Night Watch to Police, 1811-28 121amateur and professional. A key reason why this continued was the issue of
cost. Amateurs still patrolled the streets because it was cheaper for the
parish, or sometimes out of moral zeal. In Shoreditch, a minority faction
within the vestry felt deputy constables were not enforcing Sabbath laws
rigorously enough. 1\vo Shoreditch constables who served in their own
right testified before the 1818 Police Committee that they were shocked to
find respectable tradesmen playing cards and dominoes at pubs in the
evenings and on Sundays. A churchwarden, on the other hand, testified
that the parish had taken great care to make sure that only reliable and
respectable men were accepted as substitutes.^97 Appointing residents as
constable who would then pay for a substitute meant that the cost of hiring
the deputy fell on those individuals, not the parish and the parish rates.
Parishes could have cheap professional policing and they had constables
who, hired from year to year, became familiar with the job and reasonably
efficient at carrying it out.^98
The best evidence for the trend towards professionalization at the parish
level was the expansion of the practice of swearing in as special constables
those who were already doing the work of peace-keeping. Developed in the
eighteenth century, the practice became much more widespread. In St Mary-
lebone, starting in 1813, more watch personnel were made constables until
1822, when the vestry obtained a local act that allowed it to swear in all of
the men employed on the watch as constables. By 1828 St Marylebone thus
had 260 professional constables policing its streets.^99 Swearing in as
constables those already hired to police the streets was a convenience.
Constables thus were men whose character and capabilities were already
known to the watch authorities. A constable's authority often enhanced the
ability of the watchmen and patrols to perform their duties. Poorer parishes
or areas like Ththill Fields, Westminster, a slum region in the parishes of
St John and St Margaret, could have professional policing without having to
hire additional officers.^100 Apart from being convenient and economical,
having watch personnel act as constables meant watch committees had a
point of leverage from which they could more effectively discipline negligent
or corrupt men. This enhanced the accountability of constables to the watch
authorities.
Accountability, however, was an issue that crossed jurisdictional lines,
evident in Clerkenwell in 1827 when the Hatton Garden police magistrates
refused to swear in the superintendents and watchhouse keepers employed
by the paving commissioners of StJames, Clerkenwell as constables. Why the
magistrates refused is not clear but the commissioners sought a legal opinion
on the relative status of constables and watchmen. Their unnamed legal
advisor traced the history of the status of constables and watchmen from
medieval statutes through the history of the Paving Commission and reached
three conclusions. First, Clerkenwell's constables and watchmen