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

(Jacob Rumans) #1

178 Notes



  1. CJ, vol. XL, p. 616.

  2. Beattie, Crime and the Courts, pp. 218-22.

  3. Pawson, Transport and Economy, pp. 254-5.


4 COLLABORATION, 1750-74



  1. For the historiography, see C. Emsley, The English Police: A Political and Social
    History (New York: StMartin's Press, 1991).

  2. J. Styles, 'Sir John Fielding and the Problem of Criminal Investigation in
    Eighteenth-Century England', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 33
    (1983), p. 149.

  3. Beattie, Crime and the Courts, p. 521.

  4. For the complete membership, see CJ, vol. XXVI, pp. 27, 39, 155, and 158.
    There has been some discussion about the extent to which Henry Fielding was
    involved in the work of this committee. See, for example, Radzinowicz, History,
    vol. II, p. 420. Malvin R. Zirker, Jr argues strongly that Fielding's role in the
    criminal law reform (as opposed to police reform) has been overrated. He
    states: 'In the first place both the Committee's resolutions and Fielding's
    pamphlet [An Enquiry in the Causes of the Late Increase in Robbers] express
    views which, taken individually, were commonplaces of the time, and it is rash
    to ascribe an influence to Fielding for ideas that had been widespread for a
    hundred years or more before he wrote. Second, it is presumptuous to assume
    that a Committee which included such notable legislators and reformers as Pitt,
    Charles Townshend, Lyttleton, Sir Dudley Ryder and General Oglethorpe
    should look to a Bow Street magistrate for guidance in a matter which its
    members were competent to handle themselves.' See Zirker, 'Fielding and
    Reform in the 1750's', Studies in English Literature 7 (1967), p. 462. For a
    similar view see H. Armory, 'Henry Fielding and the Criminal Legislation of
    1751-52', Philological Quarterly 50 (1971), p. 189.

  5. The initial resolutions were reported to the House of Commons on 1 April
    1751, with additions made on 23 April and 13 June. See CJ, vol. XXVI, pp.
    159-M, 190, 289.

  6. For fuller detail, see my 'Night Watch', pp. 109-18.

  7. CJ, vol. XXVI, pp. 219, 236, 266, 268, 270, 283, 286, 289. See also Beattie,
    Crime and the Courts, p. 522.

  8. CJ, vol. XXVII, p. 327; StJames, Piccadilly, VM, 26 Jan. 1754, 27 Jan. 1755 and
    St Anne, Soho, VM, 20 Nov. 1755 and 20 April1756.

  9. 29 Geo.II c.25; CJ, vol. XXVII, pp. 587-8. See also House of Commons
    Sessional Papers of the Eighteenth Century, ed. S. Lambert, (Wilmington, DE:
    Scholarly Resources Inc., 1975), vol. 10, p. 57.

  10. St Margaret and StJohn, Westminster, Joint VM, 27 Feb. 1756.

  11. Radzinowicz, History, vol. III, p. 54.

  12. Radzinowicz, History, vol. II, pp. 32Cr-32; J. Langbein, 'Shaping the Eighteenth-
    Century Trial: A View from the Ryder Sources', University of Chicago Law
    Review 50 (1983), pp. 110-14; and R. Paley, 'Thief-takers in London in the
    Age of the McDaniel Gang, c. 1745-1754', in Policing and Prosecution in Britain
    1750-1859, ed. Hay and Snyder, pp. 301-41.

  13. H. Fielding, An Enquiry into the Causes of the Late Increase of Robbers, Etc.
    (1751 ), p. 116.

Free download pdf