Numerous times I encounter Silversmiths who were apprenticed to one master, then subsequently "turned over" to another. Sometimes it occurs on the death or retirement of the original master, which is easily understandable. Sometimes for no apparent reason - and one assumes that the original masters trade perhaps declined and he wanted to downsize his staff. Or the apprentice was paying too much attention to his masters wife or daughter !
But in a large number of cases the turnover is immediate. A master will take an apprentice, then turn him over the same day to another man, usually of the same company . In a recent case I seen the full original premuim was also paid over to the new master, so it's not a case of profit taking.
Does anyone understand why please ?
.
Britain - "Turn Over" of Apprenticeships
Hi Clive,
This is a copy of a post that may help answer your question, it's one that I posted in the Journeymens Project a while back.
Here we have an interesting pair of Indentures. They relate to one Charles Lee, the son of George Lee, Joiner of St. Martin's Le Grand, Middlesex.
The first, ties Charles Lee to Joseph Dracott of the Parish of St. George, Southwark in the County of Surrey for a term of seven years as from the 6th October 1802 to learn the trade of 'Carver and Gilder'.
The full wording of the Indenture is as folows:
This Indenture witnesseth, that Charles Lee, son of George Lee, Citizen and Joiner, late a boy of Christ's Hospital, London, doth put himself apprentice to Joseph Dracott of the Parish of St. George, Southwark in the County of Surrey, Carver and Gilder, to learn his art, and with him (after the manner of an apprentice) to serve from the day of the date hereof, until the full end of term of seven years, from thence next following, to be fully compleat and ended. During the term, the said apprentice his said Master faithfully shall serve, his secrets keep, his lawful commands every where gladly do. He shall do no damage to his said Master, nor see to be done of others; but that he, to his power, shall let, or forthwith give notice or warning to his said Master of the same. He shall not waste the goods of his said Master, nor lend them unlawfully to any. He shall not commit fornication, or contract matrimony within the said term. He shall not play at cards, dice, tables or any other unlawful games, whereby his said Master may have loss. With his own goods or others, during the said term, without license of the said Master, he shall neither buy or sell. He shall not haunt taverns or play-houses, nor absent himself from his said Master's service day or night unlawfully; but in all things as a faithful apprentice, he shall behave himself towards his said Master, and all his, during the said term. And the said Master, in consideration of the sum of five pounds charity money paid by the Treasurer of Christ's Hospital, aforesaid, his said apprentice in the art of a Carver and Gilder which he useth, shall teach and instruct, or cause to be taught and instructed, in the best manner he can, finding unto the said apprentice meat, drink, apparel, washing and lodging, and all other necessaries, according to the custom of the City of London, during the said term. And for the true preformance of all and every the said covenants and agreements, either of the said parties bindeth himself unto the other firmly by these presents. In witness whereof, the parties above-named to these Indentures interchangeably have set their hands and seals, the sixth day of October in the forty second year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Third by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France (deleted), and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth, and in the year of our Lord, One Thousand Eight Hundred and Two.
The Indenture, Covenant, Article, or Contract, must bear Date the Day it is executed; and what money or other thing is given or contracted for with the Clerk or Apprentice, must be inserted in words at length; and the Duty paid to the Stamp Office, if in London, or within the Weekly Bills of Mortality, within one month after the execution, and if in the country and out of the said Bills of Mortality, within two months, to a Distributor of Stamps, or his substitute, otherwise the Indenture will be void, the Master or Mistress forfeit fifty pounds, and another penalty, and the Apprentice be disabled to follow his trade, or be made free.
On the reverse the following is stated:
Be it remembered, that the within bounden Apprentice before me, one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the City of London, and acknowledged himself willing to serve the full term of the within written Indenture. Witness my hand, this 6th Day of October 1802.
The second Indenture, dated less than two months after the first one, is of more interest.
This one was issued by the London Goldsmiths Company. It ties the same Charles Lee to William Stroud (Grimwade 3321, 3332) Silversmith and Polisher of Burleigh Street in the Strand, Middlesex. It carries similar text to the first and is dated 1st December 1802.
This turning over of an apprentice, from one Master to another, was not unusual, and could have been because of a variety of reasons; for example Joseph Dracott may have died or have been imprisoned, or perhaps a release was granted because maybe he ill-treated Charles Lee? But the much more likely answer is that the turning over was intentional before the first was even signed.
The clue may well lie in the first Indenture. Charles Lee's father, George, is described as "Citizen and Joiner", the term 'Citizen' would have meant that George Lee was a Freeman, and thus a member of the Joiners Company. Whatever trade Charles decided to follow it would be quite natural that he would want to be Free of the same Company as his father, this could be achieved by signing an Indenture for the trade of 'Carver and Gilder', this was a trade that came under the wing of the Joiners Company and would entitle Charles to become Free of that Company following the completion of the seven year apprenticeship, even though completed under a Master from another trade and Company, the start, I believe, is the all important factor.
Charles had been a pupil at Christ's Hospital, a school that specialized in enabling their students to enter into the various trades, and it received patronage from all of the great Livery Companies. The fact that they paid the apprenticeship fee may be an indication of perhaps George Lee's ill health or of his financial situation at that time.
Grimwade records William Stroud working at 4, Burleigh Street, Strand, from 1788 until 1823, Heal records a William Strowd at the same address for the period 1792-1804. Kent's Original London Directory of 1823 records a John Strowd at the same address as 'working silversmith'.
Trev.
.
This is a copy of a post that may help answer your question, it's one that I posted in the Journeymens Project a while back.
Here we have an interesting pair of Indentures. They relate to one Charles Lee, the son of George Lee, Joiner of St. Martin's Le Grand, Middlesex.
The first, ties Charles Lee to Joseph Dracott of the Parish of St. George, Southwark in the County of Surrey for a term of seven years as from the 6th October 1802 to learn the trade of 'Carver and Gilder'.
The full wording of the Indenture is as folows:
This Indenture witnesseth, that Charles Lee, son of George Lee, Citizen and Joiner, late a boy of Christ's Hospital, London, doth put himself apprentice to Joseph Dracott of the Parish of St. George, Southwark in the County of Surrey, Carver and Gilder, to learn his art, and with him (after the manner of an apprentice) to serve from the day of the date hereof, until the full end of term of seven years, from thence next following, to be fully compleat and ended. During the term, the said apprentice his said Master faithfully shall serve, his secrets keep, his lawful commands every where gladly do. He shall do no damage to his said Master, nor see to be done of others; but that he, to his power, shall let, or forthwith give notice or warning to his said Master of the same. He shall not waste the goods of his said Master, nor lend them unlawfully to any. He shall not commit fornication, or contract matrimony within the said term. He shall not play at cards, dice, tables or any other unlawful games, whereby his said Master may have loss. With his own goods or others, during the said term, without license of the said Master, he shall neither buy or sell. He shall not haunt taverns or play-houses, nor absent himself from his said Master's service day or night unlawfully; but in all things as a faithful apprentice, he shall behave himself towards his said Master, and all his, during the said term. And the said Master, in consideration of the sum of five pounds charity money paid by the Treasurer of Christ's Hospital, aforesaid, his said apprentice in the art of a Carver and Gilder which he useth, shall teach and instruct, or cause to be taught and instructed, in the best manner he can, finding unto the said apprentice meat, drink, apparel, washing and lodging, and all other necessaries, according to the custom of the City of London, during the said term. And for the true preformance of all and every the said covenants and agreements, either of the said parties bindeth himself unto the other firmly by these presents. In witness whereof, the parties above-named to these Indentures interchangeably have set their hands and seals, the sixth day of October in the forty second year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Third by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France (deleted), and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth, and in the year of our Lord, One Thousand Eight Hundred and Two.
The Indenture, Covenant, Article, or Contract, must bear Date the Day it is executed; and what money or other thing is given or contracted for with the Clerk or Apprentice, must be inserted in words at length; and the Duty paid to the Stamp Office, if in London, or within the Weekly Bills of Mortality, within one month after the execution, and if in the country and out of the said Bills of Mortality, within two months, to a Distributor of Stamps, or his substitute, otherwise the Indenture will be void, the Master or Mistress forfeit fifty pounds, and another penalty, and the Apprentice be disabled to follow his trade, or be made free.
On the reverse the following is stated:
Be it remembered, that the within bounden Apprentice before me, one of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the City of London, and acknowledged himself willing to serve the full term of the within written Indenture. Witness my hand, this 6th Day of October 1802.
The second Indenture, dated less than two months after the first one, is of more interest.
This one was issued by the London Goldsmiths Company. It ties the same Charles Lee to William Stroud (Grimwade 3321, 3332) Silversmith and Polisher of Burleigh Street in the Strand, Middlesex. It carries similar text to the first and is dated 1st December 1802.
This turning over of an apprentice, from one Master to another, was not unusual, and could have been because of a variety of reasons; for example Joseph Dracott may have died or have been imprisoned, or perhaps a release was granted because maybe he ill-treated Charles Lee? But the much more likely answer is that the turning over was intentional before the first was even signed.
The clue may well lie in the first Indenture. Charles Lee's father, George, is described as "Citizen and Joiner", the term 'Citizen' would have meant that George Lee was a Freeman, and thus a member of the Joiners Company. Whatever trade Charles decided to follow it would be quite natural that he would want to be Free of the same Company as his father, this could be achieved by signing an Indenture for the trade of 'Carver and Gilder', this was a trade that came under the wing of the Joiners Company and would entitle Charles to become Free of that Company following the completion of the seven year apprenticeship, even though completed under a Master from another trade and Company, the start, I believe, is the all important factor.
Charles had been a pupil at Christ's Hospital, a school that specialized in enabling their students to enter into the various trades, and it received patronage from all of the great Livery Companies. The fact that they paid the apprenticeship fee may be an indication of perhaps George Lee's ill health or of his financial situation at that time.
Grimwade records William Stroud working at 4, Burleigh Street, Strand, from 1788 until 1823, Heal records a William Strowd at the same address for the period 1792-1804. Kent's Original London Directory of 1823 records a John Strowd at the same address as 'working silversmith'.
Trev.
.
Thanks Trev
That makes sense. The bucklemaker in question was apprenticed to John Eaton on 2nd August 1753 and turned over the same day to Samuel Eaton. Both Eatons were working silver bucklemakers and although their fathers differed were probably related. Their history also demonstrates your point
John Eaton was originally apprenticed to Edward Beddow, citizen and Goldsmith but turned over to Samuel Eaton who was free of the Leathersellers. John however was free of the Goldsmiths
Thus as you say , appears to be the start of the apprenticeship that determines the Company, not who you actually finish with .
Hence I'm sure you are right, it's a method of joining the Company you want while training appropriately with someone of a different company. And maybe a family friend
Also avoids Freedom by redemptiom which cost real money ! The only bucklemaker I know who did this was William Harrisom in 1753
.
That makes sense. The bucklemaker in question was apprenticed to John Eaton on 2nd August 1753 and turned over the same day to Samuel Eaton. Both Eatons were working silver bucklemakers and although their fathers differed were probably related. Their history also demonstrates your point
John Eaton was originally apprenticed to Edward Beddow, citizen and Goldsmith but turned over to Samuel Eaton who was free of the Leathersellers. John however was free of the Goldsmiths
Thus as you say , appears to be the start of the apprenticeship that determines the Company, not who you actually finish with .
Hence I'm sure you are right, it's a method of joining the Company you want while training appropriately with someone of a different company. And maybe a family friend
Also avoids Freedom by redemptiom which cost real money ! The only bucklemaker I know who did this was William Harrisom in 1753
.