HC Deb 02 May 1821 vol 5 cc491-5

Mr. Clive having moved the second reading of this bill,

Mr. Bernal

said, there were two provisions in the bill which he conceived might be improved. By one clause the secretary for the home-department was empowered to re-imburse police officers for any extraordinary expense they might incur in the prosecution of certain duties, the fact being certified by the police-magistrates. This provision might be extended, with much benefit, to cases in which the parties aggrieved were unable, from their poverty, to employ officers. It was provided, by a second clause, that, in cases of petty misdemeanor, the constable of the night might suffer the party accused to go at large, on giving bail to appear at the police-office in the morning. It was not, however, imperative on the constable to do so. Now, he thought the constable ought to be compelled to receive bail in such cases.

Mr. Bennet

expressed his surprise that the hon. gentleman should bring forward the measure in question in the absence of many individuals who felt a deep interest in its provisions. After all that had been said on the subject of the metropolitan police—after all the evidence that had been given to show the necessity of new-modelling it—he could not repress his astonishment, when he found such a measure proposed as that which the hon. gentleman had introduced—than which no measure could be imagined so utterly imperfect for any good or efficient purpose, or containing the seeds of so much real mischief. The objection which he and other gentlemen had to this bill was, that, in the dangerous situation in which the metropolis now stood, recourse had not been had to those salutary measures for checking the evil which a wise government would have seen and adopted. He was sorry that the step which he had suggested, and which experience had shown to be beneficial in the ease of the Prison bill, had not been adopted, namely, the sending the bill to a committee above stairs, where alone details could be examined in an effectual manner. The bill had been brought in without consultation with the magistrates of the metropolis, or with those who were most conversant with matters of police, except mere verbal communication with the home-office, when the police magistrates went up with their monthly reports. It was easy to say that a good police was desirable. There was no difference as to the end—the only difference was as to the means of attaining it. Now, this bill merely took away the office at Shadwell, and added one for Marylebone, but, with that exception, left the whole machine of the police, which had been proved utterly inefficient, just as it found it. No one could be ignorant of the vices of this system who had read the evidence given before the police committee, or the publications on the subject; in one of which, by a very distinguished member of the police magistracy, it was stated to be "essentially corrupt." The cause of this was, that there was great service, great temptation, and little pay. Yet with all this well known, the service, the temptation, and the pay remained the same. It was a fact which he would pledge himself to prove by the evidence of police magistrates, that there was scarcely a felon committed who might not compound if he had money; and the mode by which this was to be done was by corrupting the officers of justice. He did not mean to say that there were not among those officers most honourable and conscientious men. It was from them that he had received the clue of the greatest part of the information he had extracted before the police committee. They had given him the information; but they said their situation was such, that they begged he would not call them; but in every instance, the questions they furnished him with, drew such information from the magistrates themselves as corroborated their statements. The cause of the corruption was, that the officers were so ill-paid. The first police officer had only a guinea a week. They might get an additional allowance indeed at times, if they were employed by individuals, or appointed to attend the royal family. But there was no remuneration for danger, no allowance on account of wounds or injury to health, no pension on retirement when they were worn out in the service, no pensions to their family if they lost their lives. It was true, that the Crown, in particular cases, doled out pensions; but by law they were not entitled to any. The hon. member then read an extract from the evidence of Vickery, a most efficient and respectable officer, stating these facts and adding that he had been nearly cut to pieces in apprehending two men for a murder, and had been confined six months to his bed without receiving the smallest allowance. He spoke in behalf of those officers from justice to the public. They were put in a situation in which they had great power to do harm as well as good; and, if they did not get money in a fair way, they would take it by joining that conspiracy against the peace and property of the public, which it was their duty to frustrate.—The next point was as to the constables. In this department the same corruption prevailed. Three-fourths of them performed their duty by deputy. These were the men who were to be made by this bill judges at night, while they were to be thief-takers by day. A friend of his had published an excellent pamphlet, in which he stated, that a man had served as a constable whom he knew to be a thief and who had been convicted as a receiver of stolen goods. Yet this man threatened him with a mandamus for refusing to swear him in again as a constable. How could these men be otherwise than corrupt? They led a life of drudgery at the police offices and courts of justice, and they were left to pick up their living by setting their names at the back of indictments. There was a singular fact which illustrated this mode of obtaining a livelihood, which had been stated to him by a counsel who was in the habit of attending the Old Bailey. Before the bill which he (Mr. B.) had brought in, by which the reward money on the conviction of felons was abolished, there never was a case of felony in which there was not a man from some police office to prove the confession of the offender: since that time such a thing was never heard of. There were also the high constables. He would not say that they were all corrupt, but there were among them persons who had fled from their parishes to avoid their creditors. It was curious that these constables high and low, were almost always coal dealers. The coal trade attracted them all, as the magnetic rock in the "Arabian Nights" drew out the nails of the ships which happened to come near it. The secret of this was, that they supplied with coals the brothels and alehouses, and in return answered for their character, or screened them from detection. There was one of those persons who had been brought before the police committee who had been proved utterly unworthy of the office which he held, and who yet in defiance of law and decency, was kept in his office by the trading justices of his district. The best law in hands such as these could have no effect. In this instance economy was foolish. He did not wish to see a system of profusion; still less a police, which some gentlemen were advocates for, like that of Paris, in which the servant was set as a spy upon his master, and in which there was a prying and vexatious interference which kept the whole of the community in irritation; but he wished to see a system of police, of which they had something approaching to an example in the city of London. Within the city the officers were better paid. The result was, that Mr. Bill Soames, a gentleman with whose acquaintance he was honoured, did not like to ply his vocation within Temple Bar. The numbers of the officers at the different offices were insufficient and unequal. In the Marlborough street district there was a population at the last census of 270,000, now probably 300,000; yet, attached to this office there were no more than eight constables. Worship-street office district had a population of 163,000 and six constables; and Queen-square, with only 24,000 population, had the same number as the district with 300,000. At Bow-street, indeed, which was a favoured office, there was more expenditure. But Bow-street was not, as it was commonly considered, a head, or superintending office. It was the chief office: but there was as little correspondence between that and flies other offices, as there was between Bow-street and the police minister at Paris, They did not even send circulars to one another at the end of the day in case of signal frauds or offences. There was certainly now great care in the selection of persons appointed to the police magistracy, for which great praise was due to the noble lord at the head of the Home office: but this was of no avail, while there was no improvement among the officers. The great alteration of the bill was, to extend the power of apprehending persons who were described as reputed thieves in public places, to all parts of the metropolis. The late sir S. Romilly had contended, that the former limited power was most unjustifiable and unconstitutional. That part of the question, he should leave to others; but as to the practical benefit, he did not believe that the apprehension of a single thief would ensue from it. The power was put into the hand of every corrupt constable; and he had no doubt that the great sufferers would be Irish labourers, who were poor and destitute, and the practice would only be considered like the apprehension of vagrants, another easy way of earning five shillings. The discretion which they even now possessed was such as honest officers scarcely ever dared to exercise. This they had stated to him; but they had also stated, that there were needy and greedy persons enough about the offices who would exercise it. The hon. member concluded with observing, that if they had inferior police officers, well selected and adequately paid, and respectable magistrates, made as independent as possible of any interest, with such an administration of justice as would not indispose the public to the conviction of offenders, they would do more towards the repression of crime than by establishing the French prying system of police.

Mr. H. Clive

said, that the hon. gentleman had suggested many things that might hereafter be proper subjects for inquiry by a committee upstairs. At present the appointment of a committee seemed unnecessary, there having already been four committees at different times, and three very full reports. These reports had been attended to in the framing of this bill.

Mr. Denman

objected to the principle of several of the clauses, especially those respecting the power of taking up persons suspected to be vagrants. He also observed that the latter part of the bill was wholly unconnected with the former; so much so, that he would suggest the propriety of dividing it into two distinct hills. If the first part relating to the payment of salaries, could be brought within a reasonable compass, no gentleman could object to it; but, as it stood at present, he must oppose it.

The bill was read a second time.