So after looking at a couple of the sites it looks like Charing Cross is almost like the street that leads from the poor to the middle class border. Then a little bit farther up is the rich district. For some reason I thought that the districts would be very specific areas. That seems to not have been the case though. By using the Charles Booth site i saw how close some of the poor areas were to the middle and upper class. Which then leads to what I found in the old bailey! I looked up the street in the old bailey and every insert seemed to be about burglary and or theft. This, to me, makes sense due to the fact that the class areas were so close together. I mean if right out side my house was a much richer person, and I saw them everyday, I might try and steal a thing or two from them. A few other more prominent I guess you could say crimes were things such as murder and coining but not as much as burglary. Coining was the making of false money, again makes sense when classes were so close.
One thought on “Charing Cross”
Comments are closed.
Mike, your theory about why Charing Cross was home to a lot of burglary is interesting and does make sense when you think about it. It wouldn’t surprise me if the coining was also related to the differences in wealth in the area, poorer people may have been trying to help themselves live better by making fake money when they couldn’t easily access real money. What exactly is the picture you included of, and what story did you read?