THE CASE OF THE BARBERS of
LONDON.
T HE
Barbers
of
London
were a
Fraternity
before the Time of
Edward the Second,
and by Letters-Patent of
Edward the Fourth
were made a
Body Corporate,
and invested with several Powers and Privileges. In the 32d Year of
Henry the Eighth,
the
publick
Policy thought proper to
unite
them with another Company (not then
incorporated
) called the
Surgeons
of
London,
in order, (as is most probable) to
transfer
those Powers and Privileges to the
latter,
without directly appearing to
wrest
them from the
former
to whom they had been
originally
granted.
This
Coalition
of the two Companies having now subsisted above
Two Hundred Years,
the
Barbers
are surpris'd to find an
Attempt
made by the
Surgeons
to
dissolve
it, by Authority of
Parliament,
without their Participation or Consent.
The
principal Reasons
assigned by the
Surgeons,
in their printed Case, to induce the Legislature to this
extraordinary
Act of Power, are,
That the
Barbers,
in the Time of
Henry the Eighth,
were
all Surgeons,
and that the Parliament, by
uniting
them with others of
superior
Abilities, intended
their
Improvement in
that
Profession; but that they having, long since,
ceased
to intermeddle with any Branch of
Surgery,
this
Intent
of the Act is frustrated, and the laudable
Purpose
of the
Union
at an end.
That by this
Alteration
of the Circumstances of things, the Junction of the two Companies (how advantageous soever in
former
Times) is
now
become highly
inconvenient.
That the
Surgeons,
if
distinctly
incorporated, would be encouraged to
meet
and
communicate
to one another their Experiments and Successes.
That the like Separation has taken place at
Paris, Edinburgh,
and
Glascow.
BUT the
first
of these
Reasons
is grounded on a
Mistake
in point of
Fact;
for tho' it be
true
that the
Barbers
were
all originally Surgeons,
and incorporated
as such,
yet long
before
the Union in question,
most
of them had
quitted
the
actual Exercise
of that Profession, and the
Right
itself of exercising it
in virtue
of their Charter, had been
3
H.
8.
Ch.
11. No Person within the City of
London,
nor within seven Miles, shall occupy as a
Surgeon,
except he be first examined, approved, and admitted by the Bishop of
London
or Dean of St.
Paul
's.
taken away
by Parliament: And tho' in the
Preamble
of the uniting Act,
both
Companies are stiled
Surgeons,
yet from the
32
H.
8.
Ch.
42.
Sect.
3. No Person within the City of
London,
Suburbs of the same, and one Mile Compass of the said City, using any Barbery or Shaving, shall occupy any Surgery, Letting of Blood, or any other Thing belonging to Surgery, Drawing of Teeth only except.
Enacting
Part (which expresly
restrains
the
Barbers
from occupying any part of
Surgery,
except
Tooth-drawing
) it is evident the
Legislature
did not consider them as
real
Surgeons, nor could intend their
Improvement
in a Science they were
forbid
to
practise,
so that the Circumstances of Things are
not
altered from what they
then
were, or from what they manifestly were
designed
to be; and therefore the
Barbers
having no Relation to the
Surgeons,
or their Art (as it was
then
deemed no
Objection
to their
Union
)
annot
now,
with any Propriety, be insisted on as a
Reason
for their
Separation.
With regard to the
Inconveniencies
complained of, as the Charge is
general,
this
general
Answer only can be given, That the
Barbers
have always, with the greatest Deference,
submitted
to the
Surgeons
in all Matters
peculiar
to them, and chearfully contributed, out of their
common
Stock, towards every Expence which
they
have declared necessary for the Honour or Advancement of
their
Profession. And since
none
of these Inconveniencies have been of Consequence enough to deserve being
particularly
pointed out, we may venture to pronounce them
inconsiderable,
and unworthy the Attention and Redress of
Parliament;
and the rather, as
all
of them put together, have not prevented the
Surgeons
of
London
from carrying the Improvement of their Art, both in Speculation and Practice, to a greater Height than has been done in any other Place or Nation.
That the frequent Meetings of ingenious Men, and their free Communications on the Subject of their Profession, may tend
to the Benefit of Mankind in general, and to the Honour of their Country in particular,
is not denied: But surely the Constitution of the
united
Company is no obstacle to these laudable Purposes. The
Barbers
have for many Years, at their Monthly Courts, submitted to
withdraw
at a stated Hour, and
resigned
the Parlour to the Surgeons: And if this
Condescension
is not supposed to afford them
sufficient
Time for Conversation on these
particular
Days, nothing
hinders
them from holding
seperate
Assemblies at the Hall almost
every
other Day in the Year.
As to what is said to have been done at
Paris, Edinburgh,
and
Glascow,
no
particular
answer can be given, unless it appeared by what
Means,
for what
Reasons,
and upon what
Terms
the
Separations
in those Places were brought about. In
London
there are but two Instances of Separations of Companies,
viz.
that of the
Feltmakers
from the
Haberdashers
in 1604, and that of the
Apothecaries
from the
Grocers
in 1617; but both these were effected by
mutual
Consent, without the Intervention of
Parliament;
and it may be proper to observe, that the Feltmakers miscarried in a former Application for an exclusive Charter in 1576 for
want
of the Haberdashers Consent.
Upon the whole, therefore, the
Barbers
humbly hope the forgoing Reasons will be deemed
insufficient
to induce the
Legislature
to destroy an
Union
they
themselves
thought proper to
form,
an Union which two hundred Years Existence has rendred
venerable,
and which, by the
Improvements
above-mentioned, appears to have answered all the
Purposes
for which it was established.
But if for
other
Reasons (which the
Surgeons
say
may
be given) the Parliament shall be inclined to favour them in
this part
of their Request; the
Barbers,
from the scrupulous Regard and Tenderness which that
August Assembly
has always shewn for
private Property,
cannot but hope they shall be
continued
in the Enjoyment of
all
their present Possessions, without any
Division
whatsoever, and that, for the following Reasons:
Because most of the
united
Company's Lands and Tenements, (particularly the Site of their
Hall, Parlour, &c.
) originally belonged to
them,
and by the uniting Act
32
H.
8.
Ch.
42. The united Company shall have, possess, and enjoy, to them and their Successors for ever, all such Lands and Tenements, and other Hereditaments whatsoever, which the said Company or Commonalty of
Barbers
have and enjoy,
to the Use
of the said Mystery and Commonalty of
Barbers
of London.
seem with great Justice to have been intended to remain to their
sole
and
separate
Use, tho' in fact the
Surgeons
have hitherto been
indulged
in the
equal
Enjoyment of them with the
Barbers.
Because the
Surgeons Share
of what may have been acquired
since
the Union, will scarce be an
adequate
Recompence to the
Barbers
for the above
Indulgence,
much less for the unmerited
Loss
of a Brotherhood now so
honourable
and
advantageous
to them.
Because the Expences of the
Barbers
when
distinctly
incorporated, can fall but very little, if any thing, short of those of the
united
Company, so that a Reduction of
Income
must subject them to very great Difficulties, which (considering that
they
neither desire, nor have given the
Surgeons
just Cause to desire a Separation) would be extremely hard and unreasonable.
Because the present
flourishing
Condition of the
Surgeons,
(the only
real
Alteration in the Circumstances of Things) will sufficiently enable them to support the Dignity of their
new
and
favourite
Institution with becoming
Splendor,
without distressing their
less happy
Brethren the
Barbers.
THE CASE OF THE BARBERS of
London.