CHAPTER IX

PAROCHIAL POLICE OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

Before proceeding to a narration of the successive steps that

culminated in the radical reorganization authorized in 1829, it is

necessary to describe the nature and extent of the various police

establishments as they existed at the close of the eighteenth century.

Exclusive of Special Constables, who, though legally available, were

but rarely if ever employed, there were, at this time, five distinct

classes of Peace Officers:

(i.) Parochial Constables, elected annually in

Parish or Township and serving gratuitously.

(ii.) Their Substitutes or Deputies serving for a

wage voluntarily paid by the Principals.

(iii.) Salaried Bow Street Officers, and Patrols

expressly charged with the suppression of

highwaymen and footpads.

(iv.) Stipendiary Police Constables attached to

the Public Offices established under "The

Middlesex Justices Act."

(v.) Stipendiary Water-Police attached to the

Thames Office, as established by Act of

Parliament in 1798.

It will be noticed that of these five classes, numbers i. and ii. were

common to the whole of England, whilst numbers iii. iv. and v. were

peculiar to London and its immediate neighbourhood, but, for our

present purpose, it will be more convenient to consider the provincial

constabulary as altogether distinct from the various Metropolitan

Police bodies. Theoretically and constitutionally, there should have

been little or no difference between the policing of London and that

of any rural district, but the stage of development reached in the

Metropolis already foreshadowed the impending changes, whilst in the

country the standard of police had as yet deviated hardly at all from

the mediæval pattern.

Leaving the London police establishments, therefore, for future

consideration, we find that in rural districts, and in provincial

towns, High Constables and Parish Constables, acting under the

direction of the Justices of the Peace, continued to exercise the

time-honoured powers which had been handed down to them from forgotten

generations. To get a clear idea of how the old-time system adapted

itself, more or less, to the changed conditions that prevailed in

the nineteenth century, the best way is to turn to what we may call

the police text-books of the period such as the "Treatise on the

Functions and Duties of the Constable," by Colquhoun (1803), or "The

Churchwardens' and Overseers' Guide," by Ashdowne, published at

about the same time. "The High Constable," says Colquhoun, "has the

superintendence and direction of the petty constables, headboroughs,

and other peace officers in his hundred or division. It is his duty to

take cognisance of, and to present, all offences within his hundred or

division which lead to the corruption of morals, breaches of the Lord's

Day, Drunkenness, Cursing and Swearing. To bring forward sufficient

number of constables to maintain decency and good order during the

execution of malefactors or the punishment of offenders, and to attend

in person to see that the peace officers do their duty. To summon petty

constables to keep order in the Courts of Justice &c...." With regard

to tumults and riots, "to do all in his power to arrest offenders,

and so to dispose of his constables as to suppress the disorders in

question, also to give assistance to neighbouring divisions ... to

present all persons exposing for sale unwholesome meat ... and to take

cognisance of false or deficient weights and measures." In another

place he declares that petty constables should regularly perambulate

their districts once at least in every twenty-four hours, and visit all

alehouses once a week "to see that no unlawful games are permitted,

and that labouring people are not suffered to lounge and tipple until

they are intoxicated." The duty of petty constables when riots are

threatened is thus described. "The instant a constable hears of any

unlawful assembly, mob, or concourse of people likely to produce danger

or mischief within or near his constablewick or district (he must) give

notice to the nearest Justice, and repair instantly to the spot with

his long or short stave, and there put himself under the direction of

such magistrate or magistrates as may be in attendance."

"The Churchwardens' and Overseers' Guide and Director" is arranged in

the form of a vocabulary, and in alphabetical order gives explanations

of the principal matters with which Parish Officers are chiefly

concerned. "Constables," we learn, "are to make a Hue and Cry after

the offenders where a robbery or felony is committed, to call upon the

parishioners to assist in the pursuit: and if the criminal be not found

in the liberty of the first constable, he is to give notice to the

next, and thus continue the pursuit from town to town, and from county

to county; and where offenders are not taken, constables are to levy

the Tax to satisfy an execution on recovery against a Hundred, and pay

the same to the Sheriff &c...."

"Hundreds or Wapentakes," according to Ashdowne, "are generally

governed by a High Constable, under whom a Tythingman or Borsholder is

generally appointed for each Borough or District within the Hundred.

Hundreds are liable to penalties on exportation of wool, liable also

for damages sustained by violently pulling down buildings; by killing

cattle; cutting down trees, ... by destroying turnpikes, or works on

navigable rivers; by cutting hopbines; by destroying corn to prevent

exportation; by wounding officers of the Customs; by destroying woods

&c.... Hundreds are also bound to raise Hue and Cry when any robbery

is committed within the Hundred; and if the offender is not taken, an

action may be maintained against the Hundred to recover damages."[158]

Under the heading of "Swearing" is arranged the following

information:--"Persons guilty of profane swearing, and convicted

thereof, to forfeit to the Poor of the Parish. Day-Labourers, common

soldiers, or common seamen, 1/-. Persons under the degree of gentlemen,

2/-. Gentlemen or persons above the degree of gentlemen, 5/-. The above

penalties to be doubled for a second offence, and trebled after a

second conviction."

Of Tythingmen the same author writes:--"There is frequently a

Tythingman in the same town with a constable, who is, as it were, a

deputy to exercise the office in the constable's absence; but there are

some things which the constable has power to do that tythingmen cannot

intermeddle with. When there happens to be no constable of a parish,

the office and authority of a Tythingman seems to be the same under

another name."

If anyone should be inclined to doubt the remarkable stability of

the Constable's office, and all that pertains to it, he may find it

instructive to look back a few hundred years, and refer to what Lambard

and others have to say about Tythingmen and Constables, part of which

is quoted in the third chapter of this book.

To the scope and intention of the functions exercised by parish

officers as stated by Colquhoun and Ashdowne, if somewhat

old-fashioned, no exception need be taken. The trouble was, however,

that the office-holders did not live up to the standard inculcated by

their teachers. The commonsense and reasonableness of the whole system

fell to the ground whenever ignorant and unworthy agents were entrusted

with its administration, and such, unfortunately, was the character

of the large majority of the police personnel. The parish constable

was incompetent, and the duties imposed on him were either evaded, or

performed in a purely perfunctory manner. Under the circumstances such

a tendency was perhaps inevitable, for it is not to be expected that

unpaid services will be well performed by the poorer classes without

constant supervision. Struggling men, who have to work hard to provide

for themselves, and for their families, are not likely to overtax

their energies in the service of the State without reward, and those

substitutes who received a few shillings a year from their principals

were only careful not to exceed the minimum amount of labour which

could be exacted from them compulsorily.

Further consideration of the Rural Constabulary must be postponed

until we come to deal with the reorganization which was set on foot

in 1839. For the present we must return to the Metropolis, where the

doomed parochial system was now tottering to its fall, and where the

need for reform was more pressing than elsewhere. At the time we are

considering, London boasted a variety of police establishments, all

more or less disconnected. The City had one organization, Westminster

another, the public offices distributed justice after a fashion

in their respective districts, and Bow Street prided itself upon

holding a position of complete isolation and independence. Nor was

this all--the whole of the metropolis was split up into parishes,

and each parish made its own arrangements for keeping the peace, or

dispensed with police altogether, as it saw fit. Twelve London parishes

were thus entirely unprotected: St James' and Marylebone employed

Chelsea pensioners, the City supported 765 watchmen, Edgeware had no

policeman and no patrol, Camberwell armed its night watchmen with

blunderbusses, whilst St Pancras had no less than eighteen distinct

Watch Trusts, a source of weakness rather than of strength, because

they never co-operated with each other. In Kensington the police

force consisted only of three headboroughs, excellent men perhaps;

but as Peel remarked, "if they had been angels, it would have been

utterly impossible for them to fulfil the duties required from their

situation." Deptford, being without a single professional watchman, was

at one time patrolled by the inhabitants, who enrolled themselves into

companies twenty strong for that purpose, quickly disbanding, however,

as soon as the robbers moved into another district. In some parishes,

again, there were patrols and no beats, and in others there were beats

and stands but no patrols, despite the recommendations of Special

Commissions and the provisions of Acts of Parliament.

The degree of security extended to the ratepayers by the local

authorities was thus a very variable quantity; but it is not too much

to say that without exception the constitution of all the parochial

police bodies was antiquated and radically unsound, and that Watch and

Ward was at this time more indifferently kept than had previously been

the case throughout the whole history of the Metropolis.

In the year 1800 Parish Constables were generally permanent deputies

and of inferior origin; nor was any trouble taken to secure officers of

the right stamp. The wages paid to Parish Watchmen were miserable, and

the men usually engaged were those whose antecedents and qualifications

precluded them from obtaining more lucrative or reputable employment.

These "Charlies" (as they were popularly called, after their

predecessors the Bell-men, instituted in the reign of Charles the

Second) were for the most part infirm from age and starvation, drunken,

the creatures of street-walkers and publicans rather than servants

of the public, and altogether contemptible. Dressed in heavy capes,

muffled up to the ears, provided with long staves and dim lanterns,

they issued from their watchboxes twice an hour for a minute or two to

call the time and the state of the weather. As clocks and barometers

they may have been of some service; or, as somebody once put it, to

wake a man up after his house has been robbed to tell him the bad news;

but for the prevention of crime, they were worse than useless. Striking

their staves on the pavement, and shewing their lanterns, they gave

timely warning of their approach; and if the thieves thought it worth

while to take any notice at all of such a trivial interruption, they

had only to remove themselves temporarily into the next parish to be

secure from pursuit.

As an object for practical joking, and as a theme for ridicule, the

Charlies provided some amusement to the Jerry Hawthorns and Corinthian

Toms of the period, but this was the extent of their usefulness. Quite

a considerable literature hinged on their grotesque incompetency, but

in their praise not a syllable was uttered; everyone made fun of them.

They were humorously described as "persons hired by the parish to

sleep in the open air," and another topical saying was to the effect

that "Shiver and Shake" ought to be substituted for "Watch and Ward,"

because they spent half the night shivering with cold and the other

half shaking with fright. It was a popular amusement amongst young men

of the town to imprison watchmen by upsetting their watchboxes on top

of them as they dozed within; and the young blood who could exhibit

to his friends a collection of trophies such as lanterns, staves,

and rattles, was much accounted of in smart society. The newspapers

were never tired of skits at the expense of the parochial watch: the

following extract from _The Morning Herald_ of October 30th, 1802, will

serve as an example:--

"It is said that a man who presented himself for the office of

watchman to a parish at the West End of the Town very much infected

by depredators, was lately turned away from the Vestry with this

reprimand--I am astonished at the impudence of such a great sturdy

strong fellow as you are, being so idle as to apply for a watchman's

situation, when you are capable of labour." Another publication

calling itself "The Microcosm of London" gives its readers a satirical

account of the nightly watch in these words. "The Watch is a Parochial

establishment supported by the Parochial rate, and subject to the

jurisdiction of the magistrates: it is necessary to the peace and

security of the metropolis, and is of considerable utility: but that

it might be rendered much more useful cannot be denied. That the Watch

should consist of able-bodied men, is, we presume, essential to the

complete design of its institution, as it forms a part of its legal

description: but that the watchmen are persons of this character,

experience will not vouch: and why they are chosen from among the aged

and incapable must be answered by those who make the choice. In the

early part of the last century, an halbert was their weapon: it was

then changed to a long staff: but the great coat and lantern are now

accompanied with more advantageous implements of duty--a bludgeon and

a rattle. It is almost superfluous to add, that the watchhouse is a

place where the appointed watchmen assemble to be accoutred for their

nocturnal rounds, under the direction of a constable, whose duty being

taken by rotation, enjoys the title of Constable of the Night. It is

also the receptacle for such unfortunate persons as are apprehended

by the watch, and where they remain in custody till they can be

conducted to the tribunal of the police office, for the examination of

a magistrate."

The watchhouses here referred to were dirty and insecure hovels, with

an underground cellar secured by a grating, behind which prisoners

were confined, sometimes for forty-eight hours, but in the case of

minor offences a tip of half-a-crown to the constable was generally

sufficient to secure release.

In 1804 there were 2044 parochial constables and watchmen in the

Metropolis, including the 765 employed by the City, that is to say,

about one watchman to every seventy or eighty houses.

The City of London was much better policed than the rest of the

Metropolis. It was said that so superior were the arrangements

eastward of Temple Bar to those of the more westerly districts, that

a pickpocket was easily recognised when he came to the City boundary,

because he always walked so fast, and so often looked over his

shoulder, as if he suspected that someone was after him. The watchmen

appointed by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were selected from a better

class of men than were those who held office in Westminster and other

parishes; they were also better paid and more carefully superintended.

In 1815 the Lord Mayor himself, on more than one occasion, visited the

watch by night and had the men mustered, discharging on the spot those

whom he considered unfit. Briefly the organisation was as follows--the

City was divided into four divisions with three day patrols to each

division, in all twelve patrolmen at one and a half guineas a week

each. By night, whilst the constables and watchmen were on duty, the

patrols were reduced to eight, two to a division; their duties were, to

visit the watchhouses at least twice a night, to see that the constable

of the night was not absent from his post, signing their names at every

visit in a book kept for the purpose at the several watchhouses. The

Constables of the Night were paid no salary, but were generally in

receipt of fees from the elected householders whose deputies they were.

They were bound to be present with the watch all night long, and were

held responsible that the watchmen did their duty. In time of riot,

or when disturbances were apprehended, the Lord Mayor had power to

summon them, together with the watch, at any hour--by day as well as by

night, for the maintenance of the peace. The task of supervising the

City police was entrusted, not to a High Constable, but to the two City

Marshals, whose duty it was to pay surprise visits to the watchhouses

at uncertain hours, to certify that the patrolmen's books were duly

signed up, and to report every morning to the Lord Mayor concerning

the "internal quiet of the City of London." They also bound themselves

on oath to proceed against no man through malice, and to screen no man

through favour or affection.

Both in the city and in other parts of London, the management of the

traffic was in the hands of special officials called Street-keepers;

but beyond the regulation of vehicular traffic within the limits of the

parishes where they were employed, they had no general police duties to

perform, and were not under the control of the magistrates, nor subject

to the police authorities.

The Burgesses of Westminster still suffered their police administration

to be bound by the ecclesiastical traditions of bygone centuries;

and if we make an exception in favour of the "Jury of Annoyances,"

established in 1755, we may say that little evidence of progress was

discoverable within the Liberties of the Western City. The Act creating

the Annoyance Jury was passed in the twenty-ninth year of George II.,

and two years later was amended and enlarged. The Court of Burgesses

was now empowered to maintain forty-eight inhabitants of Westminster

for the suppression of public nuisances: members of this jury had

authority to enter any shop or house, and if they found any unlawful or

defective weight or measure therein, to destroy the same, and to amerce

the offender a sum not exceeding forty shillings for each offence. In

1764 the Jury was divided into three divisions, called St Margaret's

Division, the St James' Division, and the St Martin's Division, each

containing sixteen members; at the same time it was ordained, that

all presentments had to be in writing under the hands and seals of at

least twelve jurymen. In 1800 the Annoyance Jury was still nominally

responsible for the cleanliness, sightliness, and sanitary condition

of Westminster, but, as a matter of experience, the removal and

prevention of nuisances was left almost entirely to the discretion and

taste of the more fastidious householders.

As has already been said, the Middlesex Justices Act was at first

an experimental measure; in 1801 it was repealed, but most of its

provisions were at once re-enacted by a statute[159] which placed the

public offices on a more permanent basis, and raised the salary of the

magistrates and the wages of the police officers. There were now ten of

these offices, viz., Mansion House, Guildhall, Hatton Garden, Worship

Street, Whitechapel, Shadwell, Southwark, Queen Street Westminster;

Great Marlborough Street, and Wapping. Mansion House and Guildhall

belonged to the City proper, and Wapping was the headquarters of the

River Police. To each office were apportioned three magistrates, eight

constables, and a clerk or two. The magistrates sat in rotation,

and, within the limited areas of their respective jurisdictions,

acted independently of their colleagues. There was little uniformity

or co-operation. Each office had a general duty of apprehending and

punishing any criminals found within its boundaries, but had no

connection with the Nightly Watch. The different parishes concerned

had transferred to the public offices the duties connected with Hue

and Cry, whilst retaining in their own hands the responsibilities

of Watch and Ward. The relations existing between the parochial and

stipendiary authorities were not cordial, in fact there was frequently

a pronounced enmity between the parish constable and the police

constable, whilst the amateur peace officer not infrequently set at

defiance the professional magistrate. The impossibility of controlling

the local watchmen conduced to a very unsatisfactory state of affairs,

as is seen by the following evidence given before the 1816 Committee

by Mr Robert Raynsford, the magistrate of Hatton Garden. "At present,

as the law now stands," he said, "we have no power at all over the

parish watchmen: but when this question was agitated on a former

occasion, the parishes had so rooted an aversion to the interference of

the magistracy, that I believe there were petitions from most of the

parishes: at the same time there are offences committed in the streets,

close by a watch-box, and we are told that the watchman was fast

asleep, or would give no assistance: we have no power of sending for

the watchman, or if we did, we have no power of punishing him. I think

it would be an improvement if they were put under the direction of the

Police."

It will be remembered that the Middlesex Justices Act had placed the

police offices under the control of the Home Office, which had the

power of appointing and dismissing the magistrates: this was right and

proper, but it would have been far better if any further supervision

exercised by the Secretary of State had been confined to the larger and

more general issues connected with the police establishments, and had

stopped short of the injudicious meddling that went on. The magistrates

might surely have been trusted with the selection of their own

constables, but, for some occult reason, successive ministers seem to

have thought it their duty to diminish the authority of the magistrates

by actively interfering with the nomination and election of the rank

and file. Under these circumstances it is strange that the magistrates

were as well served by their subordinate officers as they seem to have

been, yet, everything considered, the stipendiary policeman proved so

superior to the amateur constable that Maurice Swabey, the magistrate

at Union Street, declared, that he would rather have six additional

officers than fifty parish constables.

From the list of the Public Offices above enumerated, the most

interesting has intentionally been omitted, because its unique

position calls for separate and more detailed notice. Besides being

of earlier date than the other offices, Bow Street exceeded them also

in importance, and was distinguished as the centre of the police

activities of the time. From Henry Fielding, who presided in 1753, to

Sir Franklin Lushington, who recently succeeded Sir John Bridge, the

Chief Magistrate at Bow Street has nearly always been a man of mark

amongst his brother stipendiaries, and in their day the Bow Street

Runners (as the officers attached to this Court used to be called) were

of quite a different type from their comrades employed in the junior

offices.

Though only eight in number (afterwards increased to twelve) these

runners exerted a preponderating influence, which largely altered

the aspect of the contest between the professional thieves and the

helpless public on whom they preyed. The Bow Street policemen were the

first peace officers to make a serious study of the art of detecting

and running down criminals: they were experts whereas all their

predecessors had been amateurs; no longer dull officials performing

routine duties in perfunctory fashion when "not otherwise engaged";

but keen hunters with all their faculties stimulated by the prospect

of the blood money and other rewards they hoped to earn. When they

appeared on the scene the professional depredator no longer had things

all his own way; instead of the parish constable who could be outwitted

and bamboozled at every turn, the cracksman or forger found himself

confronted by a wary adversary, well armed, and up to every move on

the board. That the Bow Street Runners achieved much good in breaking

up predatory gangs, and in bringing notorious offenders to trial, is

not to be denied, but it is no less certain that they were the source

of much evil. Actuated by the hope of gain rather than by any sense of

duty, their motives were as ignoble as their methods were shady. They

played only for their own hand, and all their best endeavours were

bent towards the arrest of the particular criminal whose conviction

would bring the greatest profit to themselves, and not to the pursuit

of the fugitive from justice whose capture was chiefly desirable on

public grounds. Prevention did not enter at all into their conception

of police duty, and their services were of course only at the disposal

of those who were rich enough to pay handsomely for the privilege. The

extent to which this system of feeing was carried may be guessed from

the fact that Townsend left £20,000 behind him, and that Sayer's heirs

divided no less than £30,000 at the death of their benefactor.

In order to obtain information, the runners made it a rule to frequent

low "flash-houses," as the resorts of thieves were called, and to

associate with the vicious and desperate characters to be found there.

When examined before a Parliamentary Commission, several of these

officers freely admitted that it was by the employment of such tactics

that they expected to obtain the most valuable information, and gave it

as their opinion that flash-houses ought to be encouraged rather than

suppressed, on account of the facilities they afforded the runner in

his search for a man who was "wanted."

There were, no doubt, many honest men amongst the Bow Street Officers

doing their duty to the best of their ability after their lights, and

although their methods would not be tolerated for a moment at the

present day, they were much in advance of their predecessors. Certain

of them attained a wide celebrity. Such men as Lavender, Nelson and

others--unique characters in their way--made it their business to go

everywhere and know everybody: they carried a small baton surmounted

by a gilt crown, and this badge of office admitted them not only to

such unsavoury dens as "The Dog and Duck" and "The Temple of Flora,"

but even into the Royal Palaces, where two officers, we learn, were

constantly stationed "on account of the King being frequently teased

of lunatics." Runners were often specialists, occupying themselves

in one line of business to the neglect of others: thus, whilst that

well-known gossip Townsend chiefly confined himself to safeguarding the

property of his wealthy clients, and to capturing noble duellists, Keys

devoted himself to circumventing coiners and forgers of bank notes, and

a third was principally engaged in the detection and apprehension of

"Resurrectionists."

There is no doubt that more than one of the Bow Street policemen were

actually in league with the depredators they were paid to catch, though

they were generally too alert to be found out; but the confidence of

the public in their thief-takers received a rude shock when Vaughan,

of the Horse Patrol, was proved to have arranged a burglary for the

sake of the reward that would have come to him on the conviction of the

felons. "Set a thief to catch a thief" may sometimes be good policy,

but it is nearly always bad police.

The Patrols, Horse and Foot, which were attached to the Bow Street

Office, had been in existence some fifty years or so, but had only

consisted of a handful of men quite insufficient for the amount of

work that was expected of them. In 1805 Sir Richard Ford, the Chief

Magistrate, obtained permission to extend the system of mounted police

so as to provide patrols for all the main roads to a distance of about

twenty miles from Bow Street. The strength of this new force was

fifty-two patrols, two inspectors, and a clerk: they were recruited

almost exclusively from retired cavalrymen, and were familiarly

known as Robin Redbreasts on account of the red waistcoat that was a

conspicuous part of their uniform. They were better paid than their

predecessors, the wages of a "patrol" being twenty-eight shillings a

week, with allowance for horse keep, and the salary of a "conductor"

standing at £100 a-year and a guinea a-week for forage and shoeing.

Their energies were principally directed against highwaymen, and they

quickly cleared Hounslow Heath and other infested localities from this

class of plunderer. The Horse Patrol cost the Government £8000 a year,

not a high price to pay for the suppression of those impudent robbers

"the gentlemen of the road." The foot patrol policed the inner circle

within a radius of about four miles.

The legal powers of Bow Street were never very strictly defined, but

it was generally understood that the jurisdiction of the Office was

confined to the County of Middlesex (the City of London excepted),

and to the main roads in the neighbourhood of the metropolis which

were patrolled by Bow Street Officers. Under the direction of the Home

Secretary, the Chief Magistrate had, in fact, the control of a small

and independent force applicable to the general police requirements of

the capital and its environment.

A History of Police in England · 第 9 / 13 章