A missing photograph and missing letter: John SMITH (x 2) per "Mangles" and Lord Calthorpe

Prisoners called John SMITH per Mangles 1835
Lord CALTHORPE's missing letter
T. J. NEVIN's missing mugshot(s) of a John Smith



Convict ship Mangles, master John Coghill
Date [ca. 1858-ca. 1911]
Identifier(s) H92.410/20
State Library of Victoria
Link: http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/132516

This is a very interesting ship with a colourful history. A logbook of the Mangles on this voyage, listing passengers, crew and prisoners, is held at the New York Public Library (Archives and Manuscripts). It contains entries made by Edward Roberts (3rd officer on board) from April 10, 1835-April 1, 1836, commanded by Captain William Carr. The ship left Deptford and Portsmouth, voyaging to Hobart, Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania), disembarking a company of soldiers, convicts, and some of the passengers before proceeding to Timor and Lombok, Dutch East India. A thoroughly engaging account written by Veronica Peek of the arrival of the Mangles and crew at Murray Island in the Torres Strait on the voyage to Dutch East India details the discovery by the crew of a white man living among the islanders.

Further reading:
https://archives.nypl.org/mss/2588
https://veronicapeek.com/2012/06/16/part-two-voyage-of-the-barque-charles-eaton/

The short John Smith and the tall John Smith

Two convicts called "John SMITH" were transported from Britain to Hobart, Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) on the ship Mangles, arriving at Hobart, 1 August 1835. One of these men was 5ft 4½ inches tall, the other was 5ft 10½ inches tall.

Ship Mangles (7) (1835)
Ship Name: Mangles (1835) (7th voyage)
Rig Type: S.
Built: Calcutta
Build Year: 1802
Size (tons): 594 Voyage
Master: William Carr
Surgeon: Peter J. Suther
Sailed: 21 April 1835
From: London
Arrived: 1 August 1835
Port: VDL
Route: Days Travel: 102
Convicts Landed: 310 males & 0 female convicts

Details for the two convicts called John SMITH per Mangles (1835)
1. Convict Name: John Smith (no. 2035, the short one, 5ft 4½ inches tall)
Trial Place: Suffolk Quarter Session
Trial Date: 21 October 1834
Sentence: Life

2. Convict Name: John Smith (no. 2045, the tall one,5ft 10½ -11 inches tall)
Trial Place: Wilts Quarter Session
Trial Date: 14 October 1834
Sentence: 7 years

Source of notes: Hawksbury on the Net
Link:https://www.hawkesbury.net.au/claimaconvict/shipDetails.php?shipId=594

One of these two men called John Smith per Mangles, prisoner no. 2035 arrived with a letter of reference from his former employer, Lord Calthorpe, addressed to the Governor who would have been Lt-Gov Colonel George Arthur in  August 1835 at the time of the ship's arrival, the letter now apparently lost. The other prisoner called John Smith per Mangles, no. 2045 reportedly absconded from the Port Arthur prison on December 3, 1873. According to the Tasmanian police gazette notice of his escape on December 12, 1873 (p. 203), the police had in their possession photographs of prisoner no. 2045 which they stated they had distributed (see police gazette record below). Lacking further information, we are assuming the photographs were police mugshots rather than private studio portraits, and that the police had distributed them to colleagues in regional police stations. Those photographs, apparently, are now lost as well. A recidivist who consistently offended from 1860s to the 1880s, he would have been photographed by T. J. Nevin as a matter of course at the Hobart Gaol.

Prisoners photographed at the Hobart Gaol
When Sheriff of Tasmania and Inspector of Police, John Swan was questioned on Penal Discipline in Tasmania for the Commissioners' Report, tabled on July 24th, 1883, he stated that prisoners tried at the Supreme Court Hobart. Tasmania, were photographed on incarceration. He made no mention of photography for prisoners admitted at the Launceston Gaol in the north of the island. His description of the procedure dated back to its inception in Victoria and NSW when T. J. Nevin's contractual arrangements were formalised for 14 years' duration, from 1872-1886, for the provision of prisoner identification photographs to the Tasmanian colonial government.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1883
JOHN SWAN, Esq., further examined.
12. Do you hold any other office besides that of Sheriff?
Yes; I am the Inspector of Police.
13. What steps are taken for the classification of prisoners in each Gaol respectively?
Proper classification is impossible under existing arrangements. This has been reported, and was pointed out by the Commission of 1874. Parliament voted a sum for effecting certain alterations. Plans were prepared, and a report from Mr. Hunter furnished. In Hobart, first and second convicted prisoners from Supreme Court are kept in the Gaol, old offenders in the House of Correction. In Launceston, there is no separation during the day. At night first and second convicted prisoners occupy cells, old offenders dormitories.
14. Are the Gaols and Houses of Correction sufficient to accommodate the present . number· of prisoners? [etc etc ....

..pages 11 & 12:



TRANSCRIPT
20. Describe the course a convicted prisoner passes through from reception to discharge?
At Hobart, a prisoner tried at the Supreme Court on reception is bathed, shaved, has his hair cut, is dressed in prison clothing, and photographed; he is then put into H. Division to serve a certain period of his sentence in separate treatment. At the expiration of such period he is put to hard labour, either at a trade or gang labor. He is bathed once a week, and attends Divine Service on Sundays; those who wish to attend school at night are allowed to do so. An Inferior Court prisoner on reception is bathed, shaved, and hair cut according to regulations; is then dressed in prison clothing, and put to hard labour either in the quarry or garden gangs; is bathed once a week, and attends Divine Service on Sundays. At Launceston, on admission he enters the receiving-room, his personal description is recorded, searched, and then taken to the male house of correction, where he is bathed, deprived of his clothing, dressed in a grey suit, hair cut, and whiskers shaved. If he is an effective he is placed in the stone-yard until Sheriff's authority is received to employ him outside the prison, He is then drafted into one of the gangs, where he usually remains until his sentence expires.
Source Parliamentary Papers 1883
Link: https://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/tpl/PPWeb/1883/HA1883pp41.pdf

ESTIMATED VALUE of a WRITER and PHOTOGRAPHER at the HOBART GAOL
Constable John Nevin (1852-1891), younger brother of professional photographer and government contractor Thomas J. Nevin, was resident at the Hobart Gaol on salary as Gaol messenger when he contracted typhus and died on 17th June 1891. He had assisted his brother Thomas J. Nevin with prisoner admissions since 1875 at the Hobart Gaol when Thomas was needed to photograph the prisoner on sentencing at the Hobart Supreme Court (next door to the Gaol) and incarceration. With John Nevin's death, and his brother's retirement from professional photography in 1886, the colonial administration advertised in 1892 for the employment of  one or two civil servants to replace the services of the Nevin brothers.

This document records the cost of employing a "writer and photographer" at the Hobart Gaol in 1892 was £77.0.0. No similar cost was incurred at the Launceston Gaol, so it would seem that prisoners there were not photographed until or unless they were relocated to the Hobart Gaol if their offense was serious enough to warrant imprisonment for longer three months.

The cost and estimated value of labour performed by the incumbent(s) as writer and photographer, £77.0.0, was shown on this return of 1892:



Source: Tasmanian Parliamentary Papers 1856 - 1901
Link: https://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/tpl/PPWeb/1893/1893pp44.pdf

Following legislative requirements introduced in NSW and Victoria in 1872 for prisoner identification photographs to be taken on sentencing and discharge, the colonial government in Tasmania engaged professional photographer T. J. Nevin in prisons to produce up to six duplicates from his capture on glass in a single sitting with every prisoner when merited. In all likelihood, he photographed one prisoner or several who called himself "John Smith" over more than a decade, yet no mugshot identified as either prisoner, whether the short one or the tall one, or indeed another using the name as an alias, has survived, or been suggested as likely among the handful yet to be identified in the Beattie collection held at the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Launceston.  As each primary document - the letter and the photograph - appears to be lost, these details of each prisoner's criminal career may assist in differentiating one from the other. A further problem appears to be the conflation of records for both men as one catalogue entry at the Archives Office of Tasmania. See this set of records, for example, at -
https://stors.tas.gov.au/NI/1435437

If a mugshot and duplicates were made of prisoner no. 2045, John Smith per Mangles (1835) as the police gazette attests, there is no reason to assume that the prisoner (a) was not photographed at the Hobart Gaol, or (b) that the photographer was not government contractor Thomas J. Nevin. There is not now, nor will there ever be any factual evidence that the commandant at the Port Arthur prison, A. H. Boyd had photographed this or any other prisoner in 1873 while in charge. As Julia Clark - the most recent and the most ardent fantasist wanting to "believe" in a Boyd accreditation for the National Library of Australia's collection of "convict portraits" which were correctly attributed to T. J. Nevin before she started her whimpering to them that she thought Boyd "should get the guernsey" in 2007 purely in self-interest in her quest for a PhD degree - as Julia Clark all too clearly reveals here in her ignorance of jurisdictional procedures of the era, her laziness in not conducting proper research, her confabulation of circumstance to prove her case, and her willingness to buttress these naively conceived fictions about Boyd with abuse of T. J. Nevin AND his descendants, she has not one iota of information to offer on the subject:-
A John Smith arrived on the Mangles on 1 August 1835 but his record stops for lack of room in the 1840s and I have not been able to find any further record of him. No image inscribed ‘John Smith’ has been found and he does not appear in the supplementary lists.... One might then expect that there would be some mention of this project in Boyd’s reports and official correspondence for 1873 and/or 1874; none has so far been found, which is curious....Boyd does not mention photographs in his Annual Reports from Port Arthur, which seems strange given that they include quite detailed accounts of expenditure that note, for example, what it cost to feed the working dogs.654 Perhaps photography was seen as an inexpensive, one-off project rather than a recurring expenditure....
From: Clark, Julia ‘Through a Glass, Darkly’: the Camera, the Convict and the Criminal Life
Unpublished, PhD thesis 2015, University of Tasmania  pp148-149.
Read our comments on this sad little thesis here:
The LONG con: our comments on Julia Clark's fraudulent thesis


Two prisoners called John SMITH

1. Prisoner no. 2035 John Smith per Mangles and the letter
Age: 38 years old on arrival at Hobart in 1835, born ca. 1797
Crime: larceny, stealing money
Trial place: Suffolk Quarter Session
Trial Date: 21 October 1834
Sentence: Life
Height and description: 5ft 4½ inches; hazel eyes; dark brown hair.
Occupation: groom and coachman
Religion: Protestant
Literacy: can read
Native Place: Worcester.
Family: Wife Sophia at Hampton; 6 children.
Stated he had lived with Lord Calthorpe for 25yrs.
Letter from Master Lord Calthorpe addressed to the Lt Governor.
1835 and 1837 Musters in Van Diemen’s Land: assigned at Government House, Hobart.



No. 2035 John Smith per Mangles. His Conduct Record noted this statement:
"I lived with Lord Calthorpe for 25 years"
Source: Archives Office Tasmania
Link: https://stors.tas.gov.au/CON31-1-40$init=CON31-1-40P131JPG

Frederick Gough, 4th Baron Calthorpe (1790–1868) lived at Perry Hall Staffs, at the time prisoner no. 2035 John Smith per Mangles (1835) claimed he lived with him as a servant for 25 yrs. If this John Smith, servant to Lord Calthorpe, was 38 years old on arrival in Hobart, born therefore ca. 1797, and had "lived with" Lord Calthorpe for 25 years, he must have begun service at Perry Hall ca. 1810 when he was 13 years old.



Frederick Gough, 4th Baron Calthorpe (1790-1868) and Lady Calthorpe (1790-1865)
Carte-de-visite 1860 by Disdéri of Paris.
Source: http://www.19thcenturyphotos.com/Lord-and-Lady-Calthorpe-125853.htm

More information regarding a letter from Lord Calthorpe was noted twice on the opposing page of the INDENT record for No. 2035, John Smith per Mangles:



"Letter deposited in the M M Office from his Master Ld Calthorpe"
written in original script, and the second, enclosed in quotation marks, added in original script in faded blue coloured pencil -
"In possession of the Lieutenant Governor"
Source: Archives Office Tasmania
Link: https://stors.tas.gov.au/CON14-1-4$init=CON14-1-4P49

Assuming that the letter accompanied the prisoner no. 2035 John Smith on the Mangles, it was deposited on arrival in 1835 at Hobart. The second note states the letter was then placed in the possession of the Lieutenant Governor, who was George Arthur in 1835, and Sir John Franklin by January 1837. John Smith's CONDUCT record states that during 1837- 1838 he was a coachman assigned to Government House when he committed further offences. The contents and purpose of this important letter from Lord Calthorpe, probably testifying to John Smith's capabilities as groom and coachman despite his criminal offences which earned him transportation for life, must have worked in his favour, since his first assignment was to the highest official in the colony, the Governor.  The letter might therefore be among the letters held by Sir John Franklin until his departure or those of this successors, still undiscovered at the Archives Office of Tasmania along with relevant documents pertaining to employment of prisoners at Government House in those years.

Police no. 2035, John Smith per Mangles 1835 received a Conditional Pardon on 29 August 1848 and soon after departed, probably for the Victorian gold fields. He may not have returned to Tasmania.



Prisoner No. 2035 John SMITH per Mangles
Detail: Conditional Pardon 1848
Archives Office Tasmania Ref: CON31-1-40P131

TRANSCRIPT (where legible)
2035 SMITH John
Mangles 1st August 1835
Suffolk QS 21st Oct 1834. Life

Transported for Larceny. Gaol Report. Bad character convicted before, a drunkard. Hulk. Report orderly. Married. Stated this offence, Stealing a purse from Maria Vickers once for Beer, 12 months, Married, 6 Children, Wife Sophia at Hampton. I lived 25 years with Lord Calthorpe, Surgeon's report Good.

April 27th 1837, Gov't House Charged by Mr Hepburn in assaulting David Webster. Solitary Cell at nights for 10 nights after his labour by day. [? initialled by authority] To be recorded in his favour his good conduct at the recent fire of Gov House [? initialled] Vide Sup 2 Dec 1837. Nov. 8th 1838 Coachman Govt Ho/ In a public House after hours [? initialled] January 22nd 1839 Drunk and ill using his masters horses Cells on bread one week [? initialled] July 8, 1839 [? initialled] Being in a public house after hours. All 7 nights doing his work by day [? illegible, struck through -"refusing to work.." initialled] June 23, 1840 making use of obscene language - 14 days cells [? initialled] August 24th 1840 [?..Wal?] Stealing 15lb of flour the property of his master To be [? ] to hard labor in chains for 6 mos [months- two sets of initials] Oct 9, 1849 C J [initialled] Ch (chain) Gang. Misconduct in leaving the church during divine service without leave, Rept disch Tol [ticket of leave] 1.3.44.
12 Sepr 1845 TL Breach of Police Act fined 20/- JP/ Recommended for a Con Pardon 29/8/48
Although commended for good conduct when a fire broke out at Government House, Hobart on 21st December 1837, John Smith was not among the three assigned convicts who received a public commendation. In 1837, with the arrival of Sir John Franklin, costs of the forty (40) convicts who were assigned to Government House, Hobart, to Government Cottages at Launceston and New Norfolk, the Domain and Gardens, called "billet men", were defrayed to the Colonial Revenue (page 3, Launceston Advertiser, Thursday 7th December 1837).



... The Lieutenant-Governor has been pleased to grant tickets-of-leave to the following men as a reward for their meritorious exertions on the occasion of the recent fire at Government House: — William Morrow, Moffatt ; James Wicks, Roslyn Castle ; John Adams, Bussorah Merchant.
Source: THE HOBART TOWN GAZETTE. Friday, December 15, 1837).

1852departure probably for the Victorian gold fields
Name: Smith, John
Record Type: Departures
Rank: Steerage
Status: Conditional Pardon
Departure date: 18 Mar 1852
Departure port: Launceston
Ship: Shamrock
Ship to colony: Mangles
Bound to: Melbourne
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:609880
Resource: POL220/1/1 p617

2. Prisoner no. 2045 John Smith and the photographs
Age: 21 years old on arrival at Hobart in 1835, born ca. 1814
Crime: house breaking
Trial Place: Wilts Quarter Session
Trial Date: 14 October 1834
Sentence: 7 years
Height and description: 5ft 10½; 2 blue marks, brown complexion; black hair; blue eyes.
Occupation: ploughman/farm labourer
Religion: Protestant
Literacy: can read
Native place: Osborne
Family: single, brothers - David and Thomas. Sisters - Jane and Sophia. Supreme Court, Hobart 17/04/1844 - sentenced to another 7yrs.



Prisoner No. 2045 John Smith per Mangles (1835) family members, housebreaking offence
Source: Archives Office Tasmania
CON14-1-4P64, CON14-1-4P65



Prisoner No. 2045 John Smith per Mangles (1835) criminal record 1830s
Source; Archives Office Tasmania Ref:CON31-1-40P135



Prisoner no. 2045, John Smith, criminal record 1840s
CON32-1-2P135
Police number: 2045
Index number: 65510
Record ID: NAME_INDEXES:1435437
Source: Archives Office Tasmania
Link: https://stors.tas.gov.au/NI/1435437



Prisoner no. 2045 John Smith per Mangles (1835) criminal record 1850s-1878
Source: Archives Office Tasmania
CON34-1-5P710

EXTRACT (loosely transcribed)
22 May 1860 Tried Supreme Court Oatlands 26 September 1860 Assault & Robbery being armed. Death recorded. Commuted to Penal servitude for life. Never again allowed to engage with the community.
4 August 1864, Port Arthur. Absconding from the Penitentiary PA, 5 years imprisonment with hard labour in chains, the first six months in separate prison
10 August 1868 Misconduct PA 4 days in solitary conf
13 November 1869 PA Misconduct 7 days solitary conf
19 December 1873 Absconding 12 months SP Separate Prison first month in solitary confinement
22 May 1875 Misconduct 6 months solitary confinement PO police office Torquay
25 6 1878 Larceny 2 months

SIDEBAR column:
To be released from heavy chains & placed in medium irons until further orders. C. O. 27.9.67
Released from chains 30.11.68
The Gov in C declines to interfere 20. 12. 70
H.C. (House of Corrections, Hobart) 7/8/75
Gov inf 20/11/76 T of L. granted Not to reside in Hobart Town
Died Invalid Depot New Town [Hobart] 11 January 1892

1873: "Photographs distributed" of absconder John Smith
This notice was to inform police that prisoner no. 2045, John Smith per Mangles, 60 yrs old in 1873, 5 ft 11 inches tall was wanted on warrant. His mugshot and its duplicates, in existence by December 1873, have disappeared, whether lost, damaged, stolen or destroyed. If he was at the Port Arthur prison prior to absconding in December 1873, and not on a chain gang in Hobart at the Domain with the Gregson brothers among others, he was photographed there during the visit of partners Samuel Clifford and Thomas J. Nevin in August 1873



TRANSCRIPT
ABSCONDED: -
On the 5th instant, from Port Arthur, whilst under-going a sentence of life passed on him at S. C. Oatlands, 26th September, 1860, for assault and robbery.
John Smith, per Mangles, aged 60, 5 feet 11, sallow complexion, brown to grey hair, hazel eyes, long nose, medium mouth, round chin, native of Hampshire, England, 2 blue marks inside right arm. Photographs distributed.
Tasmanian police gazette notice, 5 December 1873. John Smith was arrested within a week and sentenced to 12 months. His record shows he petitioned the Attorney-General in 1870 who declined to interfere. He was transferred to the Hobart Gaol, Campbell St. on 7th August 1875 where Nevin may well have photographed him again on being received, as well as on discharge in November 1876, per regulations in force since 1872. 

1876: discharged from Hobart
Prisoner no. 2045, John Smith per Mangles, 64 yrs old in 1876, 5 ft 11 inches tall, discharged.



John Smith per Mangles was tried at Oatlands S.C. on 26 September 1860 for assault and robbery being armed.
Sentence extended to life.
Native place: Hampshire
Age: 64 years old
Height: 5 ft 11 inches, grey hair, mole near left temple
Discharged 29 Nov 1876. Ticket of Leave.

1878: ticket-of-leave, convicted and discharged
This again was prisoner no. 2045, John Smith per Mangles. When convicted of larceny at Port Sorell (20 kms east of Devonport, northern Tasmania) per this police gazette notice of June 29th, 1878, John Smith per Mangles (1835) held a ticket-of-leave (TL). Now 64 years, 5 feet 11 inches tall, (still growing?) a baker by trade and resident of the Midlands district (Tasmania), the notice recorded a sentence of two months for theft of a watch, and quite remarkably, failed to record any of his prior convictions.



He was discharged two (2) months later, per this notice 31 August 1878.



According to this notice in the Tasmanian police gazette of discharges between 31 August and 4 September 1878,  John Smith, transported per Mangles, 64 years old, 5 feet 11 inches tall, with grey hair and mole near left temple, born England, was tried at Torquay, the former name of Devonport (Tasmania - see Addenda below) on 25 June 1878 for larceny, sentenced to two months' incarceration, and was discharged in late August 1878

1880-1890: Health and Welfare Records
Which of the two men called John Smith per Mangles (1835) do these records describe? Records for the short prisoner John Smith no. 2035 cease after 1852. Given the death date of the tall John Smith in 1892, these records most likely pertain to the former prisoner with the record no. 2045. From 1880 to 1890, John Smith was admitted and discharged at Invalid Depots in Hobart. For example, this notice recorded his admission in 1880 because of disobedience of orders, and his discharge because he was able to work in 1881.
Feb 2, 1881, return of paupers discharged from Invalid Depots Tasmania
Authority No. 64. John Smith per Mangles admitted at Campbell Town on 12 July 1880,
Date discharged: 1 February 1881,
Remarks: Discharged because of disobedience of orders, able to work.
Archives Office Tasmania Ref: POL709-1-18P28



Feb 2, 1881, return of paupers discharged from Invalid Depots Tasmania
Authority No. 64. John Smith per Mangles admitted at Campbell Town on 12 July 1880,
Date discharged: 1 February 1881
Remarks: Discharged because of disobedience of orders, able to work.
Archives Office Tasmania Ref: POL709-1-18P28
Source: Tasmania Reports for Police, (police gazette), February 1881

John Smith per Mangles was admitted again in 1889 and discharged in 1890.
Prisoner John SMITH per Mangles
Return of Paupers discharged from the Invalid Depots Tasmania
Authority No. 38, admitted from Hobart on 10 Sept 1889, discharged 11 Feb 1890
Remarks: at own request
Archives Office Tasmania
Ref: POL709-1-23_1890P47
Source: Tasmania Reports for Police, (police gazette), February 1881-1890



Source: Archives Office Tasmania
Link: https://stors.tas.gov.au/NI/1605660

1892: Death of John Smith (prisoner no. 2045)
Unless both men transported on the Mangles (1835) called John Smith were bakers in late life, this record of John Smith's death at the New Town Charitable Institute of senile debility, 76 yrs old, on 10th January 1892, is the record of the taller one, former prisoner no. 2045, John Smith, 5ft 10½ -11 inches tall. Looking back to his Conduct and Indent records, he was 21 years old on arrival at Hobart in 1835 on the Mangles, so in 1892, he was ca. 78 years old, born ca. 1814.



Smith, John (former prisoner no. 2045)
Record Type: Deaths
Gender: Male
Age: 76
Date of death: 10 Jan 1892
Registered: Hobart
Registration year: 1892
Record ID:NAME_INDEXES:1236916
Archives Office Tasmania Resource: RGD35/1/13 no 977

Disambiguation: George MARSH alias John SMITH
None of these prisoners with the surname or alias of SMITH in the list below who were scheduled in July 1873 to be transferred from the Port Arthur prison back to the Hobart Gaol was prisoner no. 2045, John Smith per Mangles,(1835) 60 years old who reportedly absconded from Port Arthur in December 1873, and was sentenced to 12 months when arrested within weeks. Why wasn't he listed, if the place from which he absconded was Port Arthur? He was most likely a "billet man" working on a chain gang,  perhaps near Torquay (Devonport) in the north of Tasmania when he absconded, and not at Port Arthur, the original place of his incarceration and recidivism for most of the 1830s, 1840s and 1850s. He was confined again at the Police Office, Torquay in 1875 .

1. John Smith alias Wm Orrin, 42 years old, date of conviction 26 November 1872, tried at the Supreme Court, Hobart, Crime- Feloniously receiving, Sentence - 10 years. (DOB ca. 1830)
2. John Smith alias George Marsh , 55 years old, date of conviction 13 June 1871, tried at the Police Office Launceston, Crime - Larceny and absconding, Sentence - 6 months (DOB ca. 1816)
3. Henry Smith, 37 years old, date of conviction, 12 September 1871, tried at the Supreme Court, Hobart, Crime - Housebreaking, Sentence - 5 years (DOB ca. 1834)
4. Campbell, William alias Job Smith, 45 years old, date of conviction 19 March 1872, tried at Supreme Court, Launceston, Crime - Uttering a forged cheque, Sentence - 8 years (DOB ca. 1827)
5. John Smith, 42 years old, date of conviction 10 September 1872, tried at Supreme Court, Hobart, Crime - Attempt at burglary, Sentence 2 years (DOB ca. 1830)
6. Alexander Smith, 40 years old, date of conviction 26 November 1872, tried at the Supreme Court, Hobart, Crime - uttering counterfeit coin, Sentence - 2 years (DOB ca. 1832)

Public outrage in the press at judicial inconsistencies in sentencing mentioned prisoners George Marsh with Henry Page and Charles Downes as getting a reprieve while Job Smith aka Campbell was hanged in 1875. John Smith aka George Marsh was 55 years old in 1871, 5ft 4 inches tall, when he arrived at Port Arthur on 9 December 1876. He was sent back to Hobart in 1877 per this Port Arthur conduct record of earnings, which incidentally doesn't show any earnings. This prisoner was not photographed at Port Arthur during incarceration there, and if he was photographed on discharge, his photograph apparently has not survived either as George Marsh or the alias he used, John Smith, but by 1884 when he was admitted to the Insane Asylum at New Norfolk suffering hallucinations of animal attacks and found to be of unsound mind, he was admitted as George Marsh.



Source: George Marsh as John Smith
Archives Office Tasmania Ref: CON94-1-2P20
Hospital records George Marsh
HSD285/1/1891 Marsh, George dob c.1820 03 Jun 1884 03 Jun 1884
https://stors.tas.gov.au/AI/HSD285-1-1891

Addenda 1: Lord Calthorpe at Perry Hall



Frederick Gough, 4th Baron Calthorpe (1790-1868) and Lady Calthorpe (1790-1865)
Carte-de-visite 1860 by Disdéri of Paris.
Source: http://www.19thcenturyphotos.com/Lord-and-Lady-Calthorpe-125853.htm
A carte-de-visite portrait of Frederick Gough, 4th Baron Calthorpe (1790-1868), and his wife, Lady Calthorpe. Born in London on 14 June 1790, he was the son of Henry Gough-Calthorpe, 1st Baron Calthorpe and his wife Frances née Carpenter. On 12 August 1823 he married Lady Charlotte Sophia Somerset, daughter of Henry Charles Somerset, 6th Duke of Beaufort and Lady Charlotte Sophia Leveson-Gower. The marriage produced at least three daughters and four sons; three of the sons succeeded in turn as Baron Calthorpe. He served as MP for Hindon from 1818 to 1826 and as MP for Bramber from 1826 to 1831. On 14 May 1845 his name was legally changed by Royal Licence to Frederick Gough. In September 1851 he succeeded his older brother George and became 4th Baron Calthorpe of Egbaston in the County of Warwickshire. Lady Calthorpe died, aged 70, on 12 November 1865 at Elvetham in Hampshire. Lord Calthorpe died, aged 77, on 2 May 1868, also at Elvetham. His will (dated 13 May 1856) was proved on 14 May 1868, at under £70,000.Photographed in 1860 by Disdéri of Paris.
Copyright © Paul Frecker 2021
Link: http://www.19thcenturyphotos.com/Lord-and-Lady-Calthorpe-125853.htm

Frederick Gough, 4th Baron Calthorpe (1790–1868) lived at Perry Hall Staffs, at the time prisoner no. 2035 John Smith per Mangles (1835) claimed he lived with him as a servant for 25 yrs.
Perry Hall was acquired by Sir Henry Gough of Oldfallings near Wolverhampton in 1669 and continued as the main residence of the family until 1923 when the estate was sold. The hall itself, which occupied the Northern end of a medieval moated site, bore the date 1576, although substantial additions and modifications had been made to it in 1788 and, by the architect S. S. Teulon, in the late 1840's. A two day sale of Perry's contents in March 1928 included parts of the structure itself, such as "1000 Stone Mullion & other windows", "120 Oak & Pine Doors" and "40 Marble & Oak Mantelpieces". It was demolished shortly afterwards but the moat remains as a boating pool in Perry Hall Park. In 1911 Perry, as part of the parish of Handsworth, was included within the City of Birmingham.



Location: Perry Barr, County WARWICKSHIRE
Year demolished: 1929
Reason: URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Source: Presented by Sir Richard Paget Bt, 1930.
Link: http://www.lostheritage.org.uk/houses/lh_warwickshire_perryhall_info_gallery.html

Perry Hall Park or Perry Hall Playing Fields is a park in Perry Barr, Birmingham, England, at grid reference SP059918. It was in Staffordshire until 1928.[1]
It was formerly the site of Perry Hall, demolished 1927, home of the Gough family, though only the hall's moat remains after the Birmingham Corporation had to choose between saving Perry Hall and the nearby Aston Hall for financial purposes. When Harry Dorsey Gough set up home in Maryland, United States, in 1774, he named his estate there Perry Hall. The site is protected by Fields in Trust through a legal "Deed of Dedication" safeguarding the future of the space as public recreation land for future generations to enjoy.[2]
The park is bisected by the River Tame, which was remodelled in 2005 to slow the flow, alleviate flooding and create improved habitats for wildlife, as part of the SMURF (Sustainable Management of Urban Rivers and Floodplains) project. The park has a small heronry.
The park is skirted by the Birmingham - Walsall railway line (the "Chase Line"), formerly the Grand Junction Railway and served by nearby Perry Barr railway station and, at the western end, Hamstead railway station.
In July 1913, the first International Scout Rally in Birmingham was held in the park, attended by about 30,000 Scouts.[3]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Hall_Park

Addenda 2: History of Devonport (Tas)
* Prior to the arrival of Europeans the area around Devonport had been home to the Tommeginne Aborigines for an estimated 30,000 years.
* The first explorers into the area reached the Mersey River as early as 1823. Reports were not favourable with one explorer noting that the land was "mountainous, extremely barren and totally unfit for habitation".
* The arrival of the Van Diemen's Land Company in 1826 resulted in the district being explored and surveyed. Settlers began to arrive later that year.
* The local Aborigines resisted settlement. This culminated in the killing of Captain Bartholomew Boyle Thomas, the district's first settler, in 1829.
* The tiny settlement of Torquay was established on the east bank of the Mersey River in 1851.
* A settlement named Formby was laid out on the west side of the Mersey River in 1853.
* The port facilities - a store, wharf and warning beacons as well as the Don Railway - had been completed by 1854.
* Throughout the 1850s the port was used by timber cutters and boat builders. There was also some coal mining in the area.
* Prior to 1860 the only way to cross the Mersey was by boat or swimming.
* In 1860 a rough log bridge was built upstream at the village of Latrobe. Eventually a ferry plied the river.
* A local Marine Board was formed in 1868.
* The railway from Launceston reached Devonport in 1885.
* The Devonport Town Board was formed on 11 February 1890 when Formby and Torquay amalgamated.
* The port's lighthouse, now part of the National Estate, was completed in 1899. It still stands on Mersey Bluff.
* It wasn't until 1902 that a bridge was finally built across the river.
* Devonport Municipal Council was formed in 1908.
Source: Aussie Towns: Devonport, Tasmania


RELATED POSTS main weblog

Lost and found: one day in 1866 and the scientific racism which followed

TASMANIAN PHOTOGRAPHERS C. A. Woolley; T. J. Nevin; Samuel Clifford; and the Anson Brothers 1860s-1880s
REPRODUCTIONS of C. A. Woolley's photographs of Tasmanian Aborigines 1860s by John Watt Beattie 1890s-1915
SCIENTIFIC RACISM and REPATRIATION of INDIGENOUS REMAINS from Britain

In August 1866 at his Hobart studio, 42 Macquarie Street, photographer Charles A. Woolley (1834-1922) would ask of his three sitters, Truganini, William Lanney and Bessy Clark, to bear with him while he rearranged their clothing, repositioned the studio decor, swapped their seating, and gave instructions as to sightlines. This short session, perhaps no more than an hour, resulted in a series consisting of at least four full-length portraits of the trio as a group, each slightly different in configuration and composition. The earliest example to survive from this session, an original carte-de-visite produced by Charles A. Woolley before 1869, has surfaced in the family collections of Woolley's young contemporary, Thomas J. Nevin (1842-1923).

The cdv by descent before 1961
The first of these photographs in the series from 1866, a hand-coloured carte-de-visite of this group of three sitters (below) was passed down from Thomas and Elizabeth Nevin's own photographic collection to their youngest son Albert, his wife Emily and their family where it was held for nearly a century.

In April 1961, a family member resident in NSW, Mrs Hilda Warren nee Nevin (dec), wrote a letter to Davies Brothers Limited, publishers of the daily newspaper, the Tasmanian Mercury in Hobart, suggesting they might want to publish the photograph. The impetus behind this suggestion is not immediately evident, nor easily discoverable because the National Library of Australia has yet to digitise issues of the Tasmanian Mercury past the year 1954. Perhaps by 1961 new research or new controversies regarding Tasmanian Aboriginal history were emerging. Whatever reason for Hilda's decision to offer her cdv of the Aboriginal trio to the Mercury, D. N. Hawker, Chief of Staff replied by letter dated 2nd May 1961 with the request she send him the cdv by registered post.

Tasmanian Aboriginal group 1866

Above: Letter from the Mercury, 2 May 1961 addressed to Mrs. Hilda Warren, NSW;
The cdv/photograph in question of Tasmanian Aboriginal trio by C. A. Woolley, 1866-69;
Envelope containing letter returned from the Mercury.
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021.

TRANSCRIPT
Dear Mrs. Warren,
Your letter about the photograph of three Tasmanian aborigines is most interesting.

We would like to be able to publish the picture. We would be grateful if you could send it to us by registered mail. We would see that it is returned safely.

We would be happy to meet the mailing cost and pay an appropriate publication fee if the photograph is suitable for reproduction.

Yours faithfully,
THE MERCURY NEWSPAPER PTY. LTD.
(Signature - D. N. HAWKER)
CHIEF OF STAFF

The question remains and needs to be addressed: did the Mercury receive the cdv and publish it? Perhaps Mrs Warren had second thoughts about letting the cdv go from the photographic collection of her grandfather Thomas J. Nevin, and hesitated. Only in this decade (2020) has the cdv surfaced along with many other photographs and ephemera dating from Thomas J. Nevin's active years as a commercial and police photographer, fl.1864-1888.

1. Truganini with footstool visible
The carte-de-visite print of Charles Woolley's original photograph of three Tasmanian Aborigines - Truganini (seated on left), William Lanne (centre, standing) and Bessy Clarke (on right), taken in 1866, was passed down from Thomas J. Nevin to descendants of his youngest son, Albert E. Nevin (1888-1955). It may have been reprinted by Thomas Nevin's studio before Truganini's death in 1876. The owner of the cdv print attempted hand-colouring of the drape and carpet with crimson. Similar inept hand-colouring was applied to a series of cdvs bearing Nevin's name inscribed as "Clifford & Nevin" or his studio stamp with provenance in the north of Tasmania (QVMAG, Launceston; McCullagh Private Collection, etc). Although the provenance of this particular cdv is from the private collection of Thomas and Elizabeth Nevin's grandchildren, it was not necessarily hand-coloured by Nevin or his studio assistants at the time of printing.

The phrase "The only Aboriginal Native of Tasmania living in April 1869" on the printed label, verso of this print, which appears to have been pasted over the back of the original cdv, uses the present tense to indicate that Truganini was still alive in April 1869, while Bessy Clarke had died, 12th February 1867, and William Lanne had died, 3rd March 1869, thereby dating the first reprint of this photograph in cdv format to April 1869 but not necessarily of any subsequent prints which could have been produced in every decade until the early 1920s in the name of tourism, especially by John Watt Beattie, when this particular trio was believed to represent "the Last of the Tasmanian Aborigines".
As a result of the growing belief that the Aboriginal race was doomed to extinction, photographers sought to record what was believed to be a disappearing way of life. They followed the ‘frontier’, seeking to find Aboriginal people apparently untouched by change – seemingly ‘primitive’, ‘authentic’ subjects, stripped of signs of European civilization, such as clothing. By contrast, humanitarians such as missionaries sought to show Aboriginal people as essentially the same as Western observers, dressed elegantly with signs of literacy and Christianity such as the Bible...
Jane Lydon (2016): Transmuting Australian Aboriginal photographs, World Art
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21500894.2016.1169215



Subject: on left, Truganini (seated), William Lanne (centre), Bessy Clarke (standing, on right).
Photographer: Charles Alfred Woolley (1834-1922) who worked from 1859 to 1870 at premises adjacent to his father’s upholstery and carpet warehouse.
Format: sepia carte-de-visite on plain buff mount. The plain cdv mount was imported from Marion Imprint Paris, sold by Walch's stationers in Hobart, Tasmania.
Location and date: 42 Macquarie St. Hobart, 1866
Details: reprint of an original photograph by C. A. Woolley by another studio, possibly T. J. Nevin's, given provenance from Nevin family descendants.
The verso of this particular cdv reprint was pasted over with a printed label to indicate that Truganini was still living in April 1869, ostensibly when the printed label was first created.
Crimson water colour was applied to the drape and carpet by purchasers of the print, which may have been returned to Nevin's studio where attempts were made to remove the colouring.
Condition: faded image, torn mount, pinholes in mount, possibly printed on salt paper which has absorbed the crimson colouring in parts; might have been washed at some stage.
NB: the footstool at Truganini's feet is visible in this capture which was taken minutes apart from the capture below which was reprinted by John Watt Beattie ca. 1891. Another difference between this capture and the reprint by Beattie is Truganini's right hand - she held it open and relaxed in this capture, but clenched and closed in the capture below.
Provenance: descendants of photographer Thomas J. Nevin (1842-1923)



Verso: (for recto notes, see above)
Female to left, TRUGANINI, - Seaweed. (Lallah Rookh). About 65 years old. The only Aboriginal Native of Tasmania living in April, 1869.

Female to right, PINNANOBATHAC, - Kangaroo Head. (Bessy Clarke). About 50 years old, died at Oyster Cove, February 12th, 1867.

Male, WILLIAM LANNE, or King Billy, about 26 years old. The last male Aboriginal Native of Tasmania. Died at Hobart Town, March 3rd, 1869.

Photographed from life by Chas. A. Woolley, August, 1866.

CHAS. A. WOOLLEY, 42, MACQUARIE-STREET, HOBART TOWN.
Marion Imp. Paris
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021.

2. Truganini with footstool covered
Clearly, Charles Woolley took this photograph (below) within minutes of the capture above in the same session. He requested from his sitters a few minor adjustments to the composition. Truganini moved her chair and herself closer to William, covered her feet and the footstool with the hem of her dress, and closed her right hand into a fist. William maintained his pose but changed his facial expression; and Bessy leaned in closer to William. All three maintained their gaze to the left of the photographer but focussed on a point closer to the floor.

This is not the only instance where two or more captures taken in the same sitting within minutes are extant of a group of Tasmanian Aborigines. The original session in which two photographs were taken of four sitters identified as William Lanne, Mary Ann, Truganini and Pangernowidedic is dated 1864 and widely credited to the studio of Henry Albert Frith of 19 Murray Street, Hobart. Slight variations in seating and direction of gaze also occurred between takes, and only one of the two captures to survive was hand-coloured. Read more in this article: Calling the shots in colour 1864-1879

Given the quality of this print, (below) by John Watt Beattie, he most likely acquired Charles Woolley's original glass plate negative from stock purchased by the Anson brothers when he first joined their studio in 1891 at Wellington Bridge, Elizabeth Street Hobart. He expanded their business, reprinting the works of Charles A. Woolley, Thomas J. Nevin and Samuel Clifford when each had ceased commercial photography, and mostly without due acknowledgement to them as the original photographer. There is no indication, for example, on this and later prints of this image that the original photograph was taken in 1866 by C. A. Woolley, and not by J. W. Beattie when it was reproduced after 1891. With commercial imperatives foremost in all Beattie's endeavours, this print was produced for the tourist market in postcard format as well as sold individually for inclusion in travellers' albums. In one example, a fine print of this particular composition with Beattie's name embossed on the lower left was collated thematically in a deluxe album, and offered to wealthy collectors such as David Scott Mitchell (1836-1907 - viz. Mitchell Collection, State Library of NSW).



Photograph - Tasmanian Aboriginals, TRUCANNINI, LANNE, William, CLARKE, Bessy
Item Number: PH30/1/3645
Start Date: 01 Jan 1868
View online:https://stors.tas.gov.au/AI/PH30-1-3645
Archives Office of Tasmania

3. Faux stereograph with backdrop and table
This double portrait, appearing to be a stereograph (below) might suggest that two separate photographs were taken within minutes, with the camera moved to right (or left) to create the effect necessary for stereography. But that may not be correct for several reasons. First, the stereograph has no buff mount. The whole has been cropped to eliminate the mount. Second, it would seem that the image on the viewer's right was cropped from the image on the viewer's left, suggesting just one photograph was taken but printed twice. If this is correct, the only photograph produced from this particular positioning of the Aboriginal trio and taken in the same session in 1866 at Woolley's studio, was the image on the viewer's left which kept visible at the frame's right side a conservatory door with fanlight and lace curtain partially covering a table with griffin-shaped legs. This table appears in a few portraits by Charles Woolley, notably in one of Mrs Mather. He most likely sourced the table from his father's furniture store where Thomas J. Nevin later acquired it or one identical; it features as a key piece of studio decor in dozens of Nevin's portraits of private clientele of the early 1870s, some in particular showing off his big box tabletop stereoscopic viewer.

Although Bessy Clark remained standing to William Lanney's left, in this capture her right arm was hidden behind his back. In the other two poses above, while different in other respects, her right arm was placed in front of William Lanney's left arm. In this capture, Truganini has intertwined the fingers of her left and right hands, while in the hand-coloured cdv (Thomas J. Nevin's collection) her  right hand is open and relaxed,  and in the 1890's reprint by Beattie of yet another capture from Woolley's original session, her right hand is clenched. The footstool for this capture was fully covered by Truganini's dress.



Caption:
Last of the Tasmanian Aborigines photographs, a most remarkable collection of photographs from the great Grandson of Charles Woolley, principal photographer of the Tasmanian Aboriginals. Taken from life in 1866. They have been only in the possession of the family since they were taken, comprising: 'Wapperty Z' died 12th August l867 (3): 'Truganini (seaweed) (Lallah Rookh)', of the Bruni Island Tribe was the last and only native of Tasmania living in April 1869 (3); 'King Billy (William Lanne)', the last male Aboriginal Native of Tasmania died March 3rd 1869 (3); 'Pinnanobathac (kangaroo head) Bessie Clarke', died Oyster Cove, 12th Feb 1887 (4): 'Patty' died 9th July 1867 (4); group picture of Truganini, King Billy and Bessie Clark. (1). (18)
Source: Carter's Price Guide to Antiques.
Link: https://www.carters.com.au/index.cfm/index/4860-woolley-charles-australia-photographs/

4. Another seating arrangement
Although the hand-coloured cdv (above) from Thomas J. Nevin's family collections may not have been published by the Tasmanian Mercury in 1961, another group photograph of the same sitters - Truganini, William Lanney and Bessy Clarke - which was one of at least four photographs taken by Charles A. Woolley in the single session in 1866, was published by Melbourne's Herald Sun on 8th July, 2000.

In this capture from the series (below), Bessy Clarke sat centre, the footstool visible at her feet, William Lanne took her place standing now at right of frame, and Truganini stood left of frame. This photograph of the Aboriginal trio was taken in the same session as the three single image portraits, including the image used as a stereograph (above), but it too appears to have been neglected by the institution which supplied a print of it for the Melbourne Herald Sun's article "The Death Collectors", 8th July 2000. Information supplied by the Herald Sun gave no source for the print nor any photographer accreditation. The identities of the Aboriginal trio were simply acknowledged with this caption - "(top left, from left) Truganini, her relative Bessy Clarke and William Lanney." (see page below).



Photo copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021.

Above: an original cdv of this image, produced at the time the photograph was taken, is either missing or not yet digitised if still extant in Australian or British public collections. This capture is the fourth composition, different again from the other three, each taken minutes apart during the same session when Truganini, Bessey Clark, and William Lanney posed at Charles A. Woolley's photographic studio, Hobart, in 1866. It was published by Melbourne's Herald Sun in 2000, and again by the London Times in 2003, in articles dealing with the genocide of Tasmania's Aboriginal population and theft of Aboriginal remains during the colonial and early modern era.

"The Death Collectors" 2000
Published on July 8, 2000 | Herald Sun/Sunday Herald Sun/Home Magazine (Melbourne, Australia)
Author/Byline: PAUL GRAY | Page: W08 | Section: Weekend. 1771 Words



This copy of the article was kept together with the cdv of the Aboriginal group from Thomas Nevin's family.
Photo copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021

TRANSCRIPT (text only - no photographs which appeared in this article were available at Newsbank).
LOST RITES
[head and shoulders portrait of Truganini facing front wearing shell necklace]
Caption: The bodies of countless Aborigines were dissected, decapitated and taken far from home - all in the name of science.

THE DEATH COLLECTORS
[portrait of Michael Mansell]
Caption: Tasmanian Michael Mansell says the most important issue is to get past the control exerted by British Museum authorities over the remains they hold.
COVER STORY
The return of Aboriginal remains held in British museums was high on the agenda of talks between Prime Minister John Howard and his British counterpart Tony Blair this week. PAUL GRAY investigates an appalling chapter in Australia's history.

THE corpse of an Aboriginal man lies in the morgue in Hobart Town.

It is March 1869, the day on which the last full-blood Aboriginal man in Tasmania, William Lanney, died.

But as he awaits burial, an international squabble is brewing.

British scientists are racing to lay their hands on his remains.

A modern British writer tells the grisly story of how these scientists fell over each other in their haste to get hold of Lanney's remains.

Soon after Lanney died, the surgeon in charge of the mortuary that day, Dr Stokell, was called away to tea. But the invitation to tea was a ruse, says Mark Cocker in his book, Rivers of Blood, Rivers of Gold.

While Stokell was absent, Dr William Crowther, acting for London's Royal College of Surgeons, entered the morgue with his son. Together they decapitated Lanney's corpse and removed the cranial skin.

In a crude attempt at deception, they pushed another skull -- one they'd brought with them -- inside the peeled-off skin and left, taking their "prize" with them.

Soon Stokell, a member of the Royal Society of Tasmania, returned. Apparently aghast at being beaten to the chase, he removed Lanney's hands and feet.

As if this were not enough for these men of science, the night after the funeral, Royal Society members raided the cemetery for the rest of Lanney's body, took it back to the morgue and removed more anatomical specimens.

While the fast-disappearing remains were still there, the original dissectionists -- Crowther and his fellows from the Royal College of Surgeons -- reportedly also arrived at the morgue and knocked down the door with an axe. They were disappointed.

In all this rush for scientific enlightenment, Cocker says, "there were only a few scraps of flesh left".

The gruesome fate of Lanney's body has an epilogue in the tale of Truganini (Aboriginal name Lallah Roogh)[sic].

Regarded in her lifetime as "the last Tasmanian", Truganini was born early in the 19th century and grew up witnessing some of the worst atrocities against Aborigines in recorded history.

Her hard life included helping the British "protector of Aborigines", George Robinson, to relocate a group of her own people from mainland Tasmania to Flinders Island.

She is said to have once saved Robinson's life.

Yet, despite having earned much respect from blacks and whites, Truganini nursed a fear -- which she confided to a doctor before her death -- that her body would suffer a fate similar to Lanney's.

"Bury me behind the mountains," she is said to have asked before dying in 1876.

Despite this, her body was disinterred by scientists and the skeleton put on display in a Tasmanian museum, where it remained until 1947.

Tragically, the fate of both Truganini and Lanney is typical of a national tragedy that befell unknown numbers of Australian Aborigines.

Putting that wrong to rights, particularly through the return to Aborigines of human remains still held by foreign museums, is now moving higher on Australia's political agenda.

This week, Prime Minister John Howard was to meet his British counterpart, Tony Blair, to discuss the return from British museums of Aboriginal remains. Specimens were taken in their thousands throughout the 19th century to fulfil a craving for scientific knowledge.

Commenting to Weekend on the recent return by Britain's University of Edinburgh of remains from some 330 Aborigines, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Affairs Minister John Herron says the event is significant for all Australians.

"The return of these remains marks their final journey back to local Aboriginal communities, and is recognition of the importance of indigenous heritage and culture," Herron says.

However, a great deal remains to be done before we can understand why this sacrilege -- as Aboriginal people see it -- against so many ancestors occurred.

Bob Weatherall, a longtime campaigner for the return of ancestral remains and cultural artefacts, blames the chase for specimens on an upsurge in what he calls "scientific racism" at the start of the 19th century.

Weatherall is a cultural adviser to the Queensland-based Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action.

"There were anthropologists, archeologists [sic], anatomists all going around the world acquiring non-white, indigenous remains," he says. "They were all looking for the `missing link' in Darwin's theory."

AGENTS were often paid to bring back remains for scientific institutes, Weatherall says.

"Before the bodies were cold, they were dissecting heads and arms.

"And they weren't just robbing graves, there was also deliberate murder."

In one case, Weatherall claims, a man who later became a successful Queensland politician killed his Aboriginal servant and dissected the body for trophies.

While the wholesale scientific exploitation of burial sites has long finished, Weatherall says Aborigines are still upset that graves continue to be robbed, usually by "fast-buck merchants" or people in search of "curiosities". Weatherall says he knows of pastoralists who took bodies which had been interred in trees, to pass on to museums.

The violation of burial sites is particularly inflammatory to Aborigines.

"Most (of the dead) were people who had believed that when they died, they would go to their final resting place, that they would join the spirit world. They never dreamed they would be dug up," Weatherall says.

This denial of human dignity to Aborigines throughout the 19th century has parallels in white society, with the seizure and dissection of executed criminals such as Ned Kelly.

But the systematic, scientific collection of Aboriginal bodies -- and those of other indigenous people around the world -- had no parallel inside European communities.

This, and the continuing presence of Aboriginal remains in overseas museums, is what makes their repatriation and dignified burial a project of major national importance for Australia.

Appropriately, in view of what happened to William Lanney and Truganini, Tasmanian Aboriginal activists have led the way on this issue.

In the 1970s, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre brought unsuccessful legal action against the Tasmanian Museum. However, publicity surrounding the case led to state legislation providing for the return of remains.

Two weeks ago, the centre blazed another trail towards reconciliation by writing to Prime Minister Howard welcoming his intention to ask his British counterpart for the return of all Aboriginal remains.

However, the letter warned that certain principles were crucial for repatriation to be acceptable to Aborigines, among them that all remains had to be repatriated -- identified or unidentified -- and all decisions on storage and disposition of remains on their return should be made only by Aborigines.

The Tasmanian group has also appealed directly to the British Government. In a submission last month to a House of Commons inquiry, it claimed at least 16 overseas museums and other institutions still held Tasmanian Aboriginal remains.

The centre's Michael Mansell says the most important issue at present is to get past the control exerted by British Museum authorities over the remains they hold.

Many of these authorities, he says, view the remains as "cultural items, not human remains".

If some of these authorities have their way, remains will be returned only on condition they are not cremated or buried.

"They are saying in effect that Aborigines cannot be trusted to control what is done with the remains," Mansell says.

"They can't see that every people in the world, including Aborigines, have a right to control what happens to their dead."

Mansell and the centre have already demonstrated what such control might involve. They have been receiving remains on behalf of Tasmanian Aborigines from museums and institutions since the 1970s, including a set of skulls from the University of Edinburgh in 1991.

Nearly all these remains have been cremated or buried, Mansell says. The skeleton of Truganini was cremated and the ashes scattered over her ancestral waters in 1976.

However, Mansell believes the number of Aboriginal remains still held by museums worldwide is in the thousands.

These people are waiting, he says, "to have their spirits laid to rest".

A problem is that many remains held by museums and universities include soft-tissue samples, such as skin and parts of internal organs, as well as bones. In many cases, these are unidentified or difficult to identify as to place of origin.

In such cases, what is the appropriate means of disposal?

Weatherall agrees with his Tasmanian colleagues that customary burial -- laying to rest the spirits of the dead -- must be the ultimate aim.

Repatriation, the Tasmanian Aborigines insist in their submission to the British Parliament, is not intended to further the cause of Australian museums at the expense of overseas ones.

Rather, its purpose should be solely so "we are able at last to put to rest in a traditional ceremony conducted by Aboriginal people the spirits of our ancestors who were disinterred from burial grounds or killed in the bush".

Weatherall believes that with adequate political support, a national Aboriginal reference group can be established which would set in place procedures for dealing with remains whose origins are unknown.

Part of the problem that must be faced is that there is no national clearing-house for remains. Such a clearing-house could be established under Aboriginal control to hold remains pending final investigations, Weatherall says.

Some scientists believe useful research can still be carried out on remains, particularly in light of the human genome project and DNA breakthroughs.

But Weatherall opposes this, dismissing the idea of continuing research on old human remains as nothing more than "a vampire project".

He believes that a final, satisfactory answer to the violations of the past requires an independent commission of inquiry -- in collaboration with museums, but run by Aborigines -- to make a comprehensive list of Aboriginal remains held in all museums around the world.

Weatherall's call for a national clearing-house is strongly supported by Mansell.

He believes that holding remains under Aboriginal control until they can be identified makes a lot of sense, because with museums everywhere now becoming more open, "more information is coming out every day" about their origins.

That could take years.

However, for today's Australians seeking reconciliation between black and white, it could become a useful focus of energy.

As for the dead, they continue to wait . . . *



Photo copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021.
Captions - Photos
Last of the line: (top left, from left) Truganini, her relative Bessy Clarke and William Lanney.

Science shame: (top right) Queensland campaigner Bob Weatherall blames "scientific racism" for the taking of remains.

Dialogue: (above) Prime Minister John Howard and his British counterpart Tony Blair were to discuss the return of remains this week.
CITATION (AGLC STYLE)
PAUL GRAY, 'THE DEATH COLLECTORS', Herald Sun (online), 8 Jul 2000 W08 ‹https://infoweb-newsbank-com.rp.nla.gov.au/apps/news/document-view?p=AWGLNB&docref=news/0FCE89D898FB1BDF›
Copyright, 2000, Nationwide News Pty Limited

View article in Google Drive here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1etjHJt9h14CWgk496GgNSS9YZrP-jvAs/view?usp=sharing

Source: GRAY, PAUL. "THE DEATH COLLECTORS." Herald Sun (Melbourne, Australia), 1 - FIRST ed., sec. Weekend, 8 July 2000, p. W08. Global NewsBank, Accessed 27 Aug. 2021.


5. In the London Times, 8th November 2003
The same photographic capture (below) as the print appearing in the Herald Sun, Melbourne, 8th July 2000 - with Bessy Clarke seated centre, footstool visible; Truganini standing on viewer's left; and William Lanney on viewer's right - was published by the London Times in an article reviewing the Palmer report on the repatriation of indigenous remains from British museums, specifically the skeletons of Australian Aborigines, New Zealand Maori, Egyptian mummies and American Indians [sic] acquired in the name of science.

Again, no source was given for the photographic print in the London Times article, nor any photographer accreditation, although clearly it belongs with at least three other poses and configurations of seating in the series taken during the one session at Charles A. Woolley's Hobart studio in 1866.

The absence of any record in Tasmanian collections of this particular photograph with that particular seating configuration of the Aboriginal trio might suggest the sole extant and remaining print or cdv was sent to Britain or Scotland as a pictorial record along with Aboriginal skeletal remains during the 19th century, and may still be held in the archives of those receiving institutions, whether in London, Cambridge or Aberdeen. The British Museum, as one example, holds a large collection of photographic works by photographer John Watt Beattie, including a glass plate he used to produce the prints of the trio bearing HIS name and impress. Since Beattie reproduced photographs on glass for magic lantern shows, the plate he used may or may not have been an original from Charles A. Woolley's studio.



Source: p.78, Intercolonial Exhibition 1866 : official catalogue (2nd ed.). Melbourne
Link: http://search.slv.vic.gov.au/permalink/f/1o9hq1f/SLV_ROSETTAIE4531816
Link: https://guides.slv.vic.gov.au/interexhib/1866to67

For the Commissioners of Tasmania: Charles A. Woolley won medals for individual photographic portraits of five Tasmanian Aboriginals: William Lanney, Patty, Wapperty, Truganini and Bessy Clarke at the Intercolonial Exhibition in Melbourne, October - November 1866. His series of each individual included their head and shoulder portrait in three aspects: full frontal, left profile and right profile, held in the Mitchell Collection, State Library of NSW. However, there is no record that the group portrait of William Lanney, Truganini and Bessy Clarke under discussion here was submitted for exhibition then or at any later date.



Sidebar:
"Please can we have our bones back?
*Approximately 100 skeletons collected in Australia from the mid-18th to early 20th centuries are now claimed by the Australian repatriation movement from the Duckworth Laboratory, Cambridge University.
*Up to 450 further sets of Australian remains are also held by the Natural History Museum, London.
*Maori warrior remains are claimed by the Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander research after Edinburgh University handed back 330 Aboriginal skeletons to Australia in 2000. Marischal Museum, Aberdeen."

Source:
"Skeletons in the closet : Burying the past; He's narrow skulled, pointy nosed and he upsets people. He may also have cousins in Britain. Giles Whittell on the strange case of Kennewick Man; Archaeologists All Agreed—he Wasn't an Indian. In Which Case, what was He?"
Contributors: Giles Whittell
Source: The Times, London, United Kingdom: Times Newspapers Limited, pp. 6[S2], Issue. 67915, 2003.
Publisher Information: London, United Kingdom: Times Newspapers Limited, 2003.
Publication Year: 2003
Contents Note: Arts and Sports
Document Type: Review
Language: English
Rights: © Times Newspapers Limited
Accession Number: edsgtd.IF0502523792
Database: Times Digital Archive

6. Benjamin Law's bust of Truganini, 2009
This representation of Truganini cast in plaster by Benjamin Law and dated 1836 is one of several held in public collections. The British Museum's copy is damaged. Now housed at the National Portrait Gallery in Canberra, this cast was first owned by Judah Solomon in Hobart, and was on loan to the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery until offered at Sotheby's in 2009 which prompted calls for its withdrawal from sale. The NPG Canberra purchased it in 2010.



Cast plaster bust of "Trucaninny" [NPG, sic] 1836 by Benjamin Law (1807-1890)
Purchased by the National Portrait Gallery, 2010.
Photo taken at the National Portrait Gallery 2021
Copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021




Photo copyright © KLW NFC Imprint & KLW NFC Group Private Collection 2021.

In the press
"Truganini bust sale in ownership battle".
Source: MICHELLE PAINE, Mercury, The (Hobart), 21.08.2009, p2-2, 1
Abstract: RARE busts of renowned Tasmanian Aborigines Truganini and Woureddy are expected to fetch up to $700,000 at a Sotheby's auction in Melbourne on Monday.

TRANSCRIPT
Truganini bust sale in ownership battle
RARE busts of renowned Tasmanian Aborigines Truganini and Woureddy are expected to fetch up to $700,000 at a Sotheby's auction in Melbourne on Monday.
The works are considered by many to be Australia's first major sculptures and are especially valuable because of their story.
They were originally bought by Hobart convict turned businessman Judah Solomon and were made by Benjamin Law, who knew Truganini and her husband, in the 1830s.
Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre legal adviser Michael Mansell has called on Sotheby's to withdraw the busts from sale and hand them back to Tasmania's Aboriginal community.
The Solomon family has always owned the works but they were on loan to the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery for 26 years until they helped open the National Portrait Gallery in Canberra last year.
Sotheby's senior researcher and paintings specialist David Hansen was in charge of the busts when he worked at TMAG.
"They have tremendous importance historically and culturally," Dr Hansen said.
"She is a very potent image and this is a particularly potent one because it is such a fine portrait.
"The busts are in very fine condition.
"Benjamin Law was Australia's first professional sculptor."
Until 1921, the busts stood in Temple House, where Hobart police detectives now work.
Dr Hansen said Law could have made up to 30 casts but that was not certain.
Eight pairs and four individual busts are known to exist in public collections worldwide.
Tasmanian historian Cassandra Pybus hoped a public gallery would acquire the busts.
"I think it would be tragic if these busts were to leave the public domain," she said.
"They should be on show to the public, either in Canberra or Hobart as they are of enormous historical significance.
"Perhaps [Hobart-based art collector] David Walsh might like to acquire them for his Museum of Old and New Art, or another local benefactor."
TMAG director Bill Bleathman said the gallery had its own pair of busts, although its Truganini figure needed conservation work, which would be done. "If they were donated to us or could be acquired under a cultural gift program, that would be great," he said.
The gallery had pursued the gift option, which allows tax deductibility, in vain.
Mr Mansell said: "Truganini is dead and she can't defend herself against the symbolism that is portrayed by the racists of Australia who abuse her memory.
"The auction house should take responsibility and so should the vendor. They should be accountable for changing these racist attitudes."
He said past, wrong references to Truganini as the last full-blood Aborigine implied present Aborigines were somehow impure or tainted.
© News Limited Australia. All rights reserved.

RELATED POSTS main weblog