“(1) Dowgate Dock{ Billingsgate Ward
Bridge „
Langbourn „
Cornhill „
Candlewick „
Vintry „
Walbrook „
Dowgate „
(2) Mile End{ Portsoken Ward
Tower „
Aldgate „
Duke’s Place Ward
Lyme Street „
(3) Holloway Lane End{ Bishopsgate Within Ward
„ Without „
(4) Bunhill Fields{ Cripplegate Within and Without Ward
Aldersgate Without Ward
Bassishaw „
Coleman Street „
Broad Street „
(5) Laystall at or near 3 Cranes and in
Dunghill Lane, near Broken Wharf,
till Key is there laid open. Afterwards
a Laystall at Puddle Dock 		{ Cheap Ward
Cordwainer Ward
Queenhithe „
Bread Street „
(6) Puddle Dock{ Farringdon Within Ward
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:—