The War ~an, 1793-1815 87country was limited, however, to the parishes of St George-in-the-East, St
John, Wapping, and St Paul, Shadwell_ll.
The most enthusiastic response from London's volunteers came in 1803,
when the war resumed after the brief respite provided by the Peace of
Amiens. Invasion again appeared imminent and the government called for
volunteers.^22 The City mustered a force of 10 000 volunteers while Middlesex
and Surrey contributed another 17000.^23 In Shoreditch, the vestry resolved
'it [is] highly proper at this Important Crisis That an Association should be
formed of peace officers or Special Constables'. It distributed 4000 handbills
announcing the formation of the Association, especially encouraging
'respectable Housekeepers' to be sworn in as special constables. The Shore-
ditch volunteers, however did not bear arms and the vestry insisted that 'the
service of the Members be confined to the County of Middlesex'.^24
The threat of invasion faded and the volunteers proved to be a weak prop
against domestic threats. John Bohstedt argues that as riot police, 'the
Volunteers were a bad bargain' and quotes the revealing analysis of Lord
Oifford:
An unfortunate distinction had taken place in the· minds of many Volunt-
eers. They fancy they have complied with their oath of allegiance when
they declare that they will fight for their King and Country against the
Common Enemy, but think they have a right to withhold their assistance
when called upon to support the Civil Magistrates in the execution of what
they disapprove -if Men in arms are permitted to reason on the propriety
of the Laws our boasted Liberty is at an End.^25This proved true in London as well when the activities of army recruiting
agents, known as 'crim~', and balloting for the militia touched off a series of
riots in August 1794. The main burden of controlling this riot fell on the
Horse Guards and other regular troops and local magistrates and con-
stables.27 The government had no real leverage over volunteers if they
refused to take on police duties. J.E. Cookson notes:
The authorities turned to volunteering in the necessity of the hour, pre-
pared to run the risk of an armed populace; but they soon discovered they
had created neither an efficient fighting force nor something satisfactorily
under their control. 'The general armament', once undertaken in earnest,
exposes as well as crime and disorder does the limited social authority of
the ruling class, effective up to the point where it did not conflict with
popular conceptions offairness and social obligation.^28The similarity to experiences of local law enforcement agencies is striking.
The overlap in purpose and personnel between Loyal Associations and
Volunteers also included a third group, the Society for the Suppression of
Vice. Founded in 1802, its goal was to suppress