RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: Charlie24 on Thursday 25 August 22 04:10 BST (UK)
-
Caroline Cottrell born 1817, was my 3X Great Aunt. She was convicted of stealing at the London Old Bailey in 1842, and transported to Van Diemen's Land, sentence 10 years.
I found her record of conduct at https://stors.tas.gov.au/CON40-1-2$init=CON40-1-2p241
But it's quite hard to decipher. I have attached the relevant snip.
Can anyone tell me what this says please?
Many thanks in anticipation
Charlie
-
Cotterell Caroline
Garland Graove L(?) . . . . . . . . . .
Central ?Cr (Criminal? - or County?) Court 13 June 1842. ??
next column
Transported for larceney in a Dwelling house. Single Stated
this offence Robbing my master of Clothing Single (?Cl/Ch?) Surgeons
Report Good.
11 August 1843 Montag . . . . (?of) misconduct in allowinga man to . . . . .
Room. Cu . .Hard lab(our) . .? .? ./21/4/46 3 class
T of L (ticket of Leave 7.7.46
FreeCertificate issued
14th June 1852.
Sorry - few bits I can't work out - hope this helps a bit. After hard labour, it looks like staff - and or someone's initials, but :-\
Wiggy
-
11 August 1843 Montag . . . . (?of) misconduct in allowing a man to be in her Bed
Room. 6 mos .Hard lab(our) . .? .? ./21/4/46 3 class
T of L (ticket of Leave 7.7.46
-
Hi,
Garland Grove 2, sailed 2nd Oct 1842 and arrived 20 JAN 1843 all female passengers.
This is the list, just in case you do not have
https://www.hawkesbury.net.au/claimaconvict/shipDetails.php?shipId=812
-
Many thanks to everyone.
A little more of the puzzle in place.
Best Wishes
Charlie
-
I am not convinced about "Montag". ???
It makes no sense. And they haven't stated the weekday anywhere else. And why suddenly use German/Dutch? Hmmm...
It looks like "... of misconduct", or the first word is longer and the "of" bit is part of it.
-
I wasn't convinced about Montag either - (and bracketted the OF as an alternative.)
Got another suggestion? :) :-\ In . . . maybe ??
-
I wasn't convinced about Montag either - (and bracketted the OF as an alternative.)
Got another suggestion? :) :-\ In . . . maybe ??
I have been racking my poor old brains, but nothing good has come of it yet... ::)
Edit: I can't see the first letter of "of" as an "o". It doesn't join correctly. I am tending more & more towards it all being one word. But what is it?!
Edit II: Could it be (xxx) gross misconduct, with a long "s" for the second "s"?
-
I see the name Montague.
A search on Trove shows a Mr Justice Montague presiding in Tasmania around this time.
So I think perhaps the case was held before him?
-
I also thought Montague, with a / following - thanks, JenB, for finding some corroboration.
-
Looking at other pages in the same set it’s clear that all such cases begin with a surname then a / as Arthur suggests.
So I’m confident the word in question is Montague/
It’s unclear what the significance of the surname is because they are all different, so I don’t think they can all be judges.
-
I think now that it’s perhaps more likely that the name preceding the charge was that of the person in authority at the penal colony who had brought the case.
-
This is really interesting - and a great help.
Thank you so much.
Cheers
Charlie
-
More on the name Montague - I accessed the database of Female Convicts at the Uni of Tasmania.
Montague was in fact the "Master" (presumably of the establishment she was assigned to) - date of offence 11th August 1843, the magistrate's initials given as P.S.
Plus probation noted 21st April 1846 '3rd Class'.
I'm still trying to decipher the writing at the top of the form - dates beginning 27/4/1844.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thank you again for all your help.
Charlie
-
. . . . . is the stuiff above the line, over Caroline's name, referring to the same person?
Sometimes there are several different convicts listed on per page.
Worth asking? ;)
-
You could be right, Wiggy
I looked again at the full page at:
Record of Conduct: https://stors.tas.gov.au/CON40-1-2$init=CON40-1-2p241
Nothing seemed to be recorded about these items in the Uni of Tasmania database.
Cheers
Charlie
-
I wonder if it would be worth asking someone from the library to interpret that 'above line' info?
They might help. ;)
-
You could be right, Wiggy
I looked again at the full page at:
Record of Conduct: https://stors.tas.gov.au/CON40-1-2$init=CON40-1-2p241
Nothing seemed to be recorded about these items in the Uni of Tasmania database.
Cheers
Charlie
For some reason the full link to the page doesn’t work.
For anyone wanting to look at the whole page, you need to use the menu bar at the left hand side and select page 241.
The writing above the line could apply to the previous person, Jemima Clements, but if it does why was such a huge space left above it?
Thanks for establishing who Montague was.
-
Found the page . . . . . using the Left hand menu bar, as you said JenB. I have found that is often the way on ehas to approach it, when searching convict records.
Yes, there is a big space left isn't there.
But the writing above the line appears to be in a different hand and with different ink. :-\ :-\ Hmmmm :-\
-
Hi - the notes above the line/above her name are for the previous convict's entry.
'Notes on bottom of page indicate the areas to which the convict was assigned'
https://libraries.tas.gov.au/family-history/Pages/Convict-abbreviations.aspx
They sometimes are written on the side of the page
Montague would have been the person she was assigned to work for.
'The information of conduct after arrival consists chiefly of offences which are recorded on a standard pattern: date of trial, place of convict's employment or name of his master, charge, sentence, magistrate'
https://stors.tas.gov.au/AI/CON40
cheers
M
-
Many Thanks for all of this.
I can see now that the notes above the line pertain to the previous convict record.
But '6 mos hard labour' - she was pregnant at this time - as a result of allowing a man (her future husband Thomas Shorland/Sharland - married 1846) into her bedroom) Seems a bit harsh!!
But also - after this entry - does it go straight into 'Conditional Pardon - on 21.4.1846 Class 3'?
I know there were classes of probation, but do you know what Class 3 restrictions were?
I also have now found the Conduct record for Thomas Shorland - which again, have parts difficult to decipher. I will upload it on a separate post.
Many Thanks again for all your help.
Cheers
Charlie
-
It will be interesting to see if he got 6 months hard labour for going into her bedroom.
-
I can't make it out - perhaps solitary confinement?
See attached
Cheers
Charlie
-
7 days! Compared with the 6mths hard labour How was that fair?
-
The difference in treatment of a male Back then!! ::) and maybe not just back then!!
I bet it was more to do with not being where he should have been rather than the being in the woman's room - what do you think? ;)
-
But it also seems strange that he was sentenced to Life for Housebreaking & stealing a Crown piece (5 shillings?) while she was given 10 years for stealing clothes worth 15 pounds.
He was tried in Somerset, & she at the Old Bailey.