Why 1829? 147The Hackney petition fell on deaf ears in 1829.
The advantages of local knowledge, controllable cost, and more immediate
accountability no longer were enough to tip the scales in favour of decen-
tralized policing when weighed against the potential for broader, more
efficient protection promised by centralization. Peel had done his work
well and brought in his reform at just the right time. Many of those who,
in previous years, supported locally controlled policing had become disillu-
sioned with parish government, as its costs to ratepayers and evidence of
corruption and questionable management surfaced. The conduct of police
magistrates seemed to prove that they were not necessarily to be trusted
either. The old argument that local authorities were more easily held account-
able to taxpayers, as the gentlemen of Hackney had reasoned, was severely
undercut. In addition, some vestries and paving commissions, sensitive
perhaps to the campaigns that impugned the value of their services, seemed
happy to give up a troublesome burden. Most vestrymen did not realize how
much they had given up until it was too late. By the time the voice of
parochial opposition came to be heard, the Metropolitan Police had replaced
London's parish watchmen.