DRUNKS and vagrants were the everyday work of Malvern's police court 100 years ago, as a glance at the Malvern Gazette of July 20, 1902 shows.
We read of Harold Dicks, 26, of Newport, who was charged with being drunk and disorderly in the Worcester Road.
The court heard that Dicks, who pleaded not guilty, had been arrested near the Lygon Arms by Sgt Brown, who had previously told him to go home.
Dicks had been thrown out of the pub because he had "tried to strangle a dog" there after drinking a quantity of beer.
Dicks, who it was said had been a teetotaller for many years, was fined 11 shillings with fourpence costs.
The court also considered the case of 73-year-old tramp James Connor, who "was exhibiting his vocal and elocutionary powers to quite a crowd of people in the Worcester Road on Wednesday evening".
"His language was not of a Parliamentary type and his movements were somewhat erratic. PC James, after witnessing his manoeuvres, requested 'the pleasure of his company' as far as the police station."
The tramp was fined a shilling and fourpence costs, or seven days inside.
Other inebriates dealt with that week included a woman from North Malvern, described as a "woman of bad character" who was fined £1 or 14 days' hard labour, and a labourer from Leigh (fined six shillings including costs).
The evils of drink were clearly of great concern, and the same issue of the Gazette carried a report on a conference in Worcester on licensing reform, which was presided over by Earl Beauchamp of Madresfield Court.
His lordship was of the opinion that there was a need to reduce the number of public houses throughout the county.
"He thought the meeting would agree that anything which tended to diminish convictions for drunkenness would surely be a good thing for Worcester and its inhabitants."
In the circumstances, it is with little surprise that we return to court to find that an application by local publicans to extend opening time for an hour to celebrate the forthcoming Coronation was turned down point-blank.
"The Chairman, without any hesitation, said the bench was unanimous in thinking it better not to grant the application" the paper reported.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article