Liverpool has always had a rep for high crime rates and drunken-ness, but the suggestion put forward is that this might be ( in part) because we actually had a better police force.
Victorian crime stats often refer to convictions, and a larger and better police force naturally catches more criminals, hence higher recorded crime. Interesting premise. I also didn't know that whereas Manchester would often lock up drunks to 'cool off', the Liverpool Force had a policy of always charging if you were arrested, hence going by stats alone we had far more more of a drink problem than our neighbours. Other factors mean we genuinely did have higher crime rates as well, but it makes you stop and consider how much weight we can place on records alone.