Night Watch to Police, 1811-28 109StJames vestryman, described to Sidmouth the response of householders
invited to be special constables: 'at the end of three or four days, however six
only had come forward'. The vestry discovered its acts did not allow them to
use parochial rates to compensate 'shop-keepers & other persons of such a
description as to be deserving of confidence, & yet unable to give up their
time without remuneration'. Their only recourse was to solicit private con-
tributions. They decided against this because 'the town appeared pretty well
secured by the great numbers of military already assembled'. Hammersley
advised Sidmouth to create a fund to pay special constables called upon in
emergencies. 'Even if we could depend upon the house-holders coming
voluntarily forward on the instant pressure of such occasions, which I am
sure is quite impossible, they would certainly not be so efficient for parading
the streets & absolutely doing the duty,' as professional keepers of the
peace.^30 It also seems likely that some vestries, even if asked, would not
have complied with Sidmouth's request. St Leonard, Shoreditch, which sent
three petitions against the Com Laws between June 1814 and March 1815,
would not feel much sympathy for Lord Sidmouth.^31 Many Londoners did
not see the post-war political reformers, the anti-Com Law demonstrators,
or Queen Caroline's supporters as equivalent to wartime enemies like the
French. Clearly, the government could not rely on the assistance of local
authorities in policing political disorders.^32
The incident known as Peterloo also did a great deal to confirm for many
a growing belief that impartial professionals were more reliable for keeping
the peace than patriotic volunteers. The magistrates of Manchester sent
the local volunteer Yeomanry and a regular cavalry unit into a crowd of
thousands to arrest Henry Hunt as he addressed a reform meeting in
St Peter's Field on 16 August 1819. The deaths of 11 people and the
wounding of over 400 shocked people as much as the Ratcliffe Highway
murders. And, in the opinion of Whigs, Radicals, and even some moderate
Tories, the government added insult to injury when the Prince Regent con-
gratulated the magistrates of Manchester, on 'their prompt, decisive
and efficient measures for the preservation of the public tranquillity'.^33
Public perception at the time blamed the Yeomanry for the excess violence.
The Yeomanry was perceived in Manchester as socially and politically biased
and local animosities gave an edge of rancour to tempers already strained.
Even a cautious Whig like the Duke of Devonshire could write: 'with every
disposition to excuse the magistrates for what they did, I think they were
hasty and ill judged in employing yeomanry and people of the place ...
instead of regular soldiers who have no private and local enmities and who
are in the habit of being calm'.^34 In the Radical journal The Black Dwaif,
~ "Citizen" of Carlisle' asserted: 'Had the regular forces of the kingdom
been employed at Manchester, there is little doubt that the blood there spilt
would have been spared ... .'^35