The Olneyville times. (Olneyville [Providence, R.I.]) 1887-1917, 1904-10-28
AFRAIDO OF BIG CITIES
ENGLAND LONG TRIED TO KEEP DOWN
LoNDoNs POPULATION
Laws Passed That MADE IL an Onense
Ia Live In the Metropolis saa Proc
Iamations Issued to Restrict the
Size and Kam ber Of Buflainxs.


From the days Of Elizabeth to those
OF Charles III. the various English gov
ernments tried by every means within
their power 10 preserve the kingdom
from the evils" attendant upon a
huge metropolis. The frequent out
breakings Of the plague afterward
eliminating In the terrible visitation
which carried Of over $1,000 persons
the fear that with the deluge Of build
ing the population would be poisoned
by breathing I'm one another's faces"
the lncapacity Of the police OF the time
90 preserve order and their utter help
lessness in the face Of mob low-these
were among the contributory causes
which brought about a long series OF
vexations and annoying prohibitions.
In 1880 a proclamation was issued
prohibiting the erection within three
miles Of the city gates Of any new
houses or tenements upon sites where
no former house had been known 10
have been erected. Later came another
proclamation. by which II was ordered
that only one family should live In
each house, that houses erected within
the past seven years and still unlet
should remain empty, and that all un-
finished buildings on new founda lions
should be pulled down.
There would appear to have been
neither order nor system In these vary
ing proclamations which were Issued
every six OF seven years. Thus at one
time buildings were prohibited within
ten miles OF London. At another las
quoted above) within three miles. and,
while under Elizabeth unfinished
houses only were required to be pulled
down, orders were issued later under
which houses which had been erected
several years were ruthlessly demol-
ished
Further procamatiOns Of the same
period commanded that "pessons Of
livelihood and means should reside Ia
their counties and not abide or sojourn
in the city Of London, 80 that counties
remained unserved," but these seem TO
have been OF no effect until the reign
OF Charles l., when they were renewed
obedience. All persons OF livelihood
and means unconnected with public
offices were ordered within forty days
from the date OF the notice to resort to
their several counties and with their
families continue their residence there,
and they were further warned mot to
put themselves TO unnecessary charge
in providing themselves TO return In
winter To the said cities"-i. g., London
and Westminster IL was the king
firm resolution 10 withstand such great
and growing evil"
Even this had little effect upon the
public in its first issue. and a copious
list was prepared Of OFFENDERS, includ-
ing great number OF The nobility and
ladies and gentlemen, who were accus
ed OF living I'm London for several
months after the given warning. Most
Of these had made n pretense OF quit
ting the city, to return again after
brief absence, hoping thus TO escape
the penalty OF their disobedience.
1t came as bolt from the blue In
1875 when Mr.. Palmer, a large land
holder I'm Sussex, was brought into the
star chamber and fined FL 900 for dis
obeying the proclamation az TO living
I'm the country and remaining I'm Lon
don after the prescribed period. He
was bachelor and he urged In his de
fense that he had never been married,
had never been n "housekeeper" and
had no house fitting for man OF his
birth TO reside In. his own mansion in
the country having becn burnei down
but his Judges were inexorabie. and
the fine was accompanied by n severe
reprimand for having deserted his ten
ants and neighbors.
In the same year Information was
filed against Sir John Sucking. the
poet and many others for the same Of
fense and such was the terror caused
by these prosecutions that on all sides
folk OF condition and quality were to
be seen preparing for flight into the
country. cursing the hardship OF being
confined to their country houses and
leaving town and its pleasures behind
To encourage gentlemen 10 live more
willingly in the country, says writer
OF the times. all game fowl such as
pheasants. partridges. ducks and hares
were at certain times forbidden 10 be
dressed or eaten in any inn.
In n proclamation issued by Charles
H. In l66I--one of the last I'm this di-
reCtion-among the Inconvenience set
forth as daily growing by the spread
of new buildings were: The increase
OF the people I'm such great numbers
as To prohibit their proper government
by the wonted officers, the enhance
mcnt OF the price Of vituals. the en-
dangering OF the health OF the city In
habitants and the damage done 10
the tradespeople in the boroughs by
the migration downward OF the popula
ton
but II was all of no avail Nothing
could stop the increase of "upstart
London" ms II was termed 10y some OF
the old writer's. and the prediction or
James l. that England will Itself be
London. and London England" II fast
approaching verification What would
his late majesty say now to those
swarms OF gentry who. through the
instigation Of their wives or 10 new
model and fashion their daughters.
neglect their country hospitality aud
cumhe- the city. n general nuisance to
the kingdom?'
Somewhat over century later. IN
i77S. hill VAS brought before parlia
mert i'm which II was proposed TO put