the offspring of that device. Henry V. also struck various French coins, among which were muttons (so called from bearing the impression of a lamb, or Agnus Dei) of gold, and groats, half groats, quarter groats, mançois, and petit deniers, of silver. After the treaty of Troyes he coined others called saluts, demi-saluts, blancs, &c., in the legend of which he took the title of Hæres Franciæ, or Heir of France. The English coins of Henry VI. are supposed to be distinguished from his father's by the arched FRANC GROAT OF HENRY VI. crown called the imperial, surmounted with the orb and cross. He also issued, as King of France, saluts, angelots, franks, and nobles of gold, and groats, blanks, deniers, &c., of silver. ⚫ Holin shed. PENNY OF EDWARD IV. the nominal pound about 30s. Edward IV., in 1466, also struck two new gold coins, called angels and angelots, from the figure of an angel on the reverse. These were intended as substitutes for the noble and the half noble, and were, like them, ordered to pass respectively for 6s. 8d. and 3s. 4d.; but they were considerably inferior in intrinsic value even to the nobles that had been struck since the last year of the reign of Henry IV.; for instead of 108 grains, the angel contained only 80 grains. It was, therefore, really worth little more than three-fourths of the late noble, or exactly twothirds of the original coin of that name. Henry VI., also, during his short restoration to power in 1470, coined angels of gold, and groats and half groats of silver, all after the depreciated standards that had been established by Edward IV. It is not probable that Edward V. coined any money. The gold coins of Richard III. were angels and half angels, of the same weight as his brother's, and bearing Richard's cognizance of a boar's head; his silver money is distinguished from that of Richard II. by being a third lighter. GROAT OF RICHARD III. HALF GROAT OF RICHARD III. PENNY OF RICHARD III. The depreciation of the coin in Scotland during the present period proceeded much more rapidly, and was carried to a much greater extent, than in England. When James I. returned home, in 1424, he found the real value of the Scottish money very considerably less than that of the English of the same denominations; on which he imme diately got an act of parliament passed for restoring the coin to the same weight and fineness with that of England; but it proved of no effect,-the depreciation was carried farther and farther, till at length, at the close of the present period, the Scottish coins were scarcely more than one-fourth of the weight of the English. The pound of silver, which had been originally coined, as in England, into 20 shillings, was coined in 1424 into 37s. 6d.; in 1451 into 64s.; in 1456 into 96s.; and in 1475 into 144s. The value of the Scottish shilling at this last-mentioned date, therefore, was little more than 4d. of our present money. We shall find, however, that it afterwards declined to a much lower point than this. In resuming our notice of the arts of life, it should not be forgotten that, although some of the causes which tended to depress them in the present period were doubtless peculiar to a state of internal warfare, others, perhaps nearly as injurious in their operation, were simply a recurrence of evils to which the industry of the country had been always subjected. It may easily be conceived that horticulture, an art ornamental rather than absolutely necessary to existence, declined. "Such herbs, fruits, and roots," says Harrison, in his 'Description of England,' " as grow yearly out of the ground, of seed, have been very plentiful in this land in the time of the first Edward, and after his days; but in process of time they grew to be neglected, so that from Henry IV. to the latter end of Henry VII. and beginning of Henry VIII. there was little or no use of them in England, but they remained either unknown or supposed as food more meet for hogs and savage beasts to feed upon than mankind." He afterwards enumerates the productions he alludes to as being melons, pompions, gourds, cucumbers, radishes, skirrets, parsnips, carrots, cabbages, navewes, turnips, and all kinds of salad herbs.* Many of the cultivators of the soil must also have suffered severely in their fortunes from the disorders and calamities of the times; but it may be doubted whether agriculture as an art actually retrograded. The frequent confiscations of landed property, at the sole will of the sovereign, were perhaps less pernicious in themselves, however hard upon individual interests, than as they occasioned a general feeling of insecurity. The warrants for these confiscations were expressed so loosely that those to whom their execution was committed were often tempted to profit by the spoliation of the property. But even notwithstanding these frequent confiscations, the bulk of the people were more exempt from oppression than in the reigns of the first Norman kings. The evils to which agriculture had been constantly liable, in peaceful as well as turbulent periods, were the same in their tendency with those under which it was now suffering, and, though somewhat less injurious in degree, operated more universally. Thus in a statutet of Henry IV. it is stated that "daily the great persons of the Desc, of England, ch. 19. +4 Henry IV. c. 8. realm do make forcible entries into other men's lands, and put out the possessors of the same, and also take their goods and chattels in manner of robbery, so that they be utterly disinherited and undone." Half a century later the same or similar disorders prevailed. In a statute of the latter part of the reign of Henry VI.* it is recited that hostlers, brewers, and other victuallers, were wont to purchase the king's letters patent, "to take horses and carts for the carriage of the king and queen, more for their private and singular lucre and profit than for any faithful service of the king or of the queen:"-" by colour of which letters patent," it is added, "they daily take horses and carts where no need is, and bring them to their hostelries, and there keep them secretly sometime until they have spent twenty pence or forty pence, and sometime more, and then they make the owners of the said horses and carts to pay for the same before they can get delivery of their horses and carts." Treble damages were now, indeed, made recoverable for acts of this description; but the statute was not passed until 1449, and the injurious extent to which the agriculturist might previously have been harassed by such usurpations may easily be conceived. To counteract the effect of authorised and also of forcible interference with men's interests and property, there were the growing importance of trade and manufactures; the increased value of wool, "the chief and principal commodity of the realm," as it is termed in the statutes, for which there was a demand frequently exceeding the supply; the gradual emancipation of the villains, who became free labourers; and the rise of a class of cultivators paying money-rents. Under these favouring circumstances the country was frequently enabled to export a portion of its agricultural produce. In a communication to Eric X. King of Denmark, Henry VI. says, that "although England usually produces plenty of corn, yet, by reason of a rainy season, corn, and more especially rye, had this year failed in most parts." In 1425 the exportation of corn was permitted by statute anywhere except to the 28 Henry VI. c. 2 king's enemies, upon payment of the customary duties. In 1436 it was enacted that corn might be carried out of the realm without license, whenever wheat was at the low price of 6s. 8d. and barley at that of 3s. per quarter.* This act, after having been renewed for ten years in 1441, was made perpetual in 1444. In 1463 the same prices are again noticed in connexion with the importation of corn and grain,† the statute prohibiting the supply from abroad unless these prices were exceeded in the home market. The variation in prices, though not so great as in the preceding periods, was still extraordinary. The prices given in the statutes just quoted may be considered as the average. In 1416 wheat was 16s., and in 1463 the price was only 2s. per quarter. The difficulty of circulating agricultural produce would have the effect of rendering prices variable, and diminished the motives for accumulating it in any large quantities for seasons of scarcity. Both these evils were felt, and their remedy was attempted. It appears from an act passed at the beginning of the reign of Henry VI., that a commission had been appointed a short time before for improving the navigation of the river Lea, for the purpose, no doubt, of facilitating the supply of London with the corn, grain, and flour, for which the county of Hertford was and still is famous. In the absence of laws for the repair of the roads, it was also common for persons of substance to leave by will certain sums to be applied to this useful purpose.§ In 1446 a large stone edifice was erected in London, on the site of the present Leadenhallmarket, as a public granary. || Very early in the ensuing period we shall be enabled to refer to regular treatises on British husbandry, but for the present the information to be obtained on this subject must chiefly be derived from accidental notices or old money accounts. The produce of 157 acres of arable land on the Hawsted Manor Farm was 148 quarters, being, on the average, less than 8 bushels per acre on 15 Henry VI. c. 2. In the extant copies of the act, however, no prices are inentioned; those quoted have been supplied on the margin from the recitals in subsequent acts. +3 Edward IV. c. 2. § Sir J. Cullum's Hist. Hawsted. + Stow. Stow. 57 acres of wheat, 24 of barley, 22 of pease, and 54 of oats. The produce of the different grains was-wheat less than 6 bushels; barley 12 bushels; pease 12 bushels; and oats 5 bushels. The produce of 61 acres of wheat for three years was under 210 quarters, and, being followed by no rise of price, the crops were probably average ones. When the produce of wheat, however, fell to 6 bushels an acre, prices rose from 4s. and 5s. to 13s. 4d. per quarter. After an abundant harvest, 24 quarters of oats had sometimes been sold from the manor farm; but when the produce was small, not more than 3 quarters were disposed of.* The following facts relative to the occupancy of the land by tenants are taken from the same work that has just been quoted:-One rental, in 1420, mentions 8 acres of arable land let at 6d. an acre; another, in 1421, 38 acres at 9d. an acre; and a garden at the old rent of 10s. a-year. "Land," Sir John Cullum observes, speaking of the middle of the fifteenth century, "seems not now to have been of more value than it was above eighty years before." He shows that the produce of an acre in hay, in 1448, was worth 5s., which appears also to have been its value in 1359. The clauses introduced in the following lease are curious:-" In 1491 the Abbot of Bury let two pieces of pasture, containing together 18 acres, to a man and his wife and their executors, &c., for 80 years, at 6s. 8d. ayear, which is about 4 d. an acre. The tenants were to extirpate all the thorns growing on the said pastures within the first twelve years. And if the rent were not paid on the two usual days, or if all the thorns were not extirpated within the time prescribed, the landlord might re-enter and distrain the tenants, and all their goods and chattels found on the farm or elsewhere in the village." There was not much reliance upon the industry and spirit of the tenant, or the stipulation relative to the grubbing up of thorns under a lease of 80 years would scarcely have found a place. But it was most probably the "forcible entries" which lessened the confidence between landlords and tenants. Attempts have been made to calculate the value of land during the present period. From the reward offered by Edward IV. for the apprehension of the Duke of Clarence or the Earl of Warwick, in 1470,-" either 100l. per annum in land, or else 1000/. in ready money," it has been inferred that land was worth only ten years' purchase; but the proclamation, as has been remarked, "is only a proof that Edward was rich in lands, from the very numerous forfeitures, and poor in money, as appears from his constant borrowing." It is asserted that land had been sold during the preceding century at twenty-five years' purchase;‡ but that was probably very far from being the average value of landed property. On the other hand, an attempt has been made to show that Cullum. Hist. Hawsted. + Macpherson, Ann. of Com. i. 685. Godwin de Presulibus Angl. quoted by Henry, vol. x. p. 175. 8vo, land was worth much less than ten years' purchase from the fact of Sir John Fortescue having advised Edward IV. to reward his servants with money instead of land. "It is supposed," he says, "that to some of them is given 1007. worth of land yearly that would have held him content with 2007. in money, if they might have had it in hand." But this offer might have been on the presumption that, from the circumstances of the parties, an immediate supply of cash would have better satisfied them than an interest of a more remote description, though of greater real value; and it would doubtless be very far from the truth to infer from such a circumstance that land had sunk so low in value as to be worth only two years' purchase. Circumstances, however, which in the present period gave a new direction to agriculture might possibly have the effect of occasioning some temporary reduction in the value of landed property. During the thirteenth century tillage had been the great object of attention, and was in the popular estimation essentially connected with the welfare of the realm; but in the present period the arable lands were to a great extent converted into pasture. The two great causes which contributed to bring about this change were:first, the scarcity of labourers, partly arising from their new position; and, secondly, the increasing value of wool, which rendered flocks more profitable than corn and grain. The emancipated villains, on acquiring their freedom, betook themselves to handicrafts and manufactures. The statute of labourers in 1351, and subsequent statutes in 1363 and 1376, noticed in the preceding Book, afford evidence of the progress of this change. In 1405 the evils which these statutes were intended to remedy were still experienced; and in a new statute passed that year, it was provided that no person of whatever estate should put his son or daughter, of whatever age, apprentice to any craft or other labour within any city or borough, except he had land or rent to the value of 20s. by the year at least," but they should be put to other labours (that is to say, farming labours) as their estates doth require, upon pain of one year's imprisonment, and to make fine and ransom at the king's will.” In 1444 another statute was passed, § enacting that servants in husbandry proposing to leave their masters must engage with a new one, and give warning to the old. The same statute again endeavoured to fix the wages of labour; but such," it was declared, " as deserve less shall take less, and also in places where less is used to be given less shall be given from henceforth." The wages thus fixed are for the year, and, with the exception of the "common servant in husbandry," included "meat and drink." A bailiff by the year was to receive 23s. 4d., and for clothing, 5s.; a chief hind, carter, or shepherd, 20s., Fortescue on Absolute and Limited Monarchy, p. 85. and for clothing, 4s.; a woman servant 10s., with 4s. for clothing; a boy under fourteen, 6s., with 3s. for clothing. The wages of a common servant in husbandry were 15s., clothing 40d., and he seems to have been left to provide his own diet. In harvest the wages were higher; but those of a mower were not to exceed 4d. per day with meat and drink, and without diet, 6d.; of a reaper or carter, 3d. with, and 5d. without diet; of a woman labourer or other labourer, 24d. with, and 4d. without meat and drink. In spite of these attempts to regulate the price of labour, the deficiency of labourers, as might be expected, continued to be severely felt. We have noticed in a preceding page the high esteem in which English wool was held during this period. The Genoese, the Lombards, the Venetians, and others who enjoyed almost the exclusive supply of the richest and most costly cloths, were indebted to the fleece of the English sheep for the quality of their goods. In 1425 the preamble of one of the statutes* states, "that divers persons do from time to time carry out of the realm great numbers of sheep with fleeces into Flanders, and other countries beyond the sea, and there they shear them, and sell as well the said sheep as the wool of the same;" for remedy of which it is provided that no sheep shall be exported without the king's license. In 1429 the penalty for exporting wool or woolfels to any other place than to Calais, excepting such wools which pass the straits of Morocco to the merchants of Venice, Genoa, Tuscany, Lombardy, Florence, and Catalonia, was made double the value of the wool, and two years' imprisonment. Wool had often been shipped from places in obscure situations on the coast, by which the duty had been evaded; and this led to the above statute. In 1438 a license was granted by Henry VI. to a Portuguese agent in England for leave to export to Florence sixty sacks of Cotteswold wool, to be worked up in cloths of gold and silver for the King of Portugal. Edward IV. is said to have presented King John of Arragon with several English ewes and rams.§ A temporary interruption of trade between England and the subjects of the Duke of Burgundy having occurred in 1464, during which the exportation of wool ceased, the merchants of the staple at Calais addressed the king, urging that "the soldiers of the garrison would lack their wages, and that the merchants would stand in adventure both of loss of stock and credit," unless the trade were again permitted. But in the quality of English wool there was great variety. In 1343, in the reign of Edward III., parliament, in order to keep up the price, attempted to fix it by statute. The price per sack for that of Shropshire was made fourteen marks; for that of Oxfordshire and Staffordshire thirteen marks; for that of Leicester, Gloucester, and Hereford, twelve marks; and from eleven to four marks for that of other counties, the lowest value being put upon that of Cornwall. The counties which produced the best wool probably continued to do so throughout the present period. The Cotteswold sheep, the wool of which was sent to Florence for the service of the King of Portugal, is still a celebrated breed; and in a statute of the year 1467,† although the wool of Cornwall is not mentioned, that of Devonshire is, and is there held to be so inferior that the cloth-manufac turers of Tavistock and the adjacent hundreds received special permission to mix flocks in the cloth which they made, without which they could not manufacture their cloth, "by reason of the grossness and stubbornness of the said wool, for the same wool is not put in clothing nor in cloth in any part of the realm." The demand for wool seems to have been one of the most active commercial wants of the time. A statute was passed in 1464 to prevent persons buying wool before it was shorn. The preamble sets forth that, "by subtle bargains made in buying of wools before that the sheep that bear the same be shorn, the cloth-makers of this realm can wellnigh find none to be sold, to the great grief of them which have been accustomed to have their living by mean of making of cloth :" and the statute not only puts an end to the practice, but provides that those only should be allowed to buy wool who should make it into cloth within the realm. following are the counties enumerated in the statute, which it may be presumed were most celebrated at that period for the quality of their wool:Berks, Oxford, Gloucester, Salop, Hereford, Worcester, Wilts, Somerset, Dorset, Essex, Cambridge, Norfolk, Suffolk, Kent, Surrey, and Sussex. The fair and honest making up of woolpacks had also before this been an object of legislation. The By a statute of the year 14293 it was provided that no woolpacker shali make within the realm but good and due packing; and that no man make any inwinding within the fleece of wools at the rolling-up of his wools, nor put in the same locks, pelt-wool, tar, stones, sand, earth, grass, nor any dirt." The trade in wool was, during the whole of this period, by far the most important staple of the kingdom, yielding the king a large portion of his revenue, and enabling the landed proprietors to overcome what would have otherwise been a most inconvenient transition from one state of husbandry to another. But besides the exportation of wool, and in years of abundance of corn and grain, other descriptions of agricultural produce occasionally found their way to a foreign market. In 1439|| a statute was passed, enacting that butter and cheese might be exported without a license, but subject to some other regulations, in consequence of the perishable nature of the commodity In 1433.. |