Of all the various ranks of society which he reviews, that of which he speaks with most respect is the estate of Merchants. He takes pains to point out, both in this poem and in the _Vox Clamantis_, the utility of their occupation, and the justice of their claim to reasonably large profits on successful ventures in consideration of the risks they run (_Mirour_, 25177 ff.; _Vox Clam._ Lib. v. Cap. xi, _Heading_). He makes a special apology to the honest members of the class for exposing the abuses to which the occupation is liable, pleading that to blame the bad is in effect to praise the good (25213 ff., 25975 ff.), and he is more careful here than elsewhere to point out the fact that honest members of the class exist. He speaks of ‘our City,’ and has strong feelings about the interests of the city of London, and about the proceedings of a certain bad citizen who stirs up strife and aims at giving privileges in trade to strangers (_Mirour_, 26380 ff.; cp. _Vox Clamantis_, v. 835 ff.): moreover, the jealousy of Lombards which he expresses has every appearance of being a prejudice connected with rivalry in commerce (25429 ff.). He has a special enthusiasm about the wool-trade, as a national concern of the first importance, and he has very definite opinions about the abuses of the staple (25360 ff.). At the same time there is no definite evidence that Gower was a merchant, and his interest in trade and in the affairs of the city of London may well have arisen from his residence in or near the city and his personal acquaintance with merchants (cp. _Mir._ 25915 ff.). His references to the dearness of labour and the unreasonable demands of the labourer (24625 ff.) are what we might expect from a man who had property in land; but again we have no sufficient evidence that Gower was a land-owner in the ordinary sense of the word, for, though he acquired the manors of Feltwell and Multon, he did not reside upon either of them, but gave a lease of them at once. He tells us that he is a man of simple tastes (26293 ff.), and we know from the whole tone of his writings that he is a just and upright man, who believes in the subordination of the various members of society to one another, and who will not allow himself to be ruled in his own household either by his wife or his servants. But, though a thorough believer in the principle of gradation in human society, he constantly emphasizes the equality of all men before God, and refuses absolutely to admit the accident of birth as constituting any claim to ‘gentilesce.’ The common descent of all from Adam is as conclusive on this point for him as it was for John Ball. Considering that his views on society are essentially the same as those of Wycliff, and considering also his strong opinions about the corruption of the Church and the misdeeds of the friars, it is curious to find how strongly he denounces the Lollards in his later writings.