The GLIO Site

CONSTABULARY MATTERS

     The Constabulary Force receipts and expenditure were stated to be as follows:—

The net expense of the quarter was calculated at £1851  1s. 8d., and the consequent balance at Easter would be £1275  15s 3d. A half-penny rate was therefore recommended, payable at the next Sessions, which would leave a probable balance at Midsummer of £155. The two rates were consequently allowed.

     The Chairman called the attention of the court to the enactments of the 3rd and 4th of Victoria, section 88, which provided that when the tables of fees to be allowed to constables should have been fixed by the Court of Quarter Sessions, any fees payable to a police constable for the performance of a duty for which a fee would have been due to a constable appointed under the provisions of the old law; such fees should he handed over to the county for the purpose of being applied towards liquidating the county rate. The Chairman called the attention of the magistrates to the enactments of the act on this head. The superintendents of police must, under the orders of the magistrates, remit the amount of those fees to the county treasurer, and the correctness of them be checked by the return of the magistrates' clerks of the petty sessions.

     THE COUNTY CONSTABULARY.—The Rev. R. Wright said he rose with great deference to present two petitions which had been put into his hands, on the subject of the Constabulary Force. He had showed them to Capt. Robbins that the facts they alleged should be tested by examination. He should not, certainly have presented the petitions if he had not thought they contained grounds of complaint which should be met and explained; and he moved that the petitions which came from ratepayers of Titchfield and Petersfield, should be read to the court. 

     The Deputy Clerk of the Peace read the petitions; that from Petersfield alleged that the police in that neighbourhood did not efficiently protect property. That the petitioners were perfectly satisfied with the old force, the present men never being at their posts when wanted to render assistance. The petition also stated that there had been more convictions under the old force than under the present one and although the number of persons now apprehended was certainly greater, yet a great number of those committals were for assaults on the police, whose conduct had caused much disgust; while the force was a great source of expense to the county. More felonies were now committed in the neighbourhood of Petersfield than before the formation of the force, and the inhabitants more annoyed by idle and disorderly persons than heretofore, and no officers could be found when circumstances required their assistance. The petition cited the case of one Mackenzie, a superintendent, who had imposed on the tradesmen of the town to the amount of £100; being more than the value of the property lost by felonies for many years past. Other members of the force had also contracted debts under the promise of paying them when they received their pay. The petition concluded by requesting the court to abolish the force which it was alleged was totally inadequate to protect the peace and property of the county. 

     The Chairman thought magistrates should not present petitions to the court without first reading them. It may be proper to pray the court to abolish the police force, if such were the opinion of the petitioners. But what he, the chairman, complained of in this case was, that there was a charge against an individual of the police force which required investigation, but that individual had been some time since discharged, and what could the court now do with the subject. As his attention had been drawn to the workings of the police force by former complaints, he had examined the details of it. It had now been in operation two years, and some judgment could be formed of its efficiency and expense. In looking at the expense, he had omitted the first half year, because it would give the appearance of unfairness to his statement, as the force was formed gradually. The cost from Midsummer, 1840, to Midsummer, 1841, had amounted to £7,306. The estimate of its cost laid before the court previous to its commencement was £7,740 a-year; and thus no amount of unforeseen expenditure had been incurred. It had been the opinion of the court that the adoption of the force was necessary, from the great complaint of a want of security for property from many parts of the county; and from Petersfield in particular. As it regarded the expense of the constabulary then, it had not exceeded the sum anticipated when it was adopted; and next as to its efficiency. Had the number of committals increased? During the first year of its existence they had done so, as it was naturally to be expected from its increased activity; but in the second year the number of committals had been less by 135 than they were the year previous. Besides, the prosecutions were now got up in so satisfactory a way, as compared with those of the old constabulary, that the expense of prosecutions was much reduced. They averaged under the old mode £9  l9s. 1d. per head, while they now averaged but £7  7s. 1d. In the two years, during which the police had been established, a saving of £1,450 had been effected in the expense of prosecutions. There was certainly one point which required investigation by the finance committee. When the force was first established it was thought better to give a fixed sum to cover all the expenses to which the men would be liable. That sum was put at a higher point than it was first proposed, because the force was a moveable one—attending fairs, &c.—whereby some extra expense was incurred. It had been ascertained that these extra expenses were larger than was anticipated, and some allowances had to be made on them. He, the chairman, therefore proposed that the subject should be referred to the finance committee, with the view of making such alterations in the present arrangements as may he found necessary. 

     The Rev. R. Wright addressed the court in explanation of the apparent saving effected by the police, which he contended arose from an alteration in the time at which the witnesses were required to attend the quarter sessions. They used to be summoned to attend on the first day, Tuesday, on which day it was well known no trials of prisoners or hearing of appeals took place. This has now been altered, and the expense of one days allowance to witnesses saved. It had heretofore been usual to allow all witnesses, whether they lived near or distant from the court, 5s. a day for their expenses. They were now paid according to the distance they came. The alteration, too, of the criminal law has caused more frequent gaol deliveries by which the cost of maintenance of prisoners was much reduced. The payment of a moiety of the prosecutions by the government, and the allowing of a separate court of quarter sessions to the Isle of Wight, were two more causes of the decrease of the amount of prosecutions, which he contended were not traceable to the establishment of the police force.

     The Chairman said the payment of a moiety of the prosecutions by the Government did not affect the statement he had made, as they were all charged to the country, and the allowance of the Government on account carried to the credit of the county. He also noticed the fact, that the number of prisoners for trial at these Sessions last year was 74, while now it was about 50.

     Mr. Sturges Bourne said it was hardly fair to make these general statements against the police without having the counter statements. For his own district, he could say that no contrast could be greater than the former and present state of things. The alteration or mitigation of punishment for sheep-stealing had so much increased that offence in his neighbourhood, that previous to the establishment of the rural police he himself had continually lost sheep; but he had lost one since the force came into operation. Previous to the commencement of the present constabulary, detection of offenders was rare and difficult, because magistrates had no constables to send to persons or places which were suspected. It could not be expected that men, who like the old constabulary received no pay for their services, would leave their employment. Such was not now the case. The spirit of our legislation of late years had been to mitigate punishment, and fence round the prisoner by privileges which had not formerly existed, and thus rendered the services of a police more than ever necessary. He had, as a magistrate, now hardly any business to do, so beneficial had been the operation of the force in his neighbourhood

     Mr. Yonge and Mr. Abbott also Baugh testimony to the efficiency of the police; and the latter said, if any complaint existed as to the conduct of individuals in the force it should be laid before Capt. Robbins, who organised it.

     The Chairman said it was not possible to lay the complaint against the individual named in the Petersfield petition before any one, because he was no longer in the force.

     Mr. P. Williams wished to know how many of those who signed the petition were rate-payers, and really aggrieved.

     Mr. Lefevre said that it was most proper that the question of the remuneration of the constables, when going from place to place, should be referred to the Finance Committee, because it was understood when the salaries were fixed, that they included the whole expense of a movable force. The allegation of the petition, that the expense had increased, was not borne out. If the police, as alleged, got into debt or misconducted themselves, complaint should be made to Capt. Robbins, for he was bound to appoint fit men.

     The petition from Titchfield was the narrator, and it stated that felonies, within a district of not more than 3 miles of Titchfield, had much increased—41 felonies had been committed last year, 35 of which were cases of sheep-stealing. The petitioners complained that the cost of the police force fell principally on the land, while its application benefited only towns; for the proof of which they instanced the distribution of the police force, which did not sufficiently protect the property of the land. The cost of the police force employed in the district of the petitioners was £98 per man. They also petitioned for the abolition of the force.

     Capt. Robbins addressed the court in exclamation. He said only four cases of sheep stealing had been reported to the police in the neighbourhood of Titchfield, and if not a major known to the police they could not detect them. The distribution of the force, the details of which he held in his hand, and which the court could inspect, he had made to the best of his judgement; and he should be happy to yield to any suggestions of the court on the subject.

     The Chairman said that the distribution of the force must be left to the chief constable.—a magistrate said that the number of policeman employed in the Titchfield district was not enough. There had been a railroad constructing in the immediate neighbourhood.

It was understood that Capt. Robbins would attend to the complaint, and if he found woman were wondering where, he would remove them from a point where they could be spared,—Sir Raymond Jarvis suggesting that if the railway occasioned the necessity for an increased police force, more men could be employed, and the expense charged to the company; which under a clause of the act they must pay. Mr. Waddington bore testimony to the activity of the force at the recent incendiary fire at Twyford. Immediately on the first alarm several men were on the spot, and rendered most effectual assistance by maintaining order. The subject then dropped; the Titchfield petition being handed to Capt. Robbins. We should observe that a magistrate whose name we could not learn said that the signatures to the Titchfield petition were those of nearly all the ratepayers of the district.

...

(See also these pages:—
19-Oct-1839
19-Oct-1839
23-Nov-1839
20-Jan-1840
7-May-1840
1-Mar-1841
14-Feb-1842
12-Mar-1842)