SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Maurice Winn who wrote (97595)1/8/2013 9:35:12 AM
From: Robin Plunder  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218005
 
"As early as 1794, Lieutenant-Governor of New South Wales Francis Grose suggested its closure as a penal settlement, as it was too remote and difficult for shipping and too costly to maintain. [4] The first group of people left in February 1805, and by 1808 only about 200 remained, forming a small settlement until the remnants were removed in 1813. A small party remained to slaughter stock and destroy all buildings, so that there would be no inducement for anyone, especially from other European powers, to visit and lay claim to the place. From 15 February 1814 to 6 June 1825 the island was abandoned.

In 1824 the British government instructed the Governor of New South Wales Thomas Brisbane to occupy Norfolk Island as a place to send “the worst description of convicts”. Its remoteness, previously seen as a disadvantage, was now viewed as an asset for the detention of recalcitrant male prisoners. The convicts detained have long been assumed be a hardcore of recidivists, or 'doubly-convicted capital respites' - that is, men transported to Australia who committed fresh colonial crimes for which they were sentenced to death, and were spared the gallows on condition of life at Norfolk Island. However, a recent study has demonstrated, utilising a database of 6,458 Norfolk Island convicts, that the reality was somewhat different: more than half were detained at Norfolk Island without ever receiving a colonial conviction, and only 15% had been reprieved from a death sentence. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of convicts sent to Norfolk Island had committed non-violent property sentences, and the average length of detention was three years. [5]

The second penal settlement began to be wound down by the British government after 1847, and the last convicts were removed to Tasmania in May 1855. The island was abandoned because transportation from the United Kingdom to Van Diemen's Land had ceased in 1853, to be replaced by penal servitude in the UK.

On 8 June 1856, the next settlement began on Norfolk Island. These were the descendants of Tahitians and the HMS Bounty mutineers, along with Fletcher Christian. They resettled from the Pitcairn Islands, which had become too small for their growing population. They left Pitcairn Islands on 3 May 1856 and arrived with 194 persons on 8 June. The Pitcairners occupied many of the buildings remaining from the penal settlements, and gradually established traditional farming and whaling industries on the island. Although some families decided to return to Pitcairn in 1858 and 1863, the island's population continued to grow. They accepted additional settlers, who often arrived with whaling fleets.

In 1867, the headquarters of the Melanesian Mission of the Church of England was established on the island. In 1920 the Mission was relocated from Norfolk Island to the Solomon Islands to be closer to the population of focus."

Maurice, which ones were your ancestors...the guards, prisoners, descendants of the Bounty, or the priests?

:)

rp



To: Maurice Winn who wrote (97595)1/9/2013 1:03:32 AM
From: Snowshoe  Respond to of 218005
 
That 19th century music is great but I don't see how anyone could keep those funny costumes clean under field conditions. The blokes here in dark green had a more practical uniform...




To: Maurice Winn who wrote (97595)1/9/2013 7:05:54 PM
From: Snowshoe3 Recommendations  Respond to of 218005
 
>>The USA insisted on even greater independence at an earlier stage and Great Britain gave it away as a lost cause, so the USA went ahead with slavery [and Indian massacres and other less than virtuous activities] which would have been stopped when banned in the British Empire.<<

Mq,

When you turn on the wayback machine and play 'what if', you can't predict the result. With no American Revolution, there may well not have been a French Revolution. A certain French sea captain may not have become an Admiral in the Napoleonic Wars, with a descendent who assumed management of this SI discussion thread after the previous owner neutron bombed it.

There are many possible permutations for the arc of North American history. The southern slave-holding US colonies could have seceded from England and allied themselves with France, which held New Orleans and vast inland territories in the Mississippi River drainage. Slavery might have been perpetuated much longer under that scenario, instead of bein crushed in the US Civil War of the 1860s.

Snow



To: Maurice Winn who wrote (97595)1/28/2013 3:23:04 AM
From: Snowshoe  Respond to of 218005
 
>>Maybe the Western Empire could improve their music and costumes. They are not as good as the British Empire of old.<<

"Clever chap your tailor, Hay."

"Dunmore and Locke's, in St. James, Your Grace."

[yt]oKmqRqY0RLg#t=4429s[/yt]