oftentimes reproached the severity, and sometimes the insolence, of
the watchmen placed at their doors, those watchmen would answer
saucily enough, and perhaps be apt to affront the people who were in
the street talking to the said families; for which, or for their ill-
treatment of the families, I think seven or eight of them in several
places were killed; I know not whether I should say murdered or not,
because I cannot enter into the particular cases. It is true the
watchmen were on their duty, and acting in the post where they were
placed by a lawful authority; and killing any public legal officer in the
execution of his office is always, in the language of the law, called
murder. But as they were not authorised by the magistrates’
instructions, or by the power they acted under, to be injurious or
abusive either to the people who were under their observation or to
any that concerned themselves for them; so when they did so, they
might he said to act themselves, not their office; ‘ to act as private
persons, not as persons employed; and consequently, if they brought
mischief upon themselves by such an undue behaviour, that mischief
was upon their own heads; and indeed they had so much the hearty
curses of the people, whether they deserved it or not, that whatever
befell them nobody pitied them, and everybody was apt to say they
deserved it, whatever it was. Nor do I remember that anybody was
ever punished, at least to any considerable degree, for whatever was
done to the watchmen that guarded their houses.
What variety of stratagems were used to escape and get out of
houses thus shut up, by which the watchmen were deceived or
overpowered, and that the people got away, I have taken notice of
already, and shall say no more to that. But I say the magistrates did
moderate and ease families upon many occasions in this case, and
particularly in that of taking away, or suffering to be removed, the
sick persons out of such houses when they were willing to be removed
either to a pest-house or other Places; and sometimes giving the well
persons in the family so shut up, leave to remove upon information
given that they were well, and that they would confine themselves in
such houses where they went so long as should be required of them.
The concern, also, of the magistrates for the supplying such poor
families as were infected – I say, supplying them with necessaries, as
well physic as food – was very great, and in which they did not content
themselves with giving the necessary orders to the officers appointed,
but the aldermen in person, and on horseback, frequently rode to such
houses and caused the people to be asked at their windows whether
they were duly attended or not; also, whether they wanted anything
that was necessary, and if the officers had constantly carried their
messages and fetched them such things as they wanted or not. And if
they answered in the affirmative, all was well; but if they complained
that they were ill supplied, and that the officer did not do his duty, or
did not treat them civilly, they (the officers) were generally removed,
and others placed in their stead.
It is true such complaint might be unjust, and if the officer had such
arguments to use as would convince the magistrate that he was right,
and that the people had injured him, he was continued and they
reproved. But this part could not well bear a particular inquiry, for the
parties could very ill be well heard and answered in the street from the
windows, as was the case then. The magistrates, therefore, generally
chose to favour the people and remove the man, as what seemed to be
the least wrong and of the least ill consequence; seeing if the
watchman was injured, yet they could easily make him amends by
giving him another post of the like nature; but if the family was
injured, there was no satisfaction could be made to them, the damage
perhaps being irreparable, as it concerned their lives.
A great variety of these cases frequently happened between the