Combinations of the roll in tobacconists’ signs occur occasionally.  In 1660 there was a “Tobacco Roll and Sugar Loaf” at Gray’s Inn Gate, Holborn.  In 1659 James Barnes issued a farthing token from the “Sugar Loaf and Three Tobacco Rolls” in the Poultry, London.  The “Sugar Loaf” was the principal grocer’s sign, and so when it is found in combination with the tobacco roll at this time it may reasonably be assumed that the proprietor of the business was a grocer who was also a tobacconist.

Before the end of the seventeenth century, however, the signs were ceasing to have any necessary association with the trade carried on under them, and tobacconists are found with shop-signs which had no reference in any way to tobacco.  For instance, to take a few examples from the late Mr. Hilton Price’s lists of “Signs of Old London” from Cheapside and adjacent streets, in 1695 John Arundell, tobacconist, was at the “White Horse,” Wood Street; in the same year J. Mumford, tobacconist, was at the “Faulcon,” Laurence Lane; in 1699 Mr. Brutton, tobacconist, was to be found at the “Three Crowns,” under the Royal Exchange; in 1702 Richard Bronas, tobacconist, was at the “Horse Shoe,” Bread Street; and in 1766 Mr. Hoppie, of the “Oil Jar:  Old Change, Watling Street End,” advertised that he “sold a newly invented phosphorus powder for lighting pipes quickly in about half a minute.  Ask for a Bottle of Thunder Powder.”

Again, in Fleet Street, Mr. Townsend, tobacconist, traded in 1672 at the “Three Golden Balls,” near St. Dunstan’s Church; while at the end of Fetter Lane, a few years later, John Newland, tobacconist, was to be found at the “King’s Head.”

Addison, in the twenty-eighth Spectator, April 2, 1711, took note of the severance which had taken place between sign and trade, and of the absurdity that the sign no longer had any significance.  After satirizing first, the monstrous conjunctions in signs of “Dog and Gridiron,” “Cat and Fiddle” and so forth; and next the absurd custom by which young tradesmen, at their first starting in business, added their own signs to those of the masters under whom they had served their apprenticeship; the essayist goes on to say:  “In the third place I would enjoin every shop to make use of a sign which bears some affinity to the wares in which it deals.  What can be more inconsistent than to see ... a tailor at the Lion?  A cook should not live at the Boot, nor a Shoe-maker at the Roasted Pig; and yet for want of this regulation, I have seen a Goat set up before the door of a perfumer, and the French King’s Head at a sword-cutler’s.”