Many thanks indeed to correspondent Cheryl Ianson for re-writing our original page on this topic

Introduction

In the first episode of the Australian version of "Who do you think you are?" aired in 2009, actor Jack Thompson was made aware of his convict ancestry. He jokingly claimed that having a convict ancestor conferred the status of Australian royalty on a convict’s descendants. Since that time the term has become part of the genealogical lexicon, albeit very much tongue-in-cheek. Descendants of First Fleet convicts are more likely to be considered Aussie Royalty, while those stemming from all other convicts might be considered minor Royals or Aussie Aristocracy. Although family historians treasure their convict ancestors, no one takes the Royal reference in the least bit seriously. Despite the levity they do, however, appreciate that their convict ancestors were indeed criminals ranging from the petty and opportunistic to the most hardened and depraved. But how did this all come about?

Social change in "the old country"

The downside of the unfolding Agrarian and Industrial Revolutions in England, which had moved the economy from agricultural and handicraft-based into one of mass production and mechanisation, was that untold numbers lost their jobs. The disenfranchised gravitated to larger towns and cities in search of employment, but instead found poverty, social injustice, harsh and squalid living conditions, and long working hours for those lucky enough to secure work. Crime was the natural outcome as people used their wits to survive, resulting in 8 out of 10 prisoners being imprisoned for theft. Authorities responded by extending cruel punishments, even hanging, for minor crime. The dilapidated system of local prisons could not accommodate the increasing numbers of prisoners, so the use of decommissioned and converted warships was used to take the overflow, as per the picture above. Although these rotting hulks were dark and foul, prisoners were incarcerated aboard for months on end.

Now that Britain had lost her American colonies, and hence the convenience of a dumping ground for criminals, authorities were faced with unprecedented, and increasing, overcrowding of gaols. Looking further afield for a solution Britain considered establishing a new penal colony in Africa. Due to a lack of sites she turned her head to the east coast of Australia (New South Wales) which Captain James Cook had claimed in 1770. After rejecting Botany Bay, Captain Arthur Phillip established the new colony in Port Jackson (Sydney Harbour) on 26 January 1788. Other penal colonies were later established in Van Dieman's Land (Tasmania), Queensland and Western Australia, while South Australia and Victoria remained free colonies. Over the ensuing 60 years 163,000+ convicts were transported by the British government to the various antipodean colonies on board 800+ boats. Penal transportation to Australia peaked in the 1830s and dropped off significantly the following decade. The last convict ship arrived in Western Australia on 10 January 1868.

The offences and types of criminals ran the spectrum from those forced into law-breaking through difficult life circumstances to the most hardened, depraved in English and Irish society. At that extreme end 370+ convicts were transported for murder and manslaughter and 113 for vagrancy, while pickpockets numbered only 193. Sentences ranged from 7 years, to 14 years, to Life. Of the 158 identified political prisoners most were from Ireland and a few from Scotland, although it is probable others were transported under the auspices of another crime.

Impact on family structure

When convicts left Britain they never expected to be reunited with spouses and families. Given the circumstances, and the improbability of returning to their homeland, for the sake of social stability and addressing moral issues, convicts were encouraged to marry and create new families in the colonies even while they were still serving their sentences. This was official policy and was not considered to be bigamy. In some instances spouses and children did make their way to the colonies, but it was not the usual practice. Prisoners who conformed to authority gradually earned their freedom or received pardons. Conditional pardons were given to reformed convicts who had been sentenced to transportation for Life. They were never to return to their homelands although they could travel as far afield as New Zealand. In the earlier colonial years they received grants of land they could work on their day off ‘work’ even before they had their Certificate of Freedom. Although some convicts returned to their homeland most remained in Australia taking advantage of opportunities they could only dream of in their previous lives.

Once emancipated former convicts lived side by side with free settlers, however they were still considered to be second-class citizens by the rest of society. Despite their best efforts and law-abiding lives, the prejudice towards former prisoners continued until the 1850s and the discovery of gold. The influx of fortune seekers, followed in successive decades by immigrants seeking a better life, homogenised the population and the stain of convictism receded into the deep recesses of history.

The Howes, House & Howse clans were not immune to prevailing policy regarding crime, and thus a number of convicts with those names were transported to the colonies. Many have been identified by correspondent Deirdre from Victoria as having been sent to Van Dieman’s Land (Tasmania) in the 1800s, but the list is not definitive. If you can identify anyone on the list, or contribute another person, please let us know. We will post a link to their information page, as we have already done for Swing Rioter George Howes from Cawston in Norfolk.

Detail

Paul Howes, June 2018