Before the Bobbies. The Night Watch and Police Reform in Metropolitan London, 1720-1830

Why 1829? 127

government supporters (Peel's brother William), Whigs (Sir Francis Burdett)

and two aldermen from the City of London.^3

Th.e committee heard evidence from 11 witnesses, including nine police

magistrates; an additional four were officials connected to the police force of

the City of London and one was the deputy high bailiff for Westminster. No

parochial officials or officers testified although some police magistrates who

did were also vestrymen and/or watch committee members. Henry Moreton

Dyer, for example, was a police magistrate at the Marlborough Street office

and a vestryman for St Marylebone. It is clear, however, that this Select

Committee did not perceive the parochial forces as part of the 'police of the

metropolis'. Its report discussed the City of London forces, those directed by

Bow Street and other police offices, and those policing Westminster under

the authority of the Court of Burgesses. The only discussion of the night

watch concerned Westminster. The report asserted that the police of West-

minster, as compared to the City's, lacked

the same gradations and subordination of the different officers of police,

and the same subdivision of districts ... and consequently that there is not

that unity of action upon which the maintenance of public order so much

depends; it was attempted to be introduced in the different Acts for the

regulation of the police, but owing to the City of Westminster never having

been incorporated, the means of introducing efficiency and control

throughout this great district have failed.^4

Only minor changes were recommended in the policing of fairs and for

preventing bullock hunting in the streets of London. The Committee report

concluded with the now classic statement:

It is difficult to reconcile an effective system of police, with that perfect

freedom of action and exemption from interference, which are the great

privileges and blessings of society in this country; and Your Committee

think that the forfeiture or curtailment of such advantages would be too

great a sacrifice for improvements in police, or facilities in detection of

crime, however desirable in themselves if abstractedly considered.^5

Thus ended Peel's first attempt at metropolitan police reform. Although
still convinced the country needed 'a vigorous preventive police, consistent
with the free principles of our free constitution', Peel turned his attention to
improving law enforcement from his position as Home Secretary.^6 He
focused on improving that portion of the police of the metropolis directly
under Home Office control. For example, Peel added a day patrol to the
Dismounted Bow Street Patrol to patrol certain sectors during daylight. The
Times approved and commented that the day police 'promises to be of very
essential service in protecting the public from those daring outrages and
depredations which have lately become so prevalent'.^7