Development of Professional Policing In Nineteenth Century England - Essay Example

Development of Professional Policing 09 February 2007 Development of Professional Policing In Nineteenth Century England: The Arguments For and Against its Emergence Introduction The development of Professional Policing in England had its defining moments in the nineteenth century as it bore witness to the tumultuous upheavals that marked the transition from the Old Police to the New Police. The former refers to a style of policing, which is nowadays generally considered archaic and woefully inadequate. It was an amateurish and highly localized system that was comprised of parish constables and watchmen who served as the watchdogs for their community. The latter term refers to a more professional style of policing that served as the fore - runner of professional policing and eventually became the foundation on which modern policing as we know it was built. The emphasis here was on training and skills needed to prevent crime and maintain order. The journey was a long and arduous one for professional policing as its proponents and detractors fought tooth and nail to promote or prevent its development. The transition phase was a turbulent one as the debate raged on, with arguments flowing thick and fast between those who called for reform and their opponents. In the protracted battle that was to follow the detractors initially gained the upper hand and were able to stall many parliamentary measures that were proposed to establish more professional and effective policing. Eventually the tide turned in favour of the reformers, and the New Police took firm root in English society. A critical analysis of the arguments for and against the development of professional policing in nineteenth century England can prove to be very illuminating for the student of police history. Criticisms Against the Old Police and the Need for Reform Towards the end of its tenure, and sometime at the beginning of the nineteenth century the Old police received a lot of criticism and was tried on the charges of inadequacy, inefficiency, corruption and dereliction of duty. There were voices calling out for reform and the establishment of improved policing, meanwhile, the criticism continued to pour in. Critchley (1967) insisted that during those times of inept policing there was real "danger of a total relapse into barbarity" (cited by Godfrey and Lawrence, 2005, p.17). Rawlings (2002, p. 108) also mentions the criticism against the London night watchmen, "the almost useless, decrepit, and inefficient tribe of watchmen with which for the most part, the streets of the metropolis may rather be said to be infested rather than protected". The reasons were many for the charges against the old police. The parish constables were selected on a rotation basis and they could hire deputies, who were usually poorly qualified to satisfactorily perform the task at hand. John Wade in response to this practice said, "The office has fallen into the hands of the lowest class of retailers and costardmongers, who make up the deficient allowance of their principals by indirect sources of emolument" (cited by Rawlings, 2002, p.109). Once the term of office was over they had to resume their role in the community as ordinary citizens and go back to their former occupations. Therefore not surprisingly most of the constables, being aware of this fact were more concerned with currying favour with the locals and conforming to popular opinion than preventing crime and implementing measures that were unpalatable to local taste. Sometimes victims were unable to pay for the services of the constable and the criminal would not be apprehended. Furthermore, according to Godfrey and Lawrence (2005, p.14), they were not assured a steady or lucrative income, so "they may well have been less willing to act on their own initiative and more willing simply to do the minimum required of them". In other words due to the lack of a financial incentive, the constables did not perform their functions adequately and for the same reason they were not above criminal activity and corrupt practices as the recorded evidence shows. Given the circumstances and in all fairness, it must be said that more often than not the Old police did a decent job with the limited resources at their disposal. Some even acquired renown for their detecting skills and were esteemed personages in their communities. However, times were changing and Industrialization was rapidly altering the face of the country. English society was becoming increasingly urbanized. The population swelled in the industrial centres and it became difficult if not impossible for the constables with their hired, ill - equipped deputies, to maintain peace and order amidst the throngs of teeming humanity. In an earlier time, the constables had been adept at solving petty crimes and restoring stolen property but they were unable to deal with the increasing criminality brought on by an increasing population. In the words of Briggs (1996, p.141), "Whereas informal disciplines had worked well enough in the static world of finite rural communities, the scale of rootlessness of the new towns made different demands and needed a more formal response". Those in favour of reform cited the above reasons for the development of a stronger, better organized police force. Rev. Martin Madan (1785), made a heartfelt plea for better enforcement, "Our gangs of thieves are grown too numerous, and the individuals which compose them too desperate and dangerous to be controlled by the comparatively feeble powers of the private magistrate, or of the common parochial constable" (cited by Rawlings, 2002, p. 108). Yet critics of the Old police found themselves able to make very little headway in deposing of them as supporters for the old order were far too many. Capital punishment or the death penalty was generally awarded to those guilty of felony and reformers called out for a stronger force as a means of preventing crime and avoiding such inhuman measures that were bound to lie heavily on the conscience of mankind. However, according to Rawlings (2002), men like William Paley countered that the existing system was superior as people refrained from engaging in criminal activities out of fear that they would be hanged. It was hardly reason to sacrifice their liberty. The opponents of reform usually acknowledged that there were glitches in the system; however they felt that these wrinkles could be smoothed out from within. Many even tried to bring about reform within their parishes by entrusting the duty of constable only to those best suited for the job and to supplement their income by raising funds. However according to Emsley (2003, p. 67), "The problem was that some parishes were wealthier than others, and while the wealthy could afford an efficient watch, their less well - to - do neighbouring parishes might be far less fortunate". These poorer parishes were safe havens for criminals. There was lingering sentimentality towards the Old police and this was a strong factor that obstructed the development of professional policing as we know it. Old fashioned citizens took pride in their ability to look after themselves in the haven of their home and parish and the idea of the government interfering in their affairs was anathema to them. According to Rawlings (2002, p. 108) men like "The London magistrate, George Mainwaring, acknowledged the value of professionalism because he believed it increased the certainty of detection and spread a beneficial moral influence, but he stoutly defended the role of amateurism in the form of the parish constable". He believed that when people take an active part in governing themselves, they are more likely to play an earnest part in preserving the law that governs them. In addition to such views, the local communities and members of the parish where loathe to hand over their authority to the central government and thereby sacrifice their precious liberty. This line of reasoning, according to Ignatieff (2005, p. 26) led to the overthrow of the Pitts's Police Bill in 1785 on the grounds that it was "a new engine of power and authority, so enormous and extensive as to threaten a species of despotism". Crime, Public Disorder and Rioting Though temporarily quelled, far - sighted reformers continued to agitate. They pointed to the rising rates of crime as further proof of the inadequacy of the existing system and the urgent need for effective enforcement. According to Rawlings (2002), the nineteenth century was a time of intense rioting and public unrest owing to dissatisfaction with labour conditions and government policies - Mass demonstrations had bloody consequences as was evident during the Luddite disturbances, the London Spa fields' riots, the Gordon riots of 1780, Swing riots of 1830, the Peterloo massacre and the like. At the time, as a result of escalating violence and public disorder the government had no choice but to call in the military to restore order. This was an unsatisfactory measure according to Jason - Lloyd (2005) as there was inevitable delay in transporting the troops, with the result that that the situation invariably worsened and led to unnecessary bloodshed as the military troops were forced to resort to extreme measures to bring the mob under control. A pervading atmosphere of paranoia and fear prevailed in the aftermath of these riots and more people were convinced that a firm hand was needed to uphold the letter of the law. In fact, the development of the New Police has often been attributed to a fear of rising crime, public disorder and rioting. It was around this time that Robert Peel, one of the foremost proponents of reform stepped to the fore and took measures that have proved instrumental in shaping the destiny of professional policing. He argued that the rising tides of crime were ample cause for the establishment of a new police force, particularly since inability to maintain law and order would result in chaos and may ultimately topple the very government he so steadfastly served. This would lead to anarchy and had to be prevented at all costs. Statistical reports were produced to support his claims and to win over more people to his mode of thinking. The veracity of these statistics has been called into question by historians and it is believed their authenticity was dubious at best, but they served their purpose and provided the desired outcome for Peel. He also held up the drawbacks of the old system for public scrutiny during his campaign - the geographical confines that curtailed the power of the constables, insufficient reimbursement, lack of cooperation and communication between neighbourhood communities, discrepancies in efficiency and effectiveness all worked in favour of the criminals rather than the law keepers. Chadwick, another reformer supported Peel in calling for reform and stated that the " present police consists of disjointed bodies of men governed separately, under heterogeneous regulations, and acting, for the most part, under the earliest set of expedients: and then only upon being called upon, seizing or receiving in charge an offender and handing him over to the judicature for punishment" (cited by Rawlings, 2002, p. 115). Consequently, using a clever combination of strategies to counter the efforts of his opponents, Peel was able to pass the landmark Metropolitan Police Act in 1829 that led to the emergence of the Metropolitan Police. The New Police were to come under the control of the central government, their role was to supervise and patrol the streets, thereby keeping the country free from crime. Resistance to the Metropolitan Police However even after this enormous triumph it was not all smooth sailing for Peel and his followers. The tide of furious and resolute resistance that met them, threatened to thwart the functioning of the Metropolitan or New Police at every turn. Peel was vilified as an enemy of liberty and democracy and his detractors were legion. Opponents of reform rose up in arms as they believed that the liberty that was their birthright was slipping away from them. This viewpoint stemmed from a mistaken notion of the functioning of the Metropolitan Police along the lines of the state police on the continent particularly the 'Gendarmes' of France. The citizens had a deep - seated hatred for anything French and viewed the New Police with particular disfavour. The perceived authoritarianism that held sway over the French way of life, which evoked foreboding images of the Bastille and cruel autocrats, that stood poised to take control of their lives petrified the English public. Emsley (2003, p.68) states "Since the Glorious Revolution of 1688 'freeborn Englishmen' had been concerned about any attempt to police them regularly by the use of the army, or to use troops to prevent what they considered to be legitimate protest". Therefore, the Metropolitan Police with their intensive training and new blue uniforms that were reminiscent of the hated military were mockingly referred to as the 'Jenny Darbies', which was inspired from the aforementioned French term. The New Police were seen as heavy - handed minions of the law, who served as government spies and trampled on the constitutional rights of respectable English citizens. Much of this hostility and mistrust arose from fear as it was felt that the New Police were likely to abuse the unprecedented amount of power that had been suddenly transferred to them. According to Ignatieff (2005, p. 25), hatred of the police had scaled such peaks that following a violent encounter between the police and the public at Coldbath Fields in 1833, "A coroner's jury outraged by the brutality of the force, handed in a verdict of justifiable manslaughter on the body of a policeman killed in the affray". The name - calling and abuse of the police continued for many years before popular opinion turned in their favour. Detractors of the New Police also groused about the increased cost, which had to come out of their pockets. It was generally considered unnecessary expenditure. According to Rawlings (2002, p. 110), "Householders might complain bitterly about crime and the ineffectiveness of their watchmen, but they were not always keen on paying for improvements". The local parishes already unhappy about relinquishing control over their turf were infuriated at the idea of having to bear the expenses of the interlopers as they viewed the New Police. Emsley (2003, p. 69) says " some parishes found themselves having to pay more for the police when their streets were now patrolled by fewer police constables than when they had previously had watchmen". This thinly veiled hostility led to skirmishes between the parish constables and the Metropolitan Police. Throughout the better part of the nineteenth century, the parishes refused to cooperate with the police. Conclusion As time wore on policing in England underwent many changes to adapt itself to the needs of the public and for better or for worse professional policing has been firmly and irrevocably established. According to Jason - Lloyd (2005, p. 1), " policing in this country is still fundamentally based upon the principle or concept of 'policing by consent'. This means that the police service functions in society with the consent of the majority". Therefore proponents and opponents for the development of policing have played a crucial role in the creation of an enviable police force that continues to have a love - hate relationship with the English public to this very day. Reference List Briggs, J. (1996). The policing of society. Crime and punishment in England: an introductory history, p. 141 - 156. London: Routledge. Emsley, C. (2003) The birth and development of the police. Handbook of policing, ed. T. Newburn, p. 66 - 83. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Godfrey, B. and Lawrence, P. (2005) The development of policing. Crime and justice 1750 - 1950, p. 9 - 27. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Ignatieff, M. (2005) Police and people: the birth of mr. peel's 'blue locusts'. Policing: key readings, ed. T, Newburn, p. 25 - 29. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Jason - Lloyd, L. (2005) The development and foundations of modern policing. An introduction to policing and police powers, 2nd edn, p. 1 - 26. London: Cavendish Publishing Limited. Rawlings, P. (2002) The jenny darbies: the new police. Policing: a short history, p. 106 - 151. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Bibliography Briggs, J. (1996). The policing of society. Crime and punishment in England: an introductory history, p. 141 - 156. London: Routledge. Brogden, M. (2005). The emergence of the police - the colonial dimension. Policing: key readings, ed. T, Newburn, p. 25 - 29. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Emsley, C. (2003) The birth and development of the police. Handbook of policing, ed. T. Newburn, p. 66 - 83. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Godfrey, B. and Lawrence, P. (2005) The development of policing. Crime and justice 1750 - 1950, p. 9 - 27. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Ignatieff, M. (2005) Police and people: the birth of mr. peel's 'blue locusts'. Policing: key readings, ed. T, Newburn, p. 25 - 29. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Jason - Lloyd, L. (2005) The development and foundations of modern policing. An introduction to policing and police powers, 2nd edn, p. 1 - 26. London: Cavendish Publishing Limited. Rawlings, P. (2002) The jenny darbies: the new police. Policing: a short history, p. 106 - 151. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Styles, J. (2005). The emergence of the police - explaining police reform in eighteenth and nineteenth century England. Policing: key readings, ed. T, Newburn, p. 25 - 29. Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Read More