerable [Page 82] Bede affirms him to have been nec omnia doctissimus) King James, I say, did honour the Company of Cloth-workers in London (which if well en­couraged, would be one of the most important Companies of Trade in that City) with a condescension of being accounted a Freeman of that Company of Cloth-workers, whose Employment is the well-making the greatest Staple-Commodity of this Kingdom.

5. Nor let the Name of Compa­nies (because they seem not to found honourable enough, as the Appella­tions of degrees in Nobility and Gentry) avert the mind from them, as things ignoble, and unworthy the Dignity of Generous dispositions, erroneously holden to be so, in Sir John Birne's Blazon of Gentry, for all Renowned Cities ever had in them Urbana Nobilitas, and yet their Citi­zens could not but be distributed in­to [Page 83] Orders, Tribes, or Titles of Profe­ssion, yea sometimes in their Games. For the Circensian Companies in Rome, called Factions, that is to say in truth, Companies, and denomi­nated from their several clothings, as White, Blew, Green, and Red, to which Domitian added two others, Purple, and Gold, were the special Exercises of Princes and People; which grew to such Excess, that no longer af­ter than in Trajan's time, that Pli­nius secundus held it to be a matter worthy of his Complaint and Cen­sure, so as in one of his Epistles he saith, Nunc panno facient, nunc pan­num amant. Again, such of the Gen­try, who live not in the City, and do most of all elevate themselves with contempt of others in respect of the Arts, and ways of maintenance, were they but incorporated under the true Titles of their Means, in which we will not speak of their [Page 84] prodigious eating up of whole Hou­ses, Towns, & People, by a thousand wicked Devices proper to the my­stery of depopulation, (against whose consuming works so many Statutes of this Land have long time warred in vain) the Names of those City Brotherhoods, or Companies would easily sound, in a most curious ear, full out as fair, and well, as Corn, Cat­tle, Butter, Cheese, Hay, Wood, Wool, Coals, and the like materials of their Maintenance, all of them inseparable to Country-Common-weals, and with­out which they can no more subsist, than the Drapers, as Drapers, without Cloth; Gold-smiths, as Goldsmiths, with­out Jewels or Plate. Neither doth it create any great odds in this point, touching Honour between parties in this dispute, that Gentlemen by their Officers, as Bayliffs, Reeves, or the like, do order their Affairs for their more ease, and dignities; for [Page 85] besides, that the wisest among them exercise that superintendency in their own Persons; so herein, the worthy Citizen is no way behind, dispatch­ing his business by Factors, Jour­neymen, or expert Apprentices, reser­ving only to himself the Over-view and Controll of all their doings. Ci­ty-Nobleness so apparent, that the Knights or Gentlemen of Rome profes­sing Merchandise, and other among them that way bent, had their Hall or seat of their Colledge or Company upon Mount Capitoline it self, dedi­cated to their Patron Deity, or Tu­telary Godhead, Mercury. Other incorporated Societies there also were, as Goldsmiths, and the rest who li­ved so far from being excluded out of the power of Common-weal, or from Honours, and signs of Nobleness, that they forced a right in some Ca­ses to chuse out of their own Body one of the Consuls, before their Em­perors [Page 86] times. Yea so mighty were they grown in respect of Election, and negative Authority, that Clo­dius, to be revenged on Cicero, left his own rank of Patricians, and Lords, and turned Commoner.

6. To conclude, such Gentlemen are much deceived, which no sooner they hear a man named to be of this or that Society, or Colledge of Trade in London, as of Grocers, Ha­berdashers, Fishmongers, or any other of the twelve principal Monopolies, (the Zodiack of the City, in whose Ecliptick-line their Lord Mayor must ever run his years Course,) but they forthwith entertain a low conceit of the parties quality, as too much beneath their own Rank and Or­der, without farther examination; when it often happens, that he who is titularly of this fraternity, never was bred up in it, nor understands more in it than the remotest Gentleman, their [Page 87] Masters themselves having been Mer­chants, or of other Profession of life di­vers from their title, under which they are marshalled; the law of the City imposing an absolute necessity, that all who are free of the City should carry the Name of some one or o­ther of their Brotherhoods. Again, what do the Constellations of Heaven shine the worse, or the less, because they carry the names of a Ram, of a water-bearer, of Fishes, and so forth? or how many the fewer are their several lights for that? Answerable to which I say, that if the Partie's mind be adorned with the Star-lights of Honour and Virtue, what baseness is it for him to be marshall'd under any of the Names comprehending one or other of the honest Arts of worldly life, no more than the Name of the Great Fabii at Rome, for their usual feeding upon Beans, or Cicero of Pulse.

[Page 88] 7. In disputing thus, let me not be thought to set up an envious Comparison between these two de­grees or qualifications of men: that is very far from me; for it must ever be granted to the Authority of ge­neral Opinion, founded upon cu­stom among us, that the true Coun­try Esquire, caeteris paribus, is, in his proper place, before the City Esquire, which with the perpetual clause be­foresaid of caeteris paribus, holds also throughout the other degrees of the inferior Nobleness in England. I rea­son here as Reason bids, not against the right or dignity of persons, ei­ther as in parallel, or as in disparage­ment, but against the vanity and of­fences rising out of causeless Elation, and Arrogancy, and against their Errors, who not understanding the things of their own Country, are indeed meer Meteoroscopes, and hover in the Cloudy Region of Ad­miration [Page 89] upon rude and unlearned phantasies; for which cause, as minds needing to be healed, so would I sincerely wish that they were healed. Such are theirs, who would perhaps think the Compa­nies or Monopolies of the City more worthy of their acknowledgment, if where now they are denomina­ted of some particular Ware, or Craft, they were named of Eagles, Vultures, Lyons, Bears, Panthers, Ti­gers, or so forth, as the several Or­ders of Nobility in Mexico (which Josephus Acosta writes) under their Emperour. Yet much better, be­cause more truly, these Fellowships of London carry the Names of Men, and their Trades, as they have Vocations in Professions, which onely Men can execute, better or more Noble; if those Societies were denominated of Eyes, Ears, Hands, Feet, or of other Members: [Page 90] as Philostratus, in the life of that Impo­stor, Apollonius Tyaneus, saith, the Officers, and Instrument of a Philo­sophical King his Eyes, Ears, and so forth; so have these Mysteries some one or other Professor in each of them, from a higher Trade to the lowest, eminently dignified with the Honour of being the King's Ser­vant, as the King's Mercer, the King's Draper, and so forth. Again, how much more worthy is the whole than the parts, because the parts are in the whole; so by that Argu­ment it is more honourable to be marshalled as a man among Socie­ties of Civil men, than to be distin­guished by Allusions to particular Members; at least wise those Singu­lar Gentlemen might certainly in their most contempt of the City, re­member, that rare and real worth may be in the Persons of Citizens themselves, seeing Terrentius (Con­sul [Page 91] of Old Rome, with the Noble Paulus Aemilius) was free of the Butchers Company, and our Wal­worth, Lord Mayor of Old London, was free of the Fishmongers. And the others were not onely the Lords, Knights, and Gentlemen of Rome, who had voice in Election of their Prin­cipal yearly Magistrates, but even Handicrafts-men, and Artificers, as is most manifest by that place of Salust, in his Jugurthine War, where Marius was chosen Consul, by the special Affection of that sort of Ro­man Citizens, who (saith he) sua necessaria post illius honorem ducebant, preferred his Election by their Voi­ces, before the Trades by which they earned their Livings. Finally, they may remember, that in the Po­sterity of Citizens many Right No­ble and worthy Gentlemen are often found; and that, besides the uni­versal mixture with City-races [Page 92] through the Kingdom, it may not be denied, that true Nobleness or Gen­try shineth often very bright among them, as it did a little before his Ma­jestie's happy Restoration, when a great number of Apprentices, pro­bably the Sons of Gentry, and such as would not forget the accustomed Loyalty of their Progenitors, due at all times to their Soveraign, when these threatned the Lord Mayor to pull him off his horse, if he would not de­clare for the King; for even as where the Sun is there is no darkness, so where Soveraign Princes are interes­sed Parties, there is no Baseness. And as the Philosopher's Mercury purg­eth vilest Metals, turning all to Gold; so the Operation of Princes Inten­tions to ennoble Societies with their personal Presences, transmettals the Subject, and clearly takes away all Ignobility. Which things as they are most true in London, so, for that [Page 93] the Emperour Constantius Magnus, (if our Ancient Fitz Stephen reports the right,) Henry King of England, Son of King Henry the second, and that brave Prince Edward the first, and whosoever else were born in the City, they give to it the glory of Arms. And Jeffery Chaucer, Sir Thomas Moore Knight, with others born in London, communicate there­unto the Glory of Wits and Letters. To nourish up both with Excellent Titles to reall Nobility in the City, the Artillery-yard and Gresham Col­ledge were instituted. And howe­ver some of the Rebel-rout and Fa­ctious part of the Citizens of Lon­don made themselves unworthy of the Freedom and Liberties thereof, by the late Horrid and Devilish Re­bellion; yet it cannot be denied, but that many Loyal and Worthy Citizens were not only deluded, o­ver-awed, and kept under by a false [Page 94] Authority of Parliament, but plun­der'd, sequestred, and undone for their Allegiance to the King. Mr. Chaloner hanged; Sir Richard Gour­ney Knight and Baronet, Lord May­or of London, imprisoned in the Tower of London, for not acting a­gainst the King; and the Rebelli­ous Party commanded Sir George Whitman Knight, formerly Lord Mayor, and chosen, locumtenens, for the Remainder of Sir Richard Gour­ney's year, to be sent Prisoner to Yar­mouth for the like Loyalty; and James Bunch an Alderman of Lon­don, now Sir James Bunch, Knight and Baronet, imprisoned in the Tower of London, had all his Estate real and personal plundred, sequestred, and sold, and ordered by the usur­ping Powers to be exempted from Pardon, and forced to fly into the parts beyond the Seas to His now Majesty, with whom he continued [Page 95] until His Majesty's happy Restaura­tion. And Sir Abraham Reynardson, Lord Mayor of London in the time of that Rebellion, was imprisoned, and fined 2000l, for refusing to publish the Proclamation of those Contrivers of all manner of wick­edness, for the abolishing of Kingly Government.

The worthiness of the City is now visible, being not disheartned by the late Correction, and Loss, of Pestilence and Fire, which after their humble Acknowledgment to God of their deserving, have re­edified the Devastation with grea­ter Splendor and Beauty. Their Industry we may compare to the Bees, which Virgil describes;

Sir John Fitzwater's Pallace was that Noble Pile, named Baynard's Castle, neer St. Paul's Wharf, late­ly burned down, from whence in great respect to him the Lord Mayor takes water, attended with Bar­ges of the several Companies to Westminster, where he takes his Oath of Mayoralty, and so returns in Triumph to Guild-Hall to his Feasting.

Thus this Question of Honour and Arms, undertaken for affecti­on to that great City, and their Children, being, as we hope suffici­ently discussed; the End of all is this: That albeit the love of hu­mane [Page 97] Praise, and outward Splen­dor, in the marks and testimonies of it, are very vehement fires in all worthiest Natures, yet have they no Beatitude, nor (so to say) Felici­tation, but only as with reference to this of the Blessed Apostle,

Soli Deo Honor, & Gloria, AMEN.