Apprenticeship without consideration of money or other value

[venelow]

Hi Rootschatters

Under what circumstances would a London Master in the Drapers' Company take an Apprentice for no money or other value?

It is not a charity case as the father was rich enough to pay. He was turned over to his father a few months later. His father was not in the same trade as his original Master.

The Apprentice was admitted to the Drapers' after seven years but does not seem to have actually worked in the trade he was apprenticed to. In fact I suspect he never actually performed the duties of a Draper's Apprentice. He became a clergyman.

I can't see the benefit to him in doing this. Or why he would be permitted to do so.
Can anyone enlighten me?

Venelow
Canada

[youngtug]

Maybe to become a member of the guild, with all its advantages

[Maiden Stone]

I had the same thought as youngtug. I remembered a RootsChat topic about generations who never practised their alleged trade; it was a way to become a guild member so that they could carry on their real business within the City of London.

[venelow]

Thank you for responding Youngtug and Maidenstone.

The thing is he never had any sort of business in the City of London.

This chap entered the University Of Oxford about 4 months after he was inrolled (their spelling) as an Apprentice. He gained a B.A. in 1794, was ordained in1795, and got an M.A. in 1797 so I'm pretty sure he was not fulfilling the terms of the Apprenticeship and yet he was still admitted to the Draper's company on Jan 12 1797.

Most apprentices, had they not completed a full seven years of apprenticeship, would not have been granted admission. Or they would have petitioned for an admission by Redemption due to extenuating circumstances and paid a fee.

I am wondering why he needed to join the Drapers when he was a clergyman. I cannot find that he ever had a London parish. And since his own father was a Citizen and Freeman in another City Company why could he not just have joined his father's company by Patrimony.

One of his sons did join the Drapers' by Patrimony and he did have an occupation that involved textiles. But I'm sure at the age of 17 his father did not decide to join the Drapers in case he had a son that might be involved in the textile business and who might benefit by being in the Drapers' Company.

Completely puzzled.

Venelow
Canada

[stanmapstone]

From "Ancestral Trails" by Mark D. Herber, page 386.
"The guilds' power gradually diminished and most of them had ceased to operate by the late 18th. century. London was the main exception, the livery companies remaining important in the regulation of trade until the 19th. century......Some guilds survived in other places, generally as charitable bodies. As the guilds declined, the trade that was actually undertaken by a member became less important, so that a son might follow his father into a particular guild or livery company even though he practised a different trade."   


Stan

[Bookbox]

This chap entered the University Of Oxford about 4 months after he was inrolled (their spelling) as an Apprentice. He gained a B.A. in 1794, was ordained in1795, and got an M.A. in 1797 so I'm pretty sure he was not fulfilling the terms of the Apprenticeship and yet he was still admitted to the Draper's company on Jan 12 1797.

I feel bound to ask how certain you are that these references are all to the same person?

[Skoosh]

Drapers presumably a Merchants guild? selling cloth, why would that need apprentices? it's not as if he was weaving the stuff!

Skoosh.

[guest189040]

Old Boys Network in action.

Ordaned, gives the game away as does surdying at Oxford where neither was possible without parents having money and status.

[venelow]

Good Morning

Thank you for your responses. Yes Bookbox it is the same person. Traced through Wills, Oxford Alumni, the Turnover to his father and enrollment noted on the back of the Indenture, his son's Patrimony record for the Drapers Company which records his father's admission date that lines up more or less seven years after the date of the turnover and the enrollment. 

Stan, I do understand that sons would join their father's Company even though they were not engaged in the same trade. However this person joined a different Company than his father's by becoming an Apprentice to a Master who did not require any payment. Why would that be?
Then after a few months he was turned over to his father. Turnovers often happened in the first year because it was found that the apprentice had been improperly inrolled according to the custom of the City. In this case he was inrolled after the Turnover but there is no petition or paperwork as one often sees that explains the situation just a note on the back of the Indenture. I have seen one case where the apprentice changed trades and was turned over to a Master in his new trade.

There is no reason given for the turnover. I did check for the Master's death but that happened many years later.

Skoosh I can think of a few things that an apprentice draper would have to know about the business to be successful and not go bankrupt. For example, the properties of various types of cloth from muslin to tweed and be able to appreciate competent workmanship when buying cloth so he could advise his customers the best type of cloth for their requirements. Then there is accounting, contracting, selling, getting to know others in the business, importing, management, keeping records, running errands and making sure the rats don't nibble the silk or moths chomp into the wool. Most jobs require some in-house training though now it's not as long as seven years as some basic knowledge will have been gained at a business school or community college.

I could understand if he changed his mind about the Drapers and went to Oxford to study for the church as he could apply to join his father's Company by Patrimony or a Company of his choosing by Redemption. I have not found a Patrimony record or a Redemption application. But he was a member of the Company of the Master to whom he was first apprenticed as stated on his son's Patrimony record for the Drapers' Company.
The whole Apprenticeship seems to have been a fiction. I was hoping someone may have come across such a situation before and knew the reason for it. As far as I know he spent his life as a clergyman and was not engaged in any City trade. Nor did he have living in any church in London as far as I can tell. He had livings in Essex and Kent.

Yes Biggles I can see that it might be a case of networking and having somewhere to have a nice dinner when visiting Town. I mentioned that his father would have been able to pay the Apprenticeship fee. I wonder if many of the clergy in and around London were members of various Livery Companies or if there was a favourite Company they patronized.

But why go to the trouble of of signing an apprenticeship indenture and then not playing by the rules when there was the possibility of the Patrimony or Redemption route.
I have looked at a fair number of City Indentures but this is the only one I have found with no consideration of money or value. Seems like he was getting special treatment. Did this sort of arrangement happen often? It's interesting what digitization brings to light. Being able to see all the records together instead of them being in different places scattered over several years is beginning to paint a different picture.

I shall have to contact the Drapers' Company Archives and see if they have any information.

Thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.

Venelow
Canada