This system of officers of the law continued until the on set of industrial revolution, when modernity began to gather speed. This part of the essay is about the social concerns in other words the, “backdrop”, associated with the establishment of the “new police”. In the eighteenth century these rudimentary protectors of the law where insufficient to deal with the changes of society that brought on by the industrial revolution in addition industrilisation brought large numbers of migrants into urban areas hence urbanisation. They couldn’t deal with the burgeoning, urban centers for example, Manchester (Davis et al 1998) “Manchester grew from a place of 25,000 to a city of a quarter of a million in about 70 years”, these rudimentary officers couldn’t deal with population expansion of that magnitude. A new system had to be put in place, no where exemplifies the problem of population expansion greater then London, and this is why the history of policing starts in London. London grew astronomically, (Maguire et al 2002), “It was the largest city in Europe, comprising both the cities of London and Westminster, and spreading out into the counties of Middlesex, Surrey and Kent. It was a booming commercial centre as well as the seat of government. Contemporaries viewed it with pride for its obvious prosperity”. Furthermore it was one of the first cities over a million people in the world and clearly it was a place thriving with crime. Eighteenth century England was characterised by increasing concerns about crime, no where exemplifies the problem of crime better then London. As prosperity and property grew so did its population, it doubled during the eighteenth century over a million and so to levels of crime and disorder, this was a major social concern. This was due to, (McLaughlin et al 2001) “teeming slums within London’s sprawl, and it was these that provoked fears of crime and disorder”. By the middle decades of eighteenth century the city became synonymous with images of crime and deviance. (Newburn 2003), “by the mid to late eighteenth century, crime and disorder was perceived to pose a threat to social stability. The reason why crime was increasing is because, the poor were seen as promiscuous, ungodly and deprived, (McLaughlin et al 2001) “crime was increasing and that the inhabitants of the poorer districts preferred idleness, with occasional expeditions to plunder to fulfill their desire for luxury, rather than an honest, frugal existence based on the proceeds of hard work”.
Moreover, as well as the problems with the, increase of crime there were also, social concerns with the problems with alcohol and debauchery. This is because in 1690s Gin, Spirit arrived to England from Holland. 1 in 4 houses in Britain was a gin shop, therefore there was gin problems associated with that there was debauchery spilling out from gin shops to the streets of London. 28 millions of gallons of spirit was consumed a year in England. Alcohol was an immense problem, through the eighteenth century and nineteenth century. The problem of alcohol and gin was controlled to an extent. However there was another major increasing social concern.
Rioting was a common place, this was due to many reasons such as, some motivated by economic demands such as cheap food, better wages, and job security. (Rawlings 1999) “There were demonstrations against the Corn Law Bill 1815, a measure which, it was believed, would keep food prices high, in 1816 agricultural workers in East Anglia rose up in the “Bread and Blood” riots”. Other riots were motivated by political reforms, one famous example of rioting that took place on the streets on London was the, “Gordon riots”. The Gordon riots were a religious uprising in against the, “”, (BBC History) “In 1778, parliament had passed the Relief Act which repealed harsh anti-Catholic legislation from the seventeenth century. In June 1780, violent anti-Catholic riots broke out in London as Lord George Gordon marched on parliament to present a petition requesting the repeal of the Relief Act and a return to Catholic repression. Chapels, known Catholic houses, prisons, public buildings and even Catholics in the street were attacked. There were running battles between the demonstrators and the authorities. It took the government and London authorities ten days to restore order in the capital. By that time, 12,000 troops had been deployed and over 700 had been killed”. In addition the Gordon riots gave the impression of increasing lawlessness.
The French revolution in 1789 sent a huge signal to the British aristocracy about what rioting can achieve. The British aristocracy saw that rioting in France 1789 was rioting that became a revolution and fundamentally changed the structural hierarchy of France. This alerted the British ruling class to dangers associated to the wide spread rioting. They realised if action where not taken to control the problem of sustained rioting the same thing could happen in England. There was urgency amongst parliament and the ruling class to solve, the problem of the increase of crime and disorder which was a threat to social stability, the problem of alcohol and debauchery that spilled out on to the streets of London from gin shops and ale houses, the problem of rioting that eventually if actions where not taken to control it, may have the same impact as the French revolution movement, amongst many other social concerns. Parliament and the ruling class needed something to be done. They needed a new system of Policing because there where problems with the old system for example, some Parish constables where inefficient and reluctant to act.
The original response for the problem of alcohol and rioting was to improve the original keepers of the law by recruiting more patrol men. These patrol men where employed to patrol the streets and to patrol the gates, for example bishops gate in London, to provide access to people that paid there fees that had businesses in the city. Another response was to have a more organised set of Parish magistrates, one sort of group that emerged from this was a group called the bow street runners, established by Henry Fielding and his blind half-brother Sir John Fielding.
The magistrate’s office was based in Bow Street and (Maguire et al 2002) “became a model of how the trading justice might function”. The Bow Street runners were professional thief-takers who traveled all over the country in search of criminals and profited from rewards for bringing in offenders to justice. (Met history) “The Bow Street Runners were the earliest form of detective force operating from the courts to enforce the decisions of magistrates”. The original eight Bow Street Runners were London's first band of constable and where successful to an extent in controlling crime in London. However they were corrupt for example, taking money from organised crime. Also they were random and often chaotic.
(Met History) “The impotence of the law-enforcement machinery was a serious menace”. Conditions became intolerable. There where a greater need for more organisation and more structure. It was around this time that proposals started to emerge for a co-coordinated and organised police service this led to the formation of the “New Police”.
It begins by the Metropolitan Police the first, and remains the largest and best known of the constabularies. In 1822 Sir Robert Peel became Home secretary. In introducing the Metropolitan Police Bill in April 1829, Peel used criminal statistics to demonstrate that crime was rising, and in September 1829 the Metropolitan Police act was passed and set up the Metropolitan Police force, the first and only police force in the world. This is when the first British Police systematically constables took the streets of London and initially consisted of 1,000 officers controlled from No. 4 Whitehall Place and there first duty was the prevention of crime. The reason why the first Police force was created in London was because London was seen as a test case, largely there was lots of money, it was the center of British trade where the very powerful and elite lived and worked and consequently there was a need for protection a need to insure these peoples lives and property was protected. Other parts of England and Wales began to see, the Metropolitan Police being successful in quelling the problem of crime, rioting, debauchery, alcohol and as this was an “urban phenomenon”, there was a demand for organised police else where in the country. The Metropolitan Police model was extended to other provinces by two key acts. The Municipal Corporations Act 1835, (Mawby 1999) “thus allowed large boroughs to establish their own paid police forces under the control of Watch Committees comprised of local councilors and magistrates”. Then followed by the County Police act 1839, (Mawby 1999) “that allowed counties to establish police forces”. By 1860 there where 226 Police forces in England and Wales, these where more organised, structured hieratical police forces then the original keepers of the law such as the Parish magistrates, bow street patrols and etc, this was also known as the, “rise of the new police”.
The “new police”, is a term first used in the 1850s and 1860s to describe these new police forces around England and Wales whom were very successful in quelling the problem of crime, rioting and debauchery from the model first established by the Metropolitan Police. The role of the new police was crime prevention the new police is where the history of modern policing as we know it today, began to gather momentum and take hold.
However there were many institutional problems associated with the, “rise of the new police”. This part of the essay is about the institutional problems associated with the, “new police”.
The institutional problems associated with the new police were:
Accountability, as the new police grew in numbers and strength there was constant concern about who was controlling the police. People where skeptical about government agencies interfering in peoples affairs, people thought, “Who gave them the right to do what they did?” One example of this is illustrated in the fact that there’s a separate police force in the financial center in the City of London even to this day. The very powerful and elite men that worked in the financial center of London didn’t like government agencies interfering in there affairs. They didn’t want the Metropolitan police to have jurisdiction over the financial center. So the notion of accountability dubbed the British forces in early stages. Also the metropolitan police reported directly to the government at Whitehall. Other forces had different influences and reported to the local authority such as parish magistrates, tax raising authority, this is a problematic notion of accountability. The tax raising authority would raise tax, and spend some of this money on the police for example, police station, uniforms and etc, therefore there was a relationship between the tax gathering organisation and police, this meant there was a great deal of resentment between the police and the public because people disliked the tax gathering organisation. People thought these police that are patrolling the streets worked for the tax raising organistaion so all the work and arrests that the police made were done in benefit of the tax raising organisation.
Rationalisation, there were 226 police forces in England and Wales which where too many. Some of these forces where very small even though they had structure, uniform and badges they would only consist of around a dozen men for example, rural areas such as East Anglia and border counties. Therefore rationalisation needed to take place to make sure these forces had some strength for example, a dozen men would not be able to take control of riot by farmers on the Welsh borders, they needed more man power, this was done by abolishing smaller forces by combining them. This is when the history of the emergence of the police begins. From 226 police forces in England and Wales after they were rationalised there were only 131 police forces by the mid twentieth century.
Efficiency, due to the changes in crime, as crimes were getting more organised and sophisticated the police faced pressures on efficiency to keep up with these changes in crime. In addition some police forces in England and Wales were not as efficient and sophisticated to an extent as others, for example, was inefficient compared to the Metropolitan Police.
Consistency, the police forces in England and Wales were not consistent. There where different model of policing around the country, based upon the metropolitan police model but with there own approaches to policing communities, this was understandable because policing one part of the country cannot be as same as policing another for example, policing central London will not be as same as policing rural Cornwall but which also meant punishment of a crime will not always be same and consistent around the country. However this meant the Police forces in England and Wales needed to be standardised. The key rationalising measure was the County and Borough police act (1856). This made it obligatory for all counties to set up uniform, bureaucratic and hieratical police forces. It made it mandatory for police forces to establish a systematic rationalised procedures and practices. Also a national policing inspectorate was set up in 1856.
This allowed the police to be inspected, controlled and rationalised. In addition the police forces needed a lot of bills and legislations to make sure they functioned properly, legitimately and consistently around the country.
County and Borough police act (1856), even though there where obvious advantages with this act however this legislation allows us to see the forces of modernity really fighting in terms of the way we understand modern policing. Modernity’s attempts to rationalise, to govern, to exert control over populous is really seen in this legislation. This was why the public were very skeptical and didn’t like this legislation.
Another institutional problem was espionage and spy scares. Briton was always engaged in war, there was a concern in England and Wales that there were spies at large. This concern was a rational concern that cross cut regional boundaries because this was a national threat. There was a need for a more systematic police force that can put aside its local and regional differences and work against this national threat. This was a major threat right up to the First World War, (Maguire 2002), “the spy scares before the war had brought the provincial police forces into close contact with the embryonic secret service. The war itself strengthened these developments as the police were ordered first to watch out for German spies and saboteurs, then for subversives who had taken German gold to undermine the war effort”. The government passed the, emergency powers act (1919). This began a new era of Home Office control over the police, this therefore meant instead of police forces around the country being under the influence of the local lords, local politician, local tax raising organisation, because of the emergency powers act (1919), the Home Office now exert control over the police. Police forces and constabularies reported directly to the Home Office this remains the case even to this day, this brought a more centralised and coordinated police force in England and Wales.
However this brought another criticism and institutional problem. This is the idea that the police are agents of the government. People thought of the police as carrying out governments will. One example is the, “the miner’ strike in the 1980s”, they were employed to smash mining unions at the behest of Margaret Thatcher’s conservative government. Many Police officers would not have agreed with the policies because they had to live in those communities and relied on the success of the mining community. However they were in a bloody battle with the miners. This was a historic moment in British history, it capsulated a criticism endured by the Police as an institution and organisation since the 1919 right through to the present day.
In conclusion, this essay illustrates how the police in England and Wales have risen from the rudimentary officers of the law, to the rise of the new police, due to the social concerns in the eighteenth and nineteenth century of the increase of crime, the problem of alcohol, debauchery, rioting and etc. The rise of the new police has been a success because in a short period of time British policing leads the world in its structures and its ethos and successfully transforming urban centers by controlling and decreasing crime, alcoholism, debauchery, rioting and etc, to reasonably more secure and safe, and the police force we see today in England and Wales is the direct descended. Even though there have been institutional problems associated with the new police, modern police are much better due to the solving of these institutional problems.
Bibliography
Accessed 2005
Coleman. C and Norris. C (2000). Introduction Criminology, Willan Publishing
Mawby. R (1999). Policing Across The World, UCL Press Limited
Davis. M, Croall. H and Tyrer. J (1998). Criminal Justice, Second Edition, Pearson Education Limited
Maguire. M, Morgan. R and Reiner R (2002). The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Third Edition, Oxford University Press
McLaughlin. E and Muncie. J (2001) Controlling Crime, Second Edition, Sage Publications LTD, The Open University
Newburn. T (2003) Crime & Criminal Justice Policy, Second Edition, Pearson Education Limited
Rawlings. P (1999) Crime and Power: A History of Criminal Justice 1688 – 1998, Addison Wesley Longman Limited
