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

172 Notes

59. CJ, vol. XXII, p. 273.


60. StGeorge, Hanover Square, VM, 11 March 1733134; StJames, Piccadilly, VM,
    9 March 1733134; CJ, vol. XXII, pp. 27~, 278.


61. StGeorge, Hanover Square, VM, 6 Feb. 1734/35.


62. StJames, Picadilly, VM, 12 Feb. 1734/35.


63. St George, Hanover Square, VM, 25 Feb. 1734/35.


64. StJohn the Evangelist, Westminster, VM, 17 and 26 Feb. 1734/35. StJohn's
    wu formed out of St Margaret's u a separate parish in 1724, but for purposes
    of civil government, it was still united with St Margaret's. The functions of local
    government were carried out by a joint vestry representing both parishes. See
    Westminster City Council Report, p. 9.


65. CJ, vol XXII, p. 396.


66. CJ, vol. XXII, pp. 419-20.


67. CJ, vol. XXII, p. 420.


68. CJ, vol. XXII, pp. 435-6.


69. CJ, vol. XXII, pp. 451, 466, 469, 473, 475, 493; U, vol. XXIV, pp. 523, 527-9,


70. Lord l}'rconnel chaired the committee that examined the bill when it
    received its second reading.


71. St Martin-in-the-Fields, VM, 9 Jan. 1735/36. See also St Margaret, Westmin-
    ster, VM, 14 Feb. 1735/36 and St Anne, Soho, VM, 24 Feb. 1735/36.


72. CJ, vol. XXII, pp. 543, 565, 588-9, 594, 651, 704.


73. See 9 George II. c.8 (St Martin). See also 8 George II. c.15 (St James and
    StGeorge), 9 George II. c.13 (StPaul), 9George II. c.14 (StAnne), 9 George II.
    c.17 (St Margaret and StJohn) and Westminster City Council Report, pp. 33-6.


74. See 9 George II. c.8, 8 George II. c.15, 9 George II. c.13, 9 George II. c.14, 9
    George II. c.17 and Westminster City Council Report, pp. 33-6.


75. The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, no. 118, 20 March 1734/35, p. 2.


76. See Beattie, Crime and the Courts, Chap. 5 and D. Hay, 'War, Dearth and Theft
    in the Eighteenth Century: The Record of the English Courts', Past and Present
    95 (1982), pp. 117-60.


77. Beattie, Crime and the Courts, pp.206-8, 216. See also Sharpe, Crime in Early
    Modem England, pp. 111-14.


78. Beattie, Crime and the Courts, p. 216, Sharpe, Crime in Early Modern Eng/llnd,
    pp. 111-13; G. Howson, Thief-Taker GeneraL· The Rise and FaU of Jonathan Wdd
    (Hutchinson, 1970).


79. EA Wrigley, ~ Simple Model of London's Importance in Changing
    English Society and Economy 1650-1750', Past and Present, 37 (1967), p. 47;
    P. King, 'Decision-Makers and Decision-Making in the English Criminal Law,
    1750-1800', The Historical Jouma/21 (1984), pp. 34-42. See also Beattie, Crime
    and the Courts, pp. 244-5.


80. The London Daily Post and General Advertiser, no. 118, 20 March 1734135,
    p. 2.


81. For a fuUer account of the gin craze, see George, London Life, pp. 27-43. See
    also Rude, Hanoverian London, pp. 90-93 and P. Oark, 'The "Mother Gin"
    Controversy in the Early Eighteenth Century', Transactions of the Royal Histor-
    ical Society, 5th ser., 38 (1988), p. 83.


82. Shoemaker, Prosecution and Punishment, pp. 289-310.


83. R.B. Shoemaker, 'The London "Mob" in the Early Eighteenth Century',
    Journal of British Studies 26 (July 1987), pp. 273-304; Rogers, Whigs and Cities,
    esp. ch. 10.


84. Rogers, Whigs and Cities, p. 388.


85. George, London Life, pp. 82-3; CJ, vol. XXII, p. 902.