A HISTORY OF SURREY 



and Guildford. Another firm of considerable 

 repute is that of Messrs. Packham & Co., 

 Limited, who have also works at Croydon. 

 The Chemists Aerated and Mineral Waters 

 Association, Limited (' Camwal '), has its 



manufactory at Mitcham. Mineral waters are 

 also made by some of the brewers in the county, 

 including Messrs. Lascelles, Tickner & Co., 

 Limited, at Guildford, and Messrs. Burford & 

 Co., Limited, at their Cranlcigh steam brewery. 



SOAP AND CANDLE MAKING 



The manufacture of soap and candles in 

 those northern districts of Siurey which lat- 

 terly have been absorbed into the metropoli- 

 tan county is of extreme importance. It is 

 not only that the industry there can boast of 

 some considerable antiquity, but also that the 

 first practical results of the great advance 

 made during the course of the last century in 

 the science of the manufacture, more espe- 

 cially of the latter commodity, were achieved 

 in the main in south London. Of two south 

 London firms existing at the present day it 

 may be said that one can probably claim to 

 be now the oldest established firm of candle 

 makers in the kingdom, whilst the other is 

 indisputably the largest firm of its kind in the 

 world. 



Of soap and candle making in Surrey in 

 medieval times we have indeed little informa- 

 tion of a definite character, but it is reasonable 

 to suppose that both industries were then 

 carried on about Southwark to some extent. 

 In a Star Chamber decree of 23 August 1633 

 it is stated that until within a few years of 

 that date no soft soap had been made in the 

 kingdom but in and about the cities of Lon- 

 don, Westminster and Bristol.' In Hilary 

 term 160 1-2 an information was lodged in 

 the Court of Exchequer against two South- 

 wark soap makers who appear at a later date 

 as men of no little importance.' One of 

 them was Edward Broomfield, who subse- 

 quently became Lord Mayor of London and 

 was knighted. In 1637 he became the 

 owner of the large estate in the borough 

 known as Suffolk Place, or still more famous 

 as the Mint.' The other was Thomas 

 Overman, who appears at a later date, as we 

 shall see, as the largest soap maker about 

 London. The oflFence with which they 

 were charged was of causing to be made and 

 used between 21 December 1600 and 19 

 December 1601, 2,000 barrels, and the like 

 number each of kilderkins and firkins, all of 

 less capacity and weight than was required 

 by statute. It is of interest to us to know 

 that the barrels were alleged to have been 

 made at Croydon. 



» S.P. Dom. Proc. i. 169. 



« Exch. K. R. Mem. R. Hil. 44. Eliz 07 



» Suit. Arch. Coll. xiv. 43. ' ^ 



But it is during the period in which the 

 soap monopoly created by Charles I. was in 

 force that we hear more especially of the 

 connection of Surrey with the soap making 

 industry of the kingdom. The story of this 

 curious episode in our economic history, 

 which beginning from humble origins be- 

 came important enough eventually to stir up 

 a great deal of discontent in the country and 

 to set two of the leading ministers of the 

 Crown by the ears, has been told by the late 

 Dr. Gardiner,* and beyond a recapitulation 

 of the leading facts we need not concern 

 ourselves here with much more than the light 

 which the materials for the history of the in- 

 cident throw upon the existence of the indus- 

 try in our own county. 



Briefly then the origin of the monopoly 

 was in two patents which James I. had 

 granted on 10 February 1622-3' ^n*! 23 

 February 1623-4' to two persons, Roger 

 Jones and Andrew Palmer, to make hard 

 soap out of barilla and both hard and soft 

 soap out of materials such as bean straw, 

 pease straw, kelp fern and other such vege- 

 tables, to be found within the kingdom as 

 could be converted into ashes or potashes. 

 These patents were rendered void by the 

 Act of 1623 against monopolies,^ but a loop- 

 hole was found in the legal maxim that the 

 king could found corporations for the benefit 

 of trade. Accordingly Charles I, on 17 

 December 1 63 1 ^ transferred the powers 

 which his predecessor had granted to Jones 

 and Palmer to a large body in which the 

 original patentees were included, and shortly 

 after, on 20 January 163 1-2, incorporated 

 this body under the name of the Governor, 

 Assistants and Fellows of the Society of Soap- 

 Makers of Westminster.' But whereas the 

 first intervention of the Crown in the matter 

 had been induced by nothing less creditable 

 than the then current opinion that it was a 

 good act to encourage the manufecture of 

 commodities made entirely of English ma- 



< Hist, of England, 1603-42, viii. 71-76, 284. 



« Pat. 20 Jas. \. pt. 12, No. 10. 



• Ibid. 21 Jas. L pt. 5, No. 2. 

 ' Stat. 21 Jas. I. cap. 3. 



« Pat. 7 Chas. I. pt. 10, No. 2. 



• Ibid. pt. 12, No. 1 1. 



402 



