Cornelius Barratt

Level 218

Dianne Jones on 7th April 2022

5 September, 1862: He was admitted to Portland prison, Grove Road, Dorset -- listed as Barratt, 28, inmate #A1756. All other details as per above jail records; behaviour in public works "very good" (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951; Portland Prison; Prison Records; Undated). Portland, Portsmouth, Chatham and Spike Island in Ireland were listed public works stations and the second stage in the penal process. After separate confinement, prisoners were “placed on work parties at various locations, most commonly naval stations, where maintenance of facilities was vital for the effective protection of Britain’s far flung commercial and military influences around the world. While there, attitude and behaviour were monitored closely. In theory, only after consistently positive reports was a prisoner moved on to the third stage of his incarceration—transportation.” (Edgar, p40) --0--

Level 218

Dianne Jones on 7th April 2022

22 March, 1862: Admitted to Millbank prison, Westminster, London -- called Cornelius Barratt, inmate #4274. He was [incorrectly] listed as 28 years old, a plasterer, married with one child, able to read, Roman Catholic; next of kin -- his wife, Elizabeth Barratt, 25 Eyre Street, Bethnal Green (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Millbank Prison; Register of Prisoners; 1861-1862). By this time, descriptions of his physical appearance refer to several tattoos with the subjects being military, jewellery, names and initials. Among them is the letter "D" on his left side, called both a tattoo and a brand. This mark tallies with Inspector Brennan/Brannan's testimony (above) that Cornelius Barrett was a deserter. At some stage, between 1846 and 1862, he must have enlisted in either the army or navy. The practice of branding was continued by the British until 1871, according to Phillip Hilton’s thesis, “Branded with a D on the left side”. Until 1829, any soldier could be branded but after that it was reserved for deserters who were “marked on the left side, 2 inches (5 cm) below the armpit, with the letter ‘D’, such letter to be not less than an inch long” (Wikipedia). Hilton says branding deserters was “a means of humiliating offenders” (2010, p140, https://eprints.utas.edu.au/17678/2/Hilton_Thesis.pdf), but he doesn’t say how the branding happened and there are conflicting versions among writers. For example, Peter FitzSimons (2019) refers to barbaric fire brandings of the four Fenian deserters among the “Catalpa six” who were transported on the Hougoumont and escaped from WA to America in 1876, while others such as Amos (1987) describe painful tattooing using India ink and an awl. A post on Irish Garrison Towns (http://irishgarrisontowns.com/d-for-deserter/) says both practices were used – hot iron/fire branding being the preferred method until around the mid-19th century when it was replaced by tattooing: “A new device was created to mark the soldiers’ skin with ink, or even gunpowder… The large, blunt points [on the branding tool] hint at the pain it caused as a spring mechanism forced these points into the skin. Regimental doctors described the practice as ‘cupping’.” Simon Barnard’s “Convict tattoos: Marked men and women of Australia” (p55) has several shots of one of these spring loaded, brass “branding instruments” manufactured by John Weiss & Sons of The Strand, London. Barnard says they were used by medical officers to tattoo army deserters. The head of the “Weiss’ Invention” model holds 47 needle points arranged in the shape of a “D”, all clearly capable of puncturing human skin. So, too, the points of the brass instrument featured on the Science Museum of London’s website. Made by Savigny & Co of London, its adjustable points “still bear traces of ink” and were pushed through the skin by a spring-powered mechanism. Savigny & Co was “better known as a major manufacturer of surgical instruments in the 1700s and early 1800s”. The Museum says branding was abolished in 1829, except for army deserters. After this, the mark was tattooed on the body until the practice was abandoned altogether in 1879 (https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co155799/branding-tool-for-marking-deserters-london-england-1810-1850-branding-tool). In Millbank, Cornelius Barrett was held in separate confinement -- for 20 days -- before his transfer to Pentonville; behaviour "good". --0-- 11 April, 1862: He was admitted to Pentonville prison, Caledonian Road, London -- again listed as Barratt and 28 years old when convicted, inmate #631 (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Pentonville Prison; Register of Prisoners; 1860-1862). “After a sentence of transportation was handed down, the prisoner entered into a separate stage where he was placed into an individual cell, isolated from others, apart from brief periods of exercise and attendance at chapel. However, no communication of any kind with other prisoners was permitted at any time. The philosophy behind this penal methodology had its provenances in the religious, monastic traditions; i.e., that in the isolation of his cell the malefactor would be able to contemplate the errors of his way, unadulterated by the negative influences of former contemporaries, and be reformed.” (Edgar, 2018, pp39-40) When first put into practice, the mandated period of separate confinement was 18 months. By the late 1840s, authorities had conceded that such conditions of imprisonment were “injurious to many prisoners’ mental health” and the stint was reduced to 12 months. Periods of separate confinement were reduced further “as a prisoner displayed good behaviour tendencies” (Edgar, p40). Millbank, Pentonville, Wakefield and Mountjoy in Ireland were the “Probation” or “Separate” prisons, as were some local jails. --0--

Level 218

Dianne Jones on 7th April 2022

JAILS: January, 1862: Cornelius Barrett was held at Newgate prison, Westminster, for 2 months 1 day; behaviour "good" (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Millbank Prison; Register of Prisoners; 1861-1862). --0--

Level 218

Dianne Jones on 7th April 2022

23 November, 1846: Again at the Old Bailey, he was convicted of simple larceny (stealing 18lbs weight of cheese), with a previous conviction for felony; sentenced to be confined for one year (https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/). --00--

Level 218

Dianne Jones on 7th April 2022

PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS: 26 October, 1846: Cornelius Barrett's history of convictions starts at the age of 15, when he was tried at the Old Bailey for simple larceny (stealing a coat), convicted and sentenced to be confined for one month (https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/). --0--