56 Before the Bobbies
assaulting a watchman was not made a felony, a paragraph was inserted in
the final version that stipulated:
if any Person or Persons shall assault or resist any Watchman whilst in the
Execution of his Office, or shall promote or encourage the same; every
such Person shall, for every such Offence, forfeit and pay any Sum not
exceeding Five Pounds.^65Other than these and some other minor changes, the Westminster Night
Watch Bill that was passed in May was the same as Whitworth's published
draft.^66 The Piccadilly vestry clerks gave credit to a Mr Speed, a clerk of the
House of Commons, who took 'great pains and spent much Time in and
about the conducting of the Act of Parliament lately passed for the better
Regulation of the Nightly Watch'.^67
The Act 'for the Better Regulation of the Nightly Watch and Beadles
within the City and Liberty of Westminster, and Parts adjacent' was imple-
mented in the autumn of 1774.^68 This was the last major statutory landmark
in the development of the night watch system in Westminster until the
Metropolitan Police Act of 1829. The emphasis, whether in the preambles
to Acts of Parliament or in the rules and regulations issued by parish vestries
and watch committees, was on the preventive function of the night watch.
This function was a limited one. Watchmen were not expected to be detect-
ives, investigating crimes once they had occurred in the expectation of
discovering the guilty party or parties, nor were they expected to act as riot
police. The Act passed only after Sir Charles Whitworth carefully solicited
the support of powerful vestries, St George, Hanover Square for example,
and adopted their suggestions. This was not a reform forced on local author-
ities from the top down but a cooperative effort between local officials and
Parliament. Whitworth's leadership from within the Commons indicates that
it was becoming increasingly acceptable for the central government to initi-
ate change in law enforcement, especially for London.
The central government's involvement in the policing of greater London
was clearly evident by the 1770s. However, because law enforcement was still
seen as primarily a local concern, the kinds of changes the king's ministers
could successfully implement were dependent on what London's magistrates,
parish vestries, and other local authorities were willing to accept. Thus, the
direction of night watch reform was not from the top down but was more
circular and even lateral. Parliamentary legislation applied reforms success-
ful in one parish to many others; parishes adopted innovations made by their
neighbours. The overlap in personnel between central and local government
made this kind of exchange even more likely. The result was a significant
degree of cooperation and uniformity in parochial law enforcement, parti-
cularly in the West End. We see this in both the work of the Fieldings and in
the Westminster Night Watch Act of 1774. In the case of the latter, parish