50 Before the Bobbies
constables so only one half were new to the job; erect signs over the doors of
constables so the public could find them when needed. Fielding argued for
the use of two shifts of watchmen, 'a whole Night's Duty being too hard'.
Sayer recommended the city be divided up into 60 divisions and each beadle
(renamed 'ward officer') be responsible for keeping vagrants off the streets
of his division and supervising the watch. Both urged the more effectual
discipline of negligent officers.^27 The most drastic of Fielding's recommenda-
tions concerned who would have jurisdiction over night watch. Sir John
proposed that parish watch committees or vestries continue to collect the
watch rate and act as paymasters but that all the decisions on how that
money would be spent would be made by a committee of magistrates, taken
from the Westminster bench of justices, of which he, Fielding, was chair-
man.28
The parliamentary committee endorsed virtually all of the recommenda-
tions made by Fielding, Sayer, and Rainsforth, stating that 'another Method
for appointing' watchmen should be found and that 'their Duty be made
general and that they should be put under One general Direction [Emphasis
added]'. In the Commons debate, however, the resolutions on the night
watch attracted no attention. Resolutions concerning receiving stolen goods
and transportation were postponed. And MPs did not find ballad singers as
much a threat to public safety as did Sir John Fielding. 'The Resolution, that
ballad singers were a great cause of the increase of robbers ... was so ri-
diculous, that the Clerk could not read it for laughing; indeed the whole
House joined him, and after some droll defence of them, as itinerant Muses,
etc. the Resolution was postponed.'^29 Only one resolution became law in
1770, an act that allowed receivers of stolen property to be convicted as the
principal offender and sentenced to 14 years' transportation.^30
Why Parliament rejected its committee's recommendations is not clear. It
is possible that the powerful, aristocratic vestries of Westminster, such as
Hanover Square and Piccadilly, were not eager to relinquish control over
their watch funds or watchmen. Other parishes, such as St Martin-in-the-
Fields and St Clement Danes, were dominated by tradesmen and others of
middling rank, with a long tradition of anti-Court politics.^31 This distrust of
the central government and its officials was only enhanced by the events
surrounding John WJ.lkes.^32 The tradesmen and artisans of Westminster, who
supported Wilkes, would not look kindly on Sir John Fielding's suggestions
that law enforcement be managed by a court-appointed body. The Wilkites
were strong supporters of independent, local law enforcement.^33 Nothing
more was heard from Parliament on the subject of night watch reform for
two years.
When Parliament examined the Westminster night watch again in 1772,
the approach to reform was distinctly different. Information and cooperation
was sought from the parishes. The legislation that finally emerged from this