"Parkhurst Boys" transported to NZ 1842/43

[liverpool annie]

Hi Tony

I suppose you have this book!!

http://www.self-publishers.org.nz/nhist1.htm

Annie

[BAC3]

Hello Annie,

Thanks for the reference.

Yes, I contacted Bryce Hadleigh through that website and bought his book "A Wind from the North"......Have you read it?   Sam's Liverpudlian background would have probably interested you most of all.

Incidentally, Bryce Hadleigh was very kind and sent me some of his research notes which contributed a lot to the 23 Biographies I've completed.

Regards

Tony

[liverpool annie]

Tony!

You might find this interesting - it's about a ship to Australia - but one of the people on board was a Guardian to the Parkhurst boys ... wondered if you had read this already - quite fascinating!!

Annie

http://chrisuphill.tripod.com/list.htm

[BAC3]

Hello Annie

Thanks for the reference.

I am always interested in any mention of John Schoales Jnr., the first Guardian to the Parkhurst Boys in Western Australia, primarily because not an awful lot has been written about a "reformer" who was so important to the "Parkhurst Boys" becoming accepted.   He really set a successful benchmark that sadly was not followed through.

The correspondence between John Schoales and the Reverend Benjamin King I have copied for future reference.

Good prime source material...thanks again.

Tony

[Koromo]

Apparently the locals were not happy about these Parkhurst Boys coming to NZ according to this snippet from a brief history about Auckland (http://www.highstreet.co.nz/highstreet/history/1840.asp):

"8 October 1841 The first ships to bring Immigrants direct from Britain arrived in Auckland. Two weeks later a ship bought the Parkhurst Boys from Britain, these boys were petty convicts and were described as "immigrant boys" in official documents. The locals felt they had been betrayed by England, as the New Zealand Colony wasn't supposed to receive any convicts."

Seems like it was a bit of a raw deal for all concerned. 

Cheers
Koromo

[BAC3]

The local Auckland population were justified in feeling unhappy about the Parkhurst Boys as  the English Government had certainly been "economical with the truth".   However, it was not unknown for there to be convicts in NZ with escapees/absconders fleeing from New South Wales, for example.

Parkhurst Prison transported two categories of convict to NZ, "Apprentices" and "Free Immigrants", and it was the latter grouping who were seemingly the major problem.....they were not subject  to any form of administrative control and it was perceived that they were the cause of the increased crime levels in Auckland.  The "Apprentices" on the other hand were indentured to the settlers at very low wage rates, mostly with board and lodging included, and this was a far more satisfactory, acceptable arrangement for both parties.

The whole furore about the influx of those 123 Parkhurst Boys lasted only a very short while but, of course, ensured that no further convict ships landed in NZ.   The comparison with Western Australia is very stark.  WA needed manpower to maintain the economy and there were no real causes for concern with the 234 transported there.   NZ did not and considered the Parkhurst Boys an unwarranted financial imposition.

Regards
BAC3

[Koromo]

It's all fascinating - I had not ever known about the Parkurst Boys before. Auckland is estimated to have only had a population of 2895 in 1842, so another 123 young lads would have been noticeable.

Best wishes for your research,  Tony.
K.

[liverpool annie]

Hi Tony!

This of course is Australia - I thought you might be interested to read some different angles!!

http://www.hyperhistory.org/index.php?option=displaypage&Itemid=569&op=page

Annie

[BAC3]

Hello Annie,

Thanks for the website reference.

I am using Point Puer as a counterpoint to Parkhurst Prison in my thesis, essentially as the former was the first prison for juvenile convicts in the British Empire and had a reasonably good record in terms of reform given the lack of resources (Teachers etc.).  The most interesting aspect is that the experiences of Point Puer were not effectively relayed back to England for constructive use in the later administration of Parkhurst Prison.   I appreciate distances in the early 1800s were the great barrier to communication but Point Puer had been operative for 4/5 years before Parkhurst Prison was established.

I have taken a copy of the website for my files.

Regards

Tony