82 Before the Bobbies
to 1692 and the reign of William III. Parochial rewards show that watch
authorities were aware of the objections to rewards. Local rewards were
offered for the apprehension or committal of a suspected felon, not convic-
tion, although in St James, the vestiy did offer an additional two guineas on
conviction. Most parish rewards were available only to the personnel of the
night watch.^164
Reformers questioned how effective rewards were. It is possible that the
rewards offered to watchmen were less liable to abuse than the statutory
rewards because their distribution was to encourage attention to normal
duties but there were problems. In 1784 the St Marylebone watch committee
established rewards for the indictment of felons, available only to the con-
stables, beadles, sergeants, and watchmen. '1\vo years later, the watch com-
mittee discovered
large Sums of Money had been received by several of their Servants from
the Public over and above the rewards paid by the Parish and that the
intention of the Board was only to give the same to such Persons who
should not be entitled to any Rewards from the Public, or should fail in the
Conviction of Offenders.They decided 'such [parish] Rewards are to be paid only when no reward is
paid by the Public upon Conviction'.^165 In St Andrew, Holbom, and
St George-the-Martyr the vestiy increased wages instead of paying out
annual rewards for diligence because the rewards had not achieved the
hoped-for results.^166 Still, the belief in rewards as encouraging the preven-
tion and detection of crime remained strong.
Rewards, double shifts, patrols, fine-tuning smaller details - all of these
were utilized by watch authorities to improve street policing. The best
indication of changing attitudes and expectations towards the night watch
is that in several parishes watch authorities told their men that if any
robberies occurred, the watchmen were deemed to have failed to do their
duty and would suffer accordingly. In 1794, the St Marylebone watch com-
mittee resolved unanimously, 'that in case any Robbery be committed within
this Parish, the Watchman in whose Walk the same shall happen be abso-
lutely discharged'. Authorities in the Clink, Holbom and Shoreditch made
similar orders.^167 Here was a Benthamite view of administrative respons-
ibility.^168
Yet these parish officials were compelled to recognize that there were
limits to prevention. A few months later, the St Marylebone watch commit-
tee conceded: 'many Robberies are committed within this Parish without
the possible knowledge of the Watchmen .. .'. The above order was
rescinded.^169 Local authorities, like speculative reformers, developed higher
standards and expectations for the night watch than had prevailed earlier in
the century. Unlike the speculative reformers, however, vestrymen and watch