CHAP. XIII. EXPORT OF YARN PROHIBITED. 263 answers first be put brokers and buying and selling by retail, which they A.D. 1376. alleged to be against their ancient franchises. To this King the King answered, that, if they would put the city under good government, for the future no foreigner City must should be allowed to dwell, act as broker, or sell by under good retail in London or the suburbs, save and except the govern Inerchants of the Hanse Towns.1 It was also a Against matter of complaint that the franchises of cities general and towns in general were invaded. In answer to the of franprayer of the Commons for a remedy of these grievances, those who had charters or liberties were ordered to show them in the Court of Chancery, and it was promised that right should be done them by advice of the Great Council.2 invasion chises, export of jects. In another matter, the King wisely resisted a peti- Against tion of the Commons, viz. that the export of corn corn which might be forbidden, because of its dearness, which King rewas alleged to be a consequence of its exportation. His answer, which was singularly contrary to the spirit of the times, was, "Let the King's lieges be free to carry it for their profit wherever it shall seem them best." Another petition, however, involving similar principles, was answered in a contrary spirit. The Petition merchants of Wiltshire, Bristol, Somerset, Gloucester, export of Dorset, and elsewhere, complained of the manufac- yarn, beture of woollen yarn, and of its export to Normandy raising and Lombardy for its manufacture into cloths. The giving emreasons alleged for ordering this to be forbidden were, that the King lost the export duty on the manufac tured cloth, and that so many people were employed in the making of this yarn that the labourers became insolent (la plus fols du corps) and would not gather in 1 Rot. Parl. 50 Ed. III. No. lxxxiv. 2 Ibid. No. viii. against cause of its wages by ployment. 3 Ibid. No. xcvii. A.D. 1376. the harvests. The King at once granted the petition, because it affected his own pocket; thus acting against grants the all the recognised principles of political economy, as King petition. Struggle between labourers and employers. Petitions against labourers now usually received. A trade, which was evidently of great importance in furnishing employment for large numbers of people, was discouraged because it raised the price of labour; and, also, because the price of the English manufactured cloths would require to be lowered, in order to compete with the cloths manufactured abroad with yarn exported from England. This proceeding arose out of the struggle between labourers and employers, which was so marked and interesting a feature of the reign, and was an pecial subject of consideration in this Parliament. The Statute of Labourers was continually evaded; refractory and the Commons now complained, that when the who want masters offered to pay their labourers according to higher the wages laid down in the statute, they fled to other places; from county to county, from hundred to hundred, from town to town, to places unknown to their masters; and, what was worse, that they obtained immediate employment at the places to which they fled, which set so bad an example, that masters did not dare challenge or displease their servants, but were obliged to give them what they asked. They then went on to attribute all sorts of evils to this struggle of the labourers for fair wages; such as that they became beggars, and staff-strikers, and sturdy rogues; and the Commons prayed, that no sustenance or alms should be given them, whether in boroughs or in the country, under heavy penalties; that they should be sent to the nearest gaol, till they were willing to return to their own country, and serve their neighbours according to law; that any one who harboured CHAV. XIII. NO CHANGE MADE IN THE LAW. 265 any such runaway servant should be liable to a pen- A.D.1376. alty of £10; and, that any runaway, who had committed such offence three times, should be imprisoned for a year, and find surety for his good behaviour before release. The Commons then went on to pray, that no artificer should keep any labourer or servant of any town as apprentice, or in the service of his art "so long that there remain none to till the ground;"1 under penalty of £10 to the King, and 100s. to the party complaining. change made in the law. No change was made in the law in consequence of but no this petition, nor indeed was any needed, for the only defect of the existing law was, that it could not be put in force; but, it was ordered, that "the statutes and ordinances already made, should be held and kept in all their points, and duly put in execution." 2 These are the principal matters which occupied the time of this important Parliament. 1 66 ❝ nulle de la dite Ville ad mestre de laborer de mayntenir la coulterre de la terre." 2 Rot. Parl. 50 Ed. III. No. lvii. and lviii. CHAPTER XIV. COUNTER REVOLUTION CONSEQUENT ON THE DEATH OF THE BLACK PRINCE. A.D. 1376. THE changes produced by the death of the Black Changes Prince, which began almost immediately after the consequent dismissal of Parliament in the beginning of July,1 must now be related. on the death of the Black Prince. power; sons De The Duke of Lancaster was foiled in his endeavours to meddle with the succession to the throne; but it was no difficult matter for him to wreak his vengeance on his opponents. He lost no time in so Lancaster doing. He immediately resumed the government of returns to the kingdom, and retained it until the King's death." he impri- His first victim was Peter de la Mare, the Speaker of the last Parliament, whom he sent to prison at Nottingham. Lord Latimer was restored to favour, and other obnoxious persons were brought back to the Court. Alice Perrers returned to the company of the King. She belonged to the Duke's party, and without doubt was enabled, by her influence over the infatuated old King, to support the Duke in the counter-revolution which had now begun. la Mare; restores Latimer. returns. Mortimer, Earl of March, got rid of. 3 Mortimer, Earl of March, was another enemy to be got rid of. He was the husband of Philippa, 1 Lowth, Life of Wykeham, p. 111. 2 Walsingham, p. 322. 3 Ibid. p. 321; but at Newark, according to Chronicle, Arch. vol. xxii. p. 213. 4 Walsingham, p. 322. |