Star.
London, England, 1816-09-19 00:00:00

~ •

ILICE OF THE METROPOLIS.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE CoM-
MITTRE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, ON THE
STATE OP THE POWCE OF THE ME I'EOPOLIS.
The Hon. Hamar Gm Bay n rr in the Chair.
Mr. Sown Feercnin, a shipowner, examined
You live in the perish of St. Paul, Shadwell?-1
Have you long lived there ? —About 18 years.
When were you Churchwarden for that parish ?
I am sn now.
Have you been long in 'that situation I—Four or
Ave years.
The parish of St. Pail, Shadwell, is principally
the residence of seamen ? Yes.
Can' you state to. the Comthittee at all the amount
of the resident population of the parish ?—By the last
census, between ten and eleven thousand.
What length is the High-street of Shadwelll—Per-
haps net quarter of e mile.
How' many public-houses are there in itl—l really
cannot tell front memory.
Is it az tha rate of one public-house to every twelve
other houses I—lt is.
What is the 'length of New Gravel-lane?—Some-
thing shorter than the high-street, rather better than
half the length of High-street.
Are there fifteen public houses in that lane ?
There are.
Which is at the rate of a public-house to every-
-other eight houses ?—lt is.
N the proportion in Lower Shadwell greater than
that ?—lt is one to every six, I think; I think there
were eighty-five.
Are those public-houses generally very disorderly?
Not generally so.
Are there any disorderly I—Some of them very
much so indeed.
As one of the Parish-Officers, did you ever make
a complaint against one or more 1-1 did.
When ?—ln the year 1814.
What .itr the names or the public houses against
which you complained I—The Duke of York, the
White Hilt, and the • viers' Arms.
To whout did you c' mplain ?—First to the Magi.
strates of Shadwell Plaice-office.
What was the result of your complaintl—They were
called before them, and admonished, several times.
Was that all ?—rThe admonition was ineffectual.
Of what did you complain I—Of the indecency
and immorality of the scenes that were witnessed in
those houses.
Can you stare the particulars 1.1.-Each of those
houses, but particularly the. Duke of York and the
White Hart, contained large rooms fitted up for the
porpose at dancing ; they were the constant resort of
the lowest class of proititutes and precuresses ; there
were some:ernes trim 150 to 2(10 women assembled
in each of them, and the 011icers of the parish went
several times to remonstrate with the landlords upon
the impropriety of their conduct.
Was the conduct of the individuals assembled with-
in those houses indecent and profligate, or was it
merely an assemblage of men and women for the
purpose of dancing 1— The most profligate and inde-
' cent it is possible to conceive.
fleeing laid your complaint of the conduct of those
houses bAore the Magistrates, and the parties being
summoned and admonished, was that conduct
changed.?—lt was not.
Did you expect that the Magistrates at the Police-
. Office would have contented themselves with admo-
nishing the keepers of those houses; or did !telex.
pect that some other mode of proceeding would have
been adopted I—We did not expect they could do
more than they did; the Magistrates of the Police.
office did all in their power ; the Magistrates before
-whom they were summoned were Mr. Raynsford,
and Mr. Markland, the resident Magistrate.
This was in 1818. was it I—lt was; I stated it,
by mistake, to be, in 1814.
Were the Licenses. that year taken away from the
three most notorious houses, the Duke of York, the
White Hart, and the Paviors' Arms?—They were; a
Memorial was presented to the Churchwardens by
the parishioners, complainiog of the conduct of those
houses, and it was made the subject of a public Vestry.
Was that in 1813 or 18141—In 1813.
When the licensing day came, in 1814, were the
houses reopened I—They were at 'the second
li-
ceasing day. '
- Did you and other inhabitants and Churchwardens
oppose that measure, and prefer complaints against
the Ling's Arms and some other houses I—We did.
That was on the sth of September I—lt was the
day of appeal, the first day.
Were you ordered to attend' again ?..-We were or-
dered to attend. again on the 19th September.
Did any thingg-happen between the sth of Septem-
ber and the 19th, relative to those pauses ?—Early in
the morning of the 12th of September. I was inform-
. ed by the resident Magistrate, Mr. biarkland, whom
I met casually in the street, that the Magistrates were
• that day coming down to view those houses, the
Duke of York, the Paviors' Arms, and the. White
Hart; my answer to him was, Nit is impossible, it
was the 19th we were to see you, and not the 12th;'.
be said, el you are mistaken, we are coming to-day ;
you had better send up to the Ceurt.house and know
the truth." I sent the Vestry-clerk up, to know whe-
ther the Magistrates were coming down that day,
sod his answer was, that they were com'hg down to
view new houses; immediately the Parish-Officers,
to whom I sent round to attend, assembled, and were
in waiting at the house of ore of the Officers, which
is directly opposite to the Duke of York ; they pro-
mised, immediately the Magistrates came, to send
for me, which they did. When I came there was a
great crowd of persons assembled, and the Magi.
skates in the middle of the street; the first I saw was
Mr. biarkiand : said he, 66 Did you not tell me that
you had Mensorialled the Magistrates against the re.
opening of these houses ?" I said, " Certainly I did,
and it is true, so far as we could do it with any
propriety." 44 Then," said he, 64 go tell Sir Daniel
V.?Gams so, for he will not believe me." Sir Daniel
was in the Middle of the street; I went up to him
and took my hat off, and stood with it off ; I said,
e. tfie Office's of our Parish did not expect to see you
here-to-day, 1 believe they were ordered,to attend on
the 19th, but they are in attendance, and we shall.
be very happy to state to yon what we have to say."
I;)attiel said, .04 Sir, you are too late ; the Magi-,
mutes We determine to re..opep the bpeses.,
Do you know that the Memorial which you and