London (England) -- History -- 17th century; London (England) -- Social life and customs -- 17th century
{Farringdon Within Ward
(6) Puddle Dock {Aldersgate Within „
{Castle Baynard „
{St. Martin’s le Grand Ward
(7) Whitefriars Farringdon Without Ward”
The Radical root-and-branch reformer is not unknown in every age. I
have before me a pamphlet written by such an one in the year 1675. It
will be seen that he advocates a thorough reform or rather a return to
the former conditions. I quote a portion only of the pamphlet. Among
other things the writer proposes—
(1) That a stop be put to any new buildings in London, or within
the bills of mortality.
(2) That the nobility and gentry of the country be compelled to
reside so many months in the year on their estates.
(3) That brandy, music, coffee, and tea be prohibited, and
coffee-houses suppressed.
(4) That the multitude of stage coaches and caravans now on the
roads be all, or most of them, suppressed.
(5) That a Court of Conscience should be established in Westminster
and in every important town.
(6) That the extravagant wages of craftsmen should be reduced. The
writer proceeds to advance his reasons for these proposals. For
instance, the abundance of new houses tempts people to come up from
the country in order to establish ale or brandy shops or to let
lodgings; it also tempts the gentry to leave their estates and to
live in London.
As to the prohibition of brandy, it is stated that brandy was so cheap,
a quartern being sold for threepence, that the people drink spirits
instead of strong beer and ale. (This is the first complaint of spirit
drinking.) Whereas, if the sale of brandy were prohibited, there would
be so great an increase in the consumption of barley required for beer
that the farmers would rise from their impoverished condition and be
once more able to pay their rents. “Brandy,” he says, “burns out the
hearts of his Majesty’s subjects.” It is not generally understood, I
think, that there were complaints on the subject of brandy before the
introduction of its cheaper and more destructive rival—gin.
He would suppress tea, coffee, and chocolate for the simple reason
that he does not understand that they do any good to anybody, and he
would shut the coffee-houses because he believes them to be mischievous
places:—
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account