Summary
Personal Information
Crime
Voyage
Transportation
Cornelius Barrett was transported on the Hougoumont, departing 10th Oct 1867 and arriving 9th Jan 1868 with 281 passengers.
875 ton ship was built at Moulmein in 1852. http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/on-this-day-in-history-australias-last-convict-ship-docks.htm ---------------------------- Incorrect Image ....This is a four masted steel hulled Barque in the drawing , im surprised Australian Geo didn't do a bit more research on this .......The Hougoumont was a works ship on the Forth Bridge Project in 1885 ....the one potrayed as a drawing in Aust Geo is the later version of this ship.....the photograph i have attached is the correct and original convict vessel. --00-- 1867 "The hired convict ship Hougoumont, which has been taken up by the Government for the conveyance of a numerous party of convicts to Freemantle, Western Australia, left the Nore on October 1, and proceeded down Channel, after receiving on board 150 convicts from the establishments at Chatham and Millbank. The convicts from the Chatham establishment, at St. Mary's, embarked from the dockyard on board the paddle-wheel steamer Adder, Mr. W. J. Blakely, and were in charge of a numerous party of convict guards and wardens, all heavily armed. Among the convicts shipped were a party of fifteen Fenians, who were engaged in the late conspiracy in Ireland, together with the officers and crew convicted of scuttling the ship Severn, and some others who have achieved notoriety from their crimes. The Fenian convicts, like the remainder of the prisoners, were chained together in gangs, but it was observed that they were kept apart from the other convicts in a portion of the vessel by themselves. The steamer Petrel also took down a number of convicts from the establishment at Millbank for shipment on board the Hougoumont, in charge of a strong escort and convict guard. On Tuesday, October 8th, the Hougoumont arrived in Portland roads. Shortly before midday ninety convicts were marched down to the Government pier at Portland under a strong escort of the 12th Light Infantry. The party included twenty-three Fenian convicts, among whom it was said, was Moriarty. The Government steamer employed in the breakwater service was used for conveying the convicts on board the Hougoumont transport ship. The convicts were chained together on embarking, and on board the steamer a strong guard of marines from her Majesty's ship St. George was formed, and saw the convicts safely placed on board the Hougoumont. The Governor of the penal settlement at Freemantle, Captain Young, is on board the Hougoumont, and returns in that ship to his sphere of duty after paying a visit to his native land." Source: Sydney Morning Herald, Thu 19 Dec 1867, p4, English Shipping, available on Trove at https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/28608271?searchTerm=hougoumont.
HougoumontReferences
| Primary Source | Australian Joint Copying Project. Microfilm Roll 93, Class and Piece Number HO11/19, Page Number 236 |
| Source Description | This record is one of the entries in the British convict transportation registers 1787-1867 database compiled by State Library of Queensland from British Home Office (HO) records which are available on microfilm as part of the Australian Joint Copying Pro |
| Original Source | Great Britain. Home Office |
| Compiled By | State Library of Queensland |
| Database Source | British convict transportation registers 1787-1867 database |
Claims
No one has claimed Cornelius Barrett yet.
Photos
No photos have been added for Cornelius Barrett.
Convict Notes
June, 1863: The Adelaide arrived at Gibraltar. Gibraltar and Bermuda were also listed public works stations (and the second stage in the penal process). On Gibraltar, as “convicts worked together with free men on the dockyards, lines between them became blurred. Convicts, like seamen, were ‘easily recognised’ by ‘their swarthy, weather beaten complexions…[and] muscular well-knit frames’. The discipline on the penal settlement was also influenced by the naval department, who superintended part of the works. In the 1840s, for example, convicts were provided ‘a half gill of rum’ at 11 AM and 5PM, which they drank from a trough. This mirrored the daily allowance of diluted rum, known as grog, to Royal Naval seamen in the Victorian era. Convicts were also allowed to use part of their earnings, to buy goods, usually tobacco, which they were allowed to smoke in the evening in the barracks. Though official correspondence cited health reasons for grog allowance, it seems likely that the convict authorities feared insubordination if they were banned from drinking and smoking, which were provided to the sappers and dockyard workers whom they worked alongside…. In 1854, the acting overseer stated that “half of the offences were committed when the men were excited by rum”. For more serious offences, convicts were flogged with a ‘cat o’nine tails’ whip against the ‘flogging mast’, and during an investigation Dr William Baly concluded that the whip which was used was an old naval cat, which was ‘much heavier than any now used in the government prison and hulks at home, or in the army.’” (Roscoe, 2018). Cornelius Barratt served 32 months 3 days on Gibraltar, working as a mason; his behaviour was listed as “exemplary” (https://www.digitalpanopticon.org/life?id=obpdef1-110-18461123). This means he would have been there at the height of a cholera epidemic that struck Gibraltar in 1865. Lawrence Sawchuck, Lianne Tripp and Michelle Mohan (2010, pp214-215) say the convict population was hardest hit as a result of several factors including the prisoners’ mental state (many convicts had been away from home for some time, leaving them open to a depressive state that it was believed was a “greater pre-disposer to cholera than the premonitory diarrhoea”), the linkage of a lack of appetite to depression, and malnourishment—although the latter “has not been associated with increased susceptibility to cholera per se, under-nutrition can lead to a weakened immune system, which, in turn, can leave one more prone to choleric infection”. Eight weeks after the initial outbreak on Gibraltar on September 6, “cholera struck the Convict Station. The lapse of time between the cases that occurred among the troops and those in the Convict Station reflects their isolation from the rest of the population. Although there was a lag in the appearance of cholera among the convicts, the epidemic manifested itself by a rapid and dramatic rise in mortality that exceeded that found in the other resident groups. The Convict Station represented not only a physical site of incarceration but also a place that forced inmates to coexist in a complex web of vulnerabilities. The penal landscape was a high-risk environment, both of an epidemiological nature (e.g., potential exposure to infectious diseases) and from a social perspective (e.g., depression and idleness). The enhanced state of vulnerability among the convicts during this epidemic can readily be seen by comparing the attack percentage for each of the resident groups where the attack proportion is the number of individuals who contracted cholera weighted by the population at risk. Using this proxy measure of vulnerability, the attack percentage indicated that the convicts were significantly more susceptible to cholera at 9.1%, than either the civilians at 5.3% and the military at 3.3%... In the 1866 medical report, it was noted that the more time spent in prison was related to a higher chance of dying if infected with cholera during the epidemic of 1865. Cases in men who were incarcerated for 4 to 6 years had 50% cholera mortality, whereas cases for men that had been brought in with the last draft only had 25% mortality. As to the overall expression of mortality during the epidemic, a comparison of the deaths attributable to cholera serves to demonstrate how devastating the epidemic was, as the crude mortality rate among the convicts stood at 6.4%, as opposed to 2.7% and 2.0% for the civilians and military groups, respectively.” —0—
TRANSPORTATION TO GIBRALTAR: 13 May, 1863: The convict ship Adelaide was cleared, with cargo, for Gibraltar and Ceylon, according to newspaper reports. —0— 16 May, 1863—from the Chatham News, p4: “Convicts. — On Wednesday morning [13 May] the Adder embarked at Prince’s Bridges a large party of convicts from the St. Mary’s Prison [Chatham prison], and steamed up the Nore, where the convicts were transferred to the convict-ship Adelaide for conveyance to Gibraltar to be employed upon the Government works in progress that place. —0— 20 May, 1863: Cornelius Barrett was sent from Portsmouth prison to embark on the Adelaide for transportation to Gibraltar. By this time, he had served 1 year 3 months 24 days of his 5 year term (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Portsmouth Prison; Register of Prisoners; labelled as 1881-1882). —0—
17 September, 1862: He was transferred to Portsmouth prison, Cumberland Street, Portsmouth—inmate #7765 (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Portsmouth Prison; Register of Prisoners; labelled as 1881-1882). —0— 6 May, 1863: Cornelius Barrett/Barratt was visited in jail by his brother. His behaviour at Portsmouth was listed as “indifferent” (UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951 for Cornelius Barratt; Portsmouth Prison; Register of Prisoners; labelled as 1881-1882). —0—
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—
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—
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—
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—
ARREST & COMMITTAL: 21 January, 1862: Aged 31, he was committed to stand trial by the Police Court, Worship Street. 27 January, 1862: Convicted at the Old Bailey, called Cornelius Barratt, aged 31, plasterer, along with John Gouldbourn/e and John Thomas, of a felony—having in their possession a mould for coining. Each was sentenced to 5 years’ penal servitude (England & Wales, Criminal Registers, 1791-1892 for Cornelius Barratt; England; Middlesex; 1862). Former Metropolitan police inspector, and Mint employee, James Brennan/Brannan, told the court “both prisoners had been before convicted; that Gouldbourne had only been out of prison six weeks; that Barrett belonged to a gang who, on one occasion, were so determined to rescue a prisoner, that they cut the harness of a cab used by the officers; that he was also a deserter, and the associate of thieves.” (https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/) —0—
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/). 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--