Criticism of the Convict System by the Molesworth Committee - Essay Example

Criticism of the Convict System by the Molesworth Committee Name: Course: Institution: Instructor Date Introduction The Molesworth committee, named after its instigator and chairperson of the Select Committee on Transportation (1837-38) was formed to address the issues of the British governments’ transportation policy into Australia as a British penal colony. As a penal colony, Australia was the destination for British convicts as a form of punishment. The system assigned convicts to British settlers in Australia, who were known was private masters, to work in their factories and farms for ‘free’ (O’Toolle, 2006) Other convicts were assigned to gangs which were working in public works such as road construction. The convicts were not entitled to any wages but were compensated with food rations, shelter and clothing. Male convicts usually worked in factories, farms, and building and construction sites while women were largely involved in domestic labour until the female factory system was introduced. This transportation system was supported by the desire to reform convicts and develop colonial economies. One aspect of reforming convicts which was a major subject in the Molesworth Committee was corporal punishment or flogging of convicts for various reasons including laziness upon conviction by district magistrates. The Molesworth Committee was commissioned by the House of Commons with the task of gathering evidence to ascertain the effectiveness of the penal transportation system. As a reformer, Molesworth was expected to side with his fellow settlers who were opposed to abolition of the system that gave them free labour in a foreign land. Unfortunately, Molesworth was vehemently opposed to the system and in particular the flogging of convicts by comparing it to slavery (Meyering 2010). He was convinced that continued treatment of convicts as slaves in Australia would create another West Indies situation. The master stroke was however comparing the transportation system, to slavery. The Committee cited other reports such as Captain Alexander Maconochie’s Report on Van Diemen’s Land which illustrated flogging as “severe, even excessive cruelty.” The Committee’s final report thus recommended abolition of the transportation system. These abolitionist views received wide positive and negative criticism both in Australia and in Britain. However, the colonial government adopted the recommendations and in 1868 transportation to Australian mainland ended. This paper discusses some of the criticisms that the Molesworth Committee report made both nationalistic and Australia-centric against the convict system. History of the colony and the system The first generation of settlers in Australia started arriving in the 1920’s. These settlers were largely drawn from the middle class including former navy men, bankers, merchants and small scale manufactures. None of these people had prior experience in farming but they saw Australia as presenting better opportunities than the post war Britain whose economy was slowing post the Napoleon era. Their inexperience with the climate, soils and farming in general and their relative lack of resources would pose a huge challenge to the settlers. With the average settler having £1000 -3000 in cash and goods and an acre of land priced at £1, many settlers went for land but did not have much to do with it (Meyering, 2008). As a result, many people re-sold their land just to survive with the wealthy accumulating huge pieces of land. With in the introduction of the convict system, those who had huge tracts of land were set to establish their estates. Such a scenario created three classes of immigrants; the reputable free inhabitants or large estate owners; free inhabitants comprising of the poor and free convicts who had completed their sentences; and the convicts serving their time. The social division in the settler society resembled the British society at the time. Many land owners were religious but political and social views were emphatically suppressed. However, political and social reformers were eager to advance their agendas in government. The economically challenged farmers opted for peasant farming while others chose to be land tenants. The governor, who was responsible for the colony appointed magistrates who were strictly controlled to disseminate justice. By 1836, the ratio of judge to settlers in New South Wales was 1 to 540. These magistrates were responsible for handing out sentences to convicts which could reach up to 50 lashes. There were settler police who were responsible for meting out such punishment to the convicts. One of the greatest challenges that faced settlers was resistance and attacks from both the convicts and Aboriginal people. Some convicts, hardened by long hours of manual labour and constant flogging were eager to buy their freedoms by whatever means. This meant that they often resulted to crude ways such as attacking and killing their private masters to gain their freedom. The Aboriginal people on the other hand were eager to protect their land from the invaders. As a deeply religious people, some Aboriginal communities were opposed to clearing and settlement of some particular patches of land for religious reasons. The settlers on the other hand, did not understand such traditional practices. The aboriginal people thus retaliated by attacking and killing a number of settlers. Some settlers were forced to give up their farms in some parts owing to constant attacks and destruction of crops and properties by the Aboriginal people (Meyering, 2008). Criticism of convict system Flogging, as a key component of the Convict system failed to achieve its core purpose; reform and deter potential offenders. Moleworth was convinced that there was a false impression among criminals in Britain that life in the penal colonies was easier in spite of the flogging. The criminal population in Britain was thus very motivated to travel to the penal; colonies for an easier life. The price of land in Australia compared to Britain was very low hence many people suffering under the faltering economic were attracted by the promises of a new life in Australia. For those who could not afford to finance their transportation to Australia, being convicted in a court of law after committing crime was an appealing alternative. Therefore, Molesworth argued that convict system encouraged crime as oppose to its intended purpose of deterring potential offenders. The geographical distance between Australia and Britain meant that deterrence cannot be achieved. The convict system actually removed the convicts from the British society by taking them to Australia. Ordinarily, conviction into a penal system is meant to reform criminals who once upon serving their sentences return back to the society as reformed people with an expectation of engaging in nation building. In essence, reformed criminals would serve as a lesson to potential offenders and even motivate criminals to stay away from crime. The convict system thus undermined the purposes of a working judicial and penal system, which is to reform criminals and inject them back into the society as reformed individuals. The convict transport system meant that once incarcerated criminals served their sentences in Australia and released, they encountered a different society (Meyering, 2008). The motivations of engaging in criminal activities were high because they were separated from their friends and family who are critical in providing moral and social support. The convict system created an unbalanced society in Australia by increasing the population of criminals which would in effect discourage regular immigrants. With over 72, 000 criminals having being transported, the Australian society was literally deeming with criminals. In part, the committee indicated that It is difficult to conceive how a man....merely having the common feelings of morality, with the ordinary dislike of crime, could be tempted, by any prospect of gain, to emigrate with this wife and family, to one of these colonies, after a picture has been presented to his mind of what would be his probably lot. To dwell in Sydney...would be much the same as inhabiting the lowest purlieus of St Giles’s in London where drunkenness and shameless profligacy are not more apparent than in the capital of Australia (Meyering 2010). Molesworth argued that settlers and the colonial government covered up the actual nature of the convict system and the situation in Australia. This further created a false image of the convict system. The committee thus questioned the motives of the settlers in the belief they had reasonable motive in that they would prefer a higher number of convicts being transported in Australia for their labour needs. This is because the convicts were a free source of labour which could be exploited at slavery levels with poor supervision by the colonial government. Besides recommending of abolition of the transport system, there was reasonable belief that the high demand for labour by land owners could fuel crime in Britain. Flogging encouraged violence in the penal colony of Australia. This was based on the fact that flogging is an unsuitable method of punishment as it does not reform but rather hardens and brutalizes convicts. Molesworth Committee argued that the slave-master-like relationship between land owners and convicts created a sense of bitterness and encouraged ‘revengeful feelings’ on the part of convicts. This claim was based on the high number of cases reported where convicts, whether free or still serving their sentences, had attacked land owners (Neal 2002). The committee defended such convicts’ actions by saying that given the circumstances and the slave-master-like relationship, convicts were “incapable of moral restraint”. The corporal punishment was deemed to rob the convicts any sense of humanity that they had left in them besides adding pain and degrading their moral fabric. A number of law makers were concerned that convict system was not economically viable for the British government. The lawmakers cited the high costs of transporting the convicts to Australia. They argued that there was no guarantee that the government would recover such costs given that majority of the convicts had no experience in manual labour or farming hence their presence in Australian farms was a great risk. The lawmakers suggested an alternative solution of retaining the convicts at home and utilising them for other purposes (O’Toolle, 2006). However, there was a counterargument to this in that the system allowed decongestion of the British penal system. The faltering economy had given rise to an increase in crime. Concern for the moral foundation of the Australian society which was being concentrated with convicts was another basis for criticism of the convict system. The convict system was labelled as a system that would eventually create “Sodom and Gomorrah” by placing a high number of convicts and ex-convicts in one geographic area before reforming them. Some lawmakers were worried about the convict legacy that would be left behind by the colony (Brake & Sheriff, 2006). In response, lawmakers suggested that convicts should be first reformed before being shipped to Australia. In line with this, the system allowed convicts two years of incarceration in British prisons for reform purposes before they were eventually transported to Australia to work in labour gangs and as farmhands. The convict system, widely recognizable through blatant flogging of convicts, was a stain on Britain’s image as a civilised society. Meyering (2008) says that that the wielding of the whips created a dramatic and palpable sense of social distance between settlers and the British populace and highlighted the differences between British norms and colonial norms. The use of flogging to punish and motivate farmhands in Australia as widely depicted by media houses around the world portrayed Britain as barbaric society when men preyed on fellow men within the protection of the law (Grass, 2003). This even further helped to highlight the plight of the local Aboriginal people whose land they settlers had forcefully occupied with protection from the colonial government. Many people thus viewed Australia as a land where the law was used to oppress the poor and the weak. This contravened strongly with British moral ideals that were keenly protected under British Common law. The convict system and flogging in general encouraged moral corruption. The committee observed this by noting the differences in opinion regarding the matter between people who had stayed long in the penal colony and those who stayed for a short period of time. It was found that people who had stayed longer in the penal colony had come to accept flogging as a way of life while those who stayed for a short period were sternly opposed to flogging. In fact, there was evidence that some settlers and overseers used flogging to gratify their evil desires. One convict overseer at Macquire harbour who was interviewed had this to say as cited by Meyering (2010, p. 4) I believe scarcely a day passed over without four or five, and in some instances 16 or 17 individuals, being flogged upon the report of the man [Anderson]. If the gang, during the time they were at labour, had been idle, or any man that he had a spite against, he would go before the commanding officer, and swear that he had been idle; of course the man complained of would receive a flogging Furthermore, some overseers used flogging to settle personal grudges and even punish convicts for their own satisfaction. It was thus concluded that flogging was a key contributor to the deterioration of the moral fabric of noble British men and women who had settled in Australia. The slave-master like relationship that existed between convicts and settlers encouraged dangerous rebellious behaviour. Dillon (2008) and Damuosi (1997) note that women, who were more prone to closer supervision from their masters when working as domestic workers often, resulted in drinking as a rebellious activity. Excessive drinking not only endangered their health but also increased the risks of sexual assault both from fellow male convicts and their male masters. For the women who were free after serving their convictions, their drinking habits were oftentimes associated with prostitution. While this was not necessarily true, it further contributed to conflict of classes, notably convicts and ex-convicts against their masters. Comparison of flogging of convicts to slavery drew support from other sections of the society most importantly the army where flogging was constantly used as a form of punishment. Military reformers drew explicit comparisons between the treatment of soldiers and that of slaves and expressed their shared concerns over the blatant disregard of human nature and morality (Grass, 2003). Support for abolition of flogging in the military shored up massive public support for the abolition of flogging and the convict system. Nonetheless, there was need to streamline the behaviour of convicts. As such, Captain Alexander Maconochie came up with plan to reform and shape the behaviour of criminals which was first trialled at the Norfolk Island. The plan would see convicts being awarded marks for good behaviours and marks deducted for bad behaviour. As a reward for high marks, convicts would be allowed to choose companions and associate with them. This system aimed at streamlining the behaviours of convicts and at the same time eliminating the necessity of flogging. However, the system was deemed a failure thought Captain Alexander Maconochie rated it as a as success (Bloy, 2002). A section of settlers vehemently opposed the recommendations of the Molesworth Committee citing a number of reasons. One of them was that abolition of the convict system would negatively affect the growth of the Australian economy and even that of Britain. This is because the convicts provided a cheap source of labour for the land owners. Much of the Australian farm produce such as wheat and cotton was exported to Britain to power the budding manufacturing industry and also feed the populations. This was one sure way of ensuring that the merchant ships that transported convicts were utilised optimally (Dillon, 2008). Conclusion In essence, the convict system has its merits and demerits. However, as the Molesworth Committee illustrated to all, the convict system was a stain in the image of a civilized Britain. The concentration of convicts in one area to supply free labour appeared to hold economic sense but the consequences were a bitter pill to swallow. Furthermore, the system allowed convenient decongestion of the British penal system while at the same time fuelling economic growth in the penal colony and in Britain. However, the moral degradation, the abuse of private master power, the high cost of transporting convicts and the general regression of human civilization under the system could not be sustained. Though efforts were made to modify the system, its basics were fundamentally wrong hence the eventual abolition of the system in 1868. References Bloy, M. (2002) The Parliamentary Report on Transportation (1838). Parliamentary papers 1837-38, Vol. 22, pp. 5-21. Retrieved online from, http://www.victorianweb.org/history/transpor.html Brake, A. & Sherriff, J. 2006. Building a colony: The convict legacy. Sydney: International Specialized Book Service Incorporated Damousi, J. 1997. Depraved and Disorderly: Female Convicts, Sexuality and Gender in Colonial Australia. Cambridge University Press Dillon, M. 2008. Convict Labour and Colonial Society in the Campbell Town Police District: 1820-1839. Grass, S. (2003). The Self in the Cell: Narrating the Victorian Prisoner. Sydney: Routledge Meyering, I. (2010). Abolitionism, settler violence and the case against flogging: a reassessment of Sir William Molesworth’s contribution to the transportation debate. History Australia, vol.7, no. 1, 1-18 Meyering, I. (2008). Contesting corporal punishment: Abolitionism, transportation and the British imperial project. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of BA (Hons) in History Department of History, University of Sydney Neal, D. (2002). The Rule of Law in a Penal Colony: Law and Politics in Early New South Wales. London: Cambridge University Press O’Toolle, S. (2006). The history of Australian corrections. Sydney: UNSW Press The 1837 Select Committee on Transportation. Report from the Select Committee on Transportation: Together with the Minutes of Evidence Read More