Van Diemen’s Land was the was one of the most notorious penal colonies in the British Empire. In 1642 it was named by Abel Tasman, a Dutch Explorer, for his boss, the head of the Dutch East India Company. In 1803 the British Established their colony here. It was the topic of many Irish folk songs because of so many Irish men and women transported there for crime or politics. It was so notorious that when the colony was granted responsible government one of the first acts of the new parliament was to change the island’s name to Tasmania to get rid of its stigma.
And the most notorious place on this notorious island was Port Arthur. It was an isolated prison where the British sent “the worst of the worst” to borrow a phrase. The last time I was here I noticed how beautiful the island was. And although the prison ruins were certainly a reminder of the cruelty administered here, I found it difficult to reconcile the beauty and the horror. This time it was easier. While still a beautiful island this was a particularly harsh and dry summer. Some of the grass was brown and there were not nearly as many flowers. The glare of the sun gave some of the photos a harsh contrast. While still beautiful, I can see the other side better.
There was a new interpretative display at Port Arthur. While we couldn’t visit Point Puer (we anchored right off if it) there were two displays about this boy’s prison, the first purpose built prison for juveniles in the British Empire. While calling the kids “little depraved felons” seems harsh, reading the display boards it really was a liberal reform. They separated the kids from the seasoned criminals, taught them trades, and while discipline was harsh, as were living conditions, some of the kids had at least a chance at a decent life at the end of their sentence. The display followed three kids. One led a life of crime and two became respected citizens and community leaders. Statistics overall did not look that good. More failures than successes for those kids for whom they had records, although a lot of them just got lost after leaving prison, appearing only in census data with no record of how they did. Tracking those who reoffended was easier. The Brits kept good court records.
The display also put the crimes the kids committed into a kind of context. A pickpocket could be sentenced for pinching a silk handkerchief. That does not seem like much, but in the early 1800s a silk handkerchief was a luxury item. It cost Six shillings sixpence, in purchasing power it would be about $175 today. But to put it another way, the craftsman working in silk could make two such handkerchiefs a week, so it would be half a week’s wages. That would make it even more valuable than $175. According to the information placards in the displays a kid would not normally be sentenced to transportation on first offence of pickpocketing but under the law he could be sentenced for stealing as little as a shilling’s worth of goods or food.
When we entered Australia, we had to make a declaration. It included the question “Have you been convicted of any criminal offense?” I wanted to answer, “I didn’t know it was still required?” But I kept my mouth shut and for that reason was probably allowed into the country to take this photo gallery of pics from Port Arthur.
