The creation of the professional police, just like that of the prison, has been surrounded by many controversial debates. We all take a concept of the police for granted; after all, the origins of the office of constable date back to a Saxon and Norman era, and it would be difficult to imagine today’s Britain without the police. However, when we contemplate the emergence of the organised police force, there is no universal truth behind it. This paper aims to reveal, and analyse the mechanism that, potentially, led to the birth of, what came to be known as the “New Police”.
It would not be possible to fully comprehend the mechanism that led to the development of professional police forces without briefly discussing the social context. It is worth to notice that although from the fifteenth century to the ‘Glorious Revolution’ in 1688 England was a country of the massive political instability, the changes that occurred did not involve any standing army or police force. Criminal law enforcement had, to some degree, been left to the justices of peace, who on many occasions, used their influence in the neighbourhood, and managed to settle disputes between citizens without invoking law. The justices of the peace were appointed by the Crown and they exercised authority over the parish constables. Whilst they enjoyed quite a favourable attention, the same cannot be said about the parish constables. However, as Newburn argues, although portrayed by Shakespeare as “incompetent, lazy and ignorant”, we need to remember that their office was unpaid, and they often found themselves in conflict, torn between their duties, and maintaining a good relationship with the community of people who were their neighbours. Also, Kent (1986), in her very detailed study of the constable of that period, praised them very highly for their “time, effort, and even financial sacrifice that was expected and so often given”. Jones argues that the argument of inefficacy was just one of many tools used by the reformers, to justify their pressure for professional policing.
By the beginning of the eighteenth century England had witnessed the final breakdown of the feudal system. Industrial Revolution resulted in birth of an urban society, where crime and disorder went virtually unchecked. Michael S.Pike refers to streets of London as “swarming with armed gangs, thieves and pickpockets. (…) robberies increased at an alarming rate”. It is argued that the principles of law and order experienced a complete breakdown. The increase in trade and commerce progressed, and as the turmoil, which initiated the French Revolution continued, both the aristocracy and the emerging middle class of traders had felt their properties and status endangered. Hay argues that, although it is difficult to underpin the most potent influences behind birth of the centralised police, the 1780 Gordon Riots in London, is thought to be one of them. Jones thinks it was unlikely that they represented any danger, although they might have reinforced fears of the more affluent members of society. Neither the watchmen not the constables were thought to be able to deal with the problems of the emerging, more advanced social order. Some considered them corrupted and the term “trading justices” was often used to describe their interest in fees rather than crime control. Sir Radzinowicz writes in The Growth of Crime: The International Experience: “Like most people I would rather live in a world with no police”control”, and despite the growing urban unrest, and the appearance of the notion of “dangerous classes”, most people in the eighteenth century seemed to share his opinion. Radzinowicz further argues that until 1732 “the word “police” was not even a part of the English vocabulary. Of course, there were those who thought that the need for reform was necessary and inevitable. When in 1748 Henry Fielding was appointed Chief Magistrate at Bow Street he wrote:
