Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 19.djvu/355

Rh POLICE 339 this distance of time, with the experience of an intervening half century, it is difficult to believe that the change by which the police system became in a few years as much a necessity of towns as their public lighting (and lighting and watching were of much the same age and character, and were frequently coupled in legislation) was regarded otherwise than with the approval of well-regulated minds. It substituted the vigorous action of a really responsible and well-regulated body, acting in an enlarged area, and independently of parochial authorities, for the partial and lax action of a variety of ill-governed and inadequate bodies. Legitimate but passing regrets might be natural as the introduction of vicarious action superseded the necessity for self help and responsibility. No poet could thereafter compose, as a sally of fancy, the adventures of a London citizen between Cheapside and Edmonton mounted on a runaway horse with associated gentlemen galloping after a presumed horsestealer. To arrest the horse, whether a runaway or stolen, only a blue-coated policeman would thenceforward be seen on the track. The objections raised to the new police were of a more serious although scarcely of a more substantial kind. The assumption that a good police could only be attained at the expense of liberty, and that it necessarily involved some arbitrary principle opposed to the free constitution of the country, had been countenanced even by the report of the committee of 1822, in which it was remarked that it was difficult to reconcile an effective system of police with that perfect freedom of action and exemption from interference which are the great privileges and blessings of society in the country. With such sedate misgivings, it is not to be wondered at, when the system was actually introduced a few years later, that cries arose in the streets of &quot; down with the new police,&quot; and that the constables were fre quently followed by hooting crowds calling them obnoxious names. By associating them with the statesman who introduced the measure, and calling them &quot; Peelers &quot; and &quot;Bobbies,&quot; names perpetuated to the present day and apparently likely to last, a compliment was really paid to the minister and to the force. But at that time Peel was attacked in parliament and suspicion thrown on the Act because the same minister had introduced Roman Catholic emancipation. Within four years of the establishment of the police force the hostility seems to have culminated. It was evinced by the result of a collision between the police and a meeting of Chartists in Coldbath Fields in May 1833, in which three police officers were stabbed and one killed with a dagger. At the inquest the coroner s jury returned a verdict of &quot;justifiable homicide,&quot; in the teeth of the evidence. The crown thereupon adopted the strong but justifiable course of applying to the Court of King s Bench, and the inquisition was quashed. Committees were appointed by the House of Commons to inquire into the circumstances of the meeting, and also regarding an allegation of inhabitants of the Surrey side that policemen were employed as spies, and a third committee was appointed to inquire into the state of the police and crime in the district. The police system and the force as a whole came out with credit, notwithstanding individual instances of undue exercise of power calling for greater control. There was no hesitation as to the duty of maintaining the principle of the new system, and the popular hostility gradually died away. After intermediate parliamentary reports and legislation by way of extension, an important Act was passed in 1839, reciting that the system of police established had been found very efficient and might be yet further improved (2 & 3 Viet. c. 47). The metropolitan police district was extended to 15 miles from Charing Cro?s. The whole of the River Thames (which had been in its course through London, so far as related to police matters, managed under distinct Acts) was brought within it, and the collateral but not exclusive powers of the metropolitan police were extended to the royal palaces and 10 miles around, and to the counties adjacent to the dis trict. Various summary powers for dealing with street and other offences were conferred. At the same time that the police were put on a more complete footing and the area enlarged, provision was made for the more effectual administration of justice by the magistrates of the metropolis (2 & 3 Viet. c. 71). The changes that occurred in magisterial functions are scarcely less remarkable than the transition from the parish con stable to the organized police. The misdirected activity of the civil magistrate in the 17th century is illustrated by the familiar literature of Butler, Bunyan, and others. The zeal of that age was succeeded by apathetic reaction, and it became necessary in the metropolis to secure the services of paid justices. The malpractices of the so-called &quot; trad ing justices &quot; of the 18th century are described and exposed for all time by Fielding, who honourably per formed the duties of justice of the peace for Middlesex and Westminster. At the beginning of the 19th century outside of the City of London (where magisterial duties were, as now, performed by the lord mayor and aldermen) there were various public offices besides the Bow Street and the Thames police offices, where magistrates attended. To the Bow Street office was subsequently attached the &quot;horse patrol,&quot; and each of the police offices had a fixed number of constables attached to it, and the Thames police had an establishment of constables and surveyors. The horse patrol was in 1836, as previously intended, placed under the new police. It became desirable that the horse patrol and constables allotted to the several police offices not interfered with by the Act of 1828 should be incor porated with the metropolitan police force. This was effected, and thus magisterial functions were completely separated from the duties of the executive police; for, although the jurisdiction of the two justices, afterwards called commissioners, as magistrates extended to ordinary duties (except at courts of general or quarter sessions), from the first they did not take any part in the examination or committal for trial of persons charged with offences. No persons were brought before them. Their functions were in practice confined to the discipline of the force and the prevention and detection of offences, by having persons arrested or summoned to be dealt with by the ordinary magistrates whose courts were not interfered with. Important alterations have been made since 1839 in the arrangements affecting the metropolitan police. In 1856 one commissioner and two assistant commissioners were sub stituted for two commissioners, and a third assistant com missioner has now (1884) been added. In 1866 jurisdic tion was given to the metropolitan police in tiie royal naval dock yards and principal military stations of the war department in England and Wales, and within 15 miles, with the restriction that the powers and privileges of the constables of the metropolitan police when without the yards, naval and marine hospitals and infirmaries, and marine barracks or stations, and not on board or in any ship, vessel, or boat belonging to the queen or in her service, shall only be used in respect of the property of the crown or of persons subject to naval or marine or military discipline (23 & 24 Viet. c. 135). Under this Act the metropolitan police exercise jurisdic tion and perform duties extending from Chatham on the east and Dover and Portsmouth on the south to Devonport, Portsmouth, and Pembroke on the west, and of course including Aldershot. The expenses incurred are defrayed by parliament.