Page 7 - Ian Marshall - London Coffe Houses - Standing Display January 2016
P. 7

1A brief summary of the extraordinary attempt by Charles II to close the
 country's coffee houses down within 3 weeks who, 2 days before
 Christmas in 1675, issued a Proclamation ordering their closure by lOth
 January 1676. Uproar ensued and discontent loomed large. The king
 listened and, exceptionally, a further Proclamation was issued on 8th
 January 1676 which, in an obvious attempt to mitigate the king's
 embarrassment, extended the closure deadline to 24th June although this
 was only subterfuge because no further attempt at molestation of the
 Coffee-houses was made.

         After much backing and filling, the king, on December 23, 1675, issued a proclamation
    which in its title frankly stated its object-"for the suppression ofcoffee houses." It is here
    given in a somewhat condensed form:

                                    , BY THE KING: A PROCLAMATION
                                            FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF
                                                  COFFEE HOUSES

           Charles R.

              Whereas it is most apparent that the multitude ofCoffee Houses of late years set up
          and kept within this kingdom, the dominion of Wales, and town ofBerwick-upon-
          Tweed, and the great resort ofldle and disaffected persons to them, have produced very
          evil and dangerous effects; as well for that many tradesmen and others, do herein
          mispend much oftheir time, which might and probably would be employed in and about
          their Lawful Calling and Affairs; but also, for that in such houses ... divers false,
          malitious and scandalous reports are devised and spread abroad to the Defamation of his
          Majestie's Government, and to the Disturbance ofthe Peace and Quiet ofthe Realm; his
          Majesty bath thought fit and necessary, that the said Coffee Houses be (for the future)
          Put down, and suppressed, and doth ... strictly charge and command all manner of
          persons, That they or any ofthem do not presume from and after the Tenth Day of
          January next ensuing, to keep any Public Coffee House, or to utter or sell by retail, in
          his, her or their house or houses (to be spent or consumed within the same) any Coffee,
          Chocolet, Sherbett or Tea, as they will answer the contrary at their utmost perils ... (all
          licenses to be revoked).

              Given at our Court at Whitehall, this third-and-twentieth day ofDec., 1675, in the
          seven-and-twentieth year ofour Reign.

              GOD SAVE THE KING.

        And then a remarkable thing happened. It is not usual for a royal proclamation issued on
   the 29th ofone month to be recalled on the 8th day ofthe next; but this is the record
   established by Charles II. The proclamation was made on December 23, 1675, and issued
   December 29, 1675. It forbade the coffee houses to operate after January 10, 1676. But so
   intense was the feeling aroused, that eleven days was sufficient time to convince the king that
   a blunder had been made. Men ofall parties cried out against being deprived oftheir
   accustomed haunts. The dealers in coffee, tea, and chocolate demonstrated that the
   proclamation would greatly lessen his majesty's revenues. Convulsion and discontent loomed
   large. The king heeded the warning, and on January 8, 1676, another proclamation was
   issued by which the first proclamation was recalled.

        In order to save the king's face, it was solemnly recited that "His Gracious Majesty," out
   ofhis "princely consideration and royal compassion" would allow the retailers ofcoffee
   liquor to keep open until the 24th ofthe following June. But this was clearly only a royal
   subterfuge, as there was no further attempt at molestation, and it is extremely doubtful ifany
   was contemplated at the time the second proclamation was promulgated.

        "Than both which proclamations nothing could argue greater guilt nor greater weakness,"
   says Anderson. Robinson remarks, "A battle for freedom ofspeech was fought and won over
   this question at a time when Parliaments were infrequent and when the liberty ofthe press
   did not exist."
   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12