Westminster, 1720-39^17the Nightly Watch etc.'. They appointed a committee to work out the details
and to contact other parishes.^61
St James's, Piccadilly readily agreed to support the bill. A committee
appointed to work with Hanover Square included the Bishop of Bristol, the
Earl of Egmont, and Viscount Palmerston.^62 The joint committees met on 13
February 1735; that from Hanover Square was chaired by Lord JYrconnel.
They agreed that the proposed bill 'would be for the publick Advantage and
Security of the City and Liberty of Westminster ... '. The joint committee
directed the vestry clerks of both parishes to deliver copies of the bill and the
supporting resolutions to the churchwardens or vestry clerk of the other
parishes of Westminster, asking for their support.^63 There was almost no
response from the other parishes. The only parish to show any interest was
that of StJohn the Evangelist. When it was proposed that an application be
made to Parliament for a night watch bill for St George's, St James's, and St
John's only, however, the delegation from StJohn's backed out. The repres-
entatives forSt John's reported to its vestry
they thought it not prudent to Joyn in such an application without ye
Concurrence of the other parishes within the City and Liberty of West-
minster ... and likewise on Account of the Expence which must necessarily
attend such an Application to parliament [sic], which Your Committee
Apprehend this parish very unable to bear.^64
In spite of the lack of neighbourly support, St James's and St George's
went ahead. In a February 1735 petition to Commons, they pointed out the
necessity of a strong and well-regulated night watch because of the increased
'Burglaries, Robberies, and other Outrages and Disorders ... '. Like the
Burgesses, the vestrymen of StJames's and StGeorge's noted that no statute
provided clear authority to establish, regulate, or, more importantly, finance
an adequate night watch. The petition further complained that the beadles
appointed by the Court of Burgesses, 'have been of great Charge and little
Use'. They had failed to keep beggars off the streets, 'to the great Annoyance
of Passengers, and Reproach of our Laws and Government ... '. Therefore,
the petitioners asked that a bill might be brought in 'for the better regulating
the Nightly Watch and Beadles within the said 1\vo Parishes of St. James,
Westminster and St. George, Hanover Square.' The petition was referred to a
committee, chaired by Lord JYrconnel.^65
Lord JYrconnel presented the committee's report on 18 March. It gives a
glimpse of the night watch system as administered by the Court of Burgesses.
Complaints included the frequency of robberies (especially of lead from
houses) and the lack of sufficient watchmen. A Major Foubert testified he
asked a watchman:
The reason of the Frequency of Robberies, and why he did not prevent
them? the Watchman answered, His Walk being so large, it was