I've been reading about the history of modern policing and came across Peel's nine principles of policing.
I'm hoping you folks could give some background on Peel and his associates, the state of crime and policing in London before the principles (which I understand he may not have personally written), and what would have prompted Peel to do so. I'd be interested if other police forces were adopting similar measures elsewhere, or if it was really a new idea at the time as well, although that may be a bit out of scope.
I would also be curious to know what the effects of adopting the principles had on policing after they were introduced.
The early 1800s can be viewed as the middle of the changing police force and crimes that have been going on for a couple centuries prior to this.
In the early 1800s, England was moving towards a decentralized police role within the government. In Britain, for example, there were roughly 40 police forces present that were elected by local police authorities. They also contained the first "modern" police forces, such as the constable and night watchmen who would patrol the streets, however interestingly enough had no real obligation to apprehend lawbreakers.
On the crime side, you need to look at what was happening during this time: The big one is the heart of the Industrial Revolution. Health was minimal still, however death rate drops due to medicinal advances increased the population. The growing urban population overshadowed the needed infrastructure for many of these people. The urbanization hosted crowded conditions that breeded conflict and unhealthy situations, forcing people to leave behind their previous social controls.
Where do they turn? You guessed it, to crime.
Many workers do not have the right to vote in major countries - they had no voice, striking was illegal, and workforce turnover often saw 100% in a single year. Domestic violence increased that reflected the stress of unemployment or awful working conditions.
Labor unions arose. Self-help organizations in which you pay dues to reap the benefits appeared, though these had standards to even enter (how do you spend money? Drinking lifestyle? Domestic abuse?) Societies such as the Suppression of Vice and the Women's Christian Temperance Union were formed, which banned drinking and sexual promiscuity. This helped curb some criminal activity, despite it still being prevalent.
The build-up of government authority incorporated militarization and funding which only increased their power. Crowded riots were more difficult to organize due to the increased firepower from the government. Tax was now pushed between 30-50%, however interestingly enough they used this money to create jobs in education, construction, etc. This dropped poverty crimes immensely (larceny, robbery).
The educated mass, who were now able to read, increased the newspaper production. The media worked similar to how it does today - people are now fearful of violent crime because crime in the headlines always sold their papers, perpetuating a skewed version of the truth.
Sir Robert Peel was impressed with how well the authority was being used in the late 1700s and early 1800s. The Force Administration was placed under the newly-titled Home Secretary Peel that was now paid for 50/50 between the local governments and the central government. He took more of a proactive approach to preventing crime instead of a reactive one. In turn, his concern was that the police should not be through political patronage/nepotism/favoritsm, but merit-based. This created a relatively high threshold for officers, who were now required to read and write, go through an interview process, and the job now preferred veterans.
By 1829, the London Metropolitan Police force was established which placed the entire area under the control of one uniformed force. There were roughly 3300 men for 1.5 million people (1:304). The job had very high standards, akin to being a role model for society: regular church attendance, regulated appearance, unmarried police live in barracks (and married men's wives were interviewed by the Captain, who could actively prevent the marriage if he did not approve!), and not being allowed voting until retirement which removed influence from politics of policing. So there was a huge push for professionalism in the police force.
Kind of a cool evolution of the modern police force we see today. You can draw a ton of parallels.
I had not heard of these principles before this post. They seem like pretty good guidelines.
Are these actually used by police departments in the US as guiding principles or for study? Are they used in the UK? Is there something else that has replaced them?