How many Convicts are you descended from?

[trish251]

Assertions that crimes committed by convicts were not really crimes seems to me almost like continuing (at just one small step removed) earlier claims that families did not have convict forebears...

JAP

My MIL was definitely not happy on discovering she descended from a first fleeter. With due lawyer's dilligence I investigated his arrest, trial and conviction & decided it was a definite miscarriage of justice. I then did the same for his "wife" (probably a bigamous marriage) who was a second fleeter - and she was found to be definitely guilty      So either which way, definitely descended from a convict - which we have now convinced the MIL is something to be most proud about.

In many areas of our lives - it seems to take over 100 years for old ideas/concerns to be overturned.  Within my own families the ideas that "free settlers" were far superior to convict origins were absolute convictions in the 19th century, suspect in the 20th century & completely turned around in the 21st century. We eventually realised everyone who came to Australia in the 18th/19th century played a large part in who we are, but the convicts, forced to be the labour force of a new world, perhaps paid much more than their fair share.

Trish

[MarieC]

Assertions that crimes committed by convicts were not really crimes seems to me almost like continuing (at just one small step removed) earlier claims that families did not have convict forebears..

Its not that our ancestors weren't criminals, its just the punishment doesn't fit the crime in most cases.

Les

Completely agree with you, Les!  Many convicts committed minor crimes out of desperation - they were not hardened criminal types.  Often, they were still children when they offended.  Once here, they took the opportunities that presented themselves, and lived lives of some achievement and happiness.  My two ancestors fall into this category. 

An excellent example is William Henry Groom, who came on the "Hashemy" in 1848 as an "exile" after committing a minor crime.  He was by far the most significant of Toowoomba's founding fathers.  He was mayor seven times, represented the city in the Queensland Legislative Assembly from Separation till Federation (he became Speaker of the Legislative Assembly), and then was elected as Toowoomba's first representative in the Federal Parliament, where he died late in 1901.  As well, he was involved in just about every important enterprise in Toowoomba in these years.  He actively promoted the interests of the emerging middle class (of which he was a member) against the attempts at dominance by the wealthy landed class, the "squatters".

It took almost a century for his importance to be recognised - perhaps because of his origins.  Thankfully, he now is well and truly recognised in the city!

MarieC

[JAP]

Hey - I seem (unintentionally) to have stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest 

I wasn't saying that the many of the crimes were not minor - many many were and some were incredibly minor and were committed by children.  But not all!!  I was just making a comment that the motives of those who seek to prove that their convicts committed only minor crimes or non-crimes seem to me to have some similarity to those earlier people who didn't want to acknowledge convict ancestry at all.     Are the current people saying that there are degrees of convict ancestry - bad ones are unacceptable but minor ones are OK? 

The closest to a convict in my own research (to date - I'm still hoping!!) is my children's paternal GggUncle.  His crime was a white-collar crime - but most definitely a crime (forgery and uttering).  In 1847, in Fife, he forged the signatures on bills of his own uncle and of his titled landlord.  He was sentenced in Perth in 1848 to 7 years transportation and served a couple of years on the prison hulks in Portsmouth.  He was just about to be shipped off when he was pardoned - and the submissions in his defence came from all the gentry and important people of his area (excluding, however, his uncle!! - but including his landlord's son); when it comes to white-collar crime, plus ca change, eh ....  Anyway, my "convict" came to Melbourne of his own volition 2 or 3 years later and made a great success in business (surprise, surprise!).

My children's Gggma married, late in life, a former convict (a very hard man from all documented reports).  His English descendants (of his first marriage of three or four) certainly downplay his "crime" - well, who knows ...

Anyway, I'm very sorry for any offence unintentionally caused.

Cheers,

JAP (still hoping for a convict of my own; non-convict - though a thorough rogue - Henry HACKING, Quartermaster of the 'Sirius' in the First Fleet, is said to be related according to family folklore but this is most certainly unproven and unquestionably he is not a forebear). 

[Les de B]

Anyway, I'm very sorry for any offence unintentionally caused.
JAP (still hoping for a convict of my own; ). 

Certainly no offence taken. I was just saying that some of the penalties back in those days were a bit harsh eg; 7 years transportation for stealing a piece of material. I have seen the Court papers of one ancestor who was convicted of stealing. The sentence is actually written "To be hanged. Transportion for Life" Phew, by the stroke of a pen his life was spared. I guess back in those days the old saying "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" really meant what it inferred!

Best of luck with your own convict searching, I do hope you can find one, and be a member of the "Club".

Les

[JAP]

Hi Les,

I suspect I'll never be a member of the "Club" 

My lot were terribly terribly boring and ordinary ...

I do sometimes wonder whether perhaps, back then, the crime which resulted in the conviction, might - like now - have been the only one which could lead to a conviction but might have hidden other known crimes which couldn't quite be proven.  But who knows 

However one never knows what will come along!

A relative of mine (on my maternal side) went along to a 'show and tell' genealogical meeting where someone got up and described how her rell, a barmaid, had been shot by mistake in a hotel by the jealous lover of the female hotel owner.  To my rell's shock, it turned out that the the hotel owner was (disappointingly for me, it was on her paternal side) her Great-Aunt! 

There are always shocks lying in wait ...

JAP

[trish251]

I also think you misread some of the responses JAP - I was attempting to explain it was rather pointless to research whether someone was guilty or not - they were transported regardless.

The 18th century experiment of convicting anyone of the most minor crimes, simply proved that society cannot afford the gaols required for this type of system & when other countries will no longer take your outcasts, an alternative is needed. We seem to have gone a full circle, as today  western societies are  much more likely to complain that the "courts are too lenient" rather than that the sentence was way too long for such a minor offence. It rather proves my thoughts on most things in society - we go round in circles every 50-100 years.

Trish

[MarieC]

Agree, Trish!  The wheel always turns and we arrive at a state of affairs that has existed before (and before and before and before....!)

I do think JAP is misreading some responses here.  There certainly were some hardened criminals transported, no doubt about it, but I think all I was doing was pointing out how minor offenders, including children, were punished disproportionately, and used their initiative to make good in the new country.  I wouldn't care if I did find a serious offender in my background - it would spice up the family tree a little!

MarieC

[Lady Di]

Nearly all mine were sent to Oz for stealing something except for an Irishman who was recorded as "giving the English Hell". Another guy forged bank notes - the Bank of England took a dim view of that and took him to court  (some people have no sense of humour!!)

I certainly wouldn't say that all, or even any, of my lot were not guilty but the sentence of LIFE for being in possession of a stollen handkerchief certainly is a bit over the top.

I believe that, even though they all probably worked themselves into an early grave - all for our benefit - in most cases they had a far better life here compared to "home"

and I applaud every one of them.

Di
 

(Thanks Joppo - I think  )

[Bellejazz]

How do you find out why they were sent here?

- Belinda.