Читать книгу Mutiny; and the Trial of Lt. Col. Johnston - Ned Overton - Страница 6

Table of Contents

GOVERNOR BLIGH arrived off Port Jackson on the 6th of August, 1806, and made his official landing at 11 a.m. on the 8th. He assumed the government on the 13th, and his commission as captain-general and governor-in-chief was read with full ceremony in front of government house at noon on that day.

Plan of the Town of Sydney in New South Wales, October, 1807, by order of Governor Bligh

Bligh resided in Sydney as governor-elect for four days, and during that time he took the extraordinary action * of accepting land grants from the retiring governor, Philip Gidley King. On the 10th of August, 1806, three grants were given by King to Bligh. The first, "for a private residence near Sydney", consisted of 240 acres to be known by the name of Camperdown. This land adjoined the Grose Farm on the south side of the Parramatta-road, and now forms the suburb of Camperdown. The second "for a private residence near Parramatta" comprised 105 acres, to be known by the name of Mount Betham. It lay on the north side of the river at the town of Parramatta. The third, "for a private residence between Sydney and Hawkesbury", comprised 1,000 acres, to be known as Copenhagen, and lay on the south-western side of the Hawkesbury road in the neighbourhood of Rouse hill. The subsequent history of the grant at Parramatta illustrates the opinion held on these transactions. After Bligh's death, these lands were inherited by his six daughters as co-heiresses. In 1840, the validity of the grants was questioned, and a suit for impeachment was threatened. Action was avoided by the surrender to the crown of the grant at Parramatta on condition that legal proceedings with a view to the impeachment of all three grants should be abandoned. This surrender was completed on the 24th of February, 1841, by Sir Maurice O'Connell, who had married Mrs. Mary Putland, one of Bligh's daughters. The acceptance of a compromise by the crown, instead of full impeachment of all three grants, indicates that there was an element of doubt as to the validity of the grants. At the same time it seems strange that there should have been a delay of so many years before any definite action was taken.

The grant of 790 acres to be known as "Thanks" to Mrs. Anna Josepha King, the wife of Governor King, by Governor Bligh on the 1st of January, 1807, has been discussed in a previous volume.*

[* See page xv, volume IV.]

Soon after his assumption of the government, Bligh had experience of the party feeling current in the colony. On the 14th of August, 1806, an address ** of welcome was presented to him, signed by George Johnston for the military, Richard Atkins for the civil, and John Macarthur for the free inhabitants. Bligh accepted this address in good faith, but in the following month addresses *** were presented to him from the free inhabitants at Sydney and the Hawkesbury. In these addresses the validity of Macarthur's signature was repudiated, the Sydney settlers stating "had we deputed anyone, John Macarthur would not have been chosen by us, we considering him an unfit person to step forward upon such an occasion, as we may chiefly attribute the rise in the price of mutton to his withholding the large flock of wethers he now has to make such price as he may choose to demand."

[** See page 566.][*** See pages 568 and 570.]

Philip Gidley King sailed from Port Jackson in H.M.S. Buffalo on the 10th of February, 1807. During these first six months of his administration Bligh attempted no reforms, but devoted himself to the task of acquiring a full acquaintance with the general condition of the colony. He called for reports on the public buildings, on the administration of the commissariat, and on the state of agriculture and the colony generally. Through no fault of his own, however, Bligh encountered opposition from the commencement of his administration. Within a fortnight of his arrival Bligh was presented with private letters written by under secretary Cooke, stating the intentions of Lord Camden to authorise grants of 600 acres to Joseph Short, commander of H.M.S. Porpoise, and of 1,000 acres to John Townson, a retired captain of the N.S.W. Corps. As neither Governor King nor himself had received "any authority according to the tenor of Mr. Cooke's letter", Bligh refused to make the grants, and on the 26th of August, 1806, wrote to the secretary of state for instructions. At the same time he authorised the applicants "to look out for the respective tracts they would approve of", which would be granted to them when he "received directions to locate the same." The neglect of the department to give orders to Bligh was unfortunate for Joseph Short, as he had brought out a considerable investment to be utilised on his anticipated grant.

During these first six months Bligh experienced considerable difficulty in the naval administration owing to the conduct of Short, which necessitated the holding of two courts of inquiry.* These resulted in Short being sent to England under arrest for trial by court martial on charges preferred by his lieutenant. At the time of the court martial Bligh's refusal to give Short a land grant, a refusal which was perfectly justified, although it entailed considerable loss to Short, was utilised by Bligh's enemies to vilify his administration.

[* See page 44 et seq. and page 65 et seq.]

Although Bligh's administration and character were represented falsely on many occasions, the exchange of land grants with Governor King and the development of Bligh's farm at the Hawkesbury admit fairly of adverse criticism. On the 1st of January, 1807, Bligh purchased some land at the Hawkesbury.** Andrew Thompson acted as Bligh's overseer. If the evidence of Thompson in a sworn deposition *** can be relied upon, Bligh erected buildings on his farm of the value of £1,000 at the cost of the crown; he employed twenty to thirty convicts victualled by the crown; he drew on the public stores at the Hawkesbury for articles for his private use; he stocked his farm by drawing animals heavy with young from the public herds, and after the young were born the mothers were returned without their progeny. Bligh and Thompson **** assert that the undertaking was of the nature of an experimental farm designed to demonstrate the value of industry and good management under conditions prevalent in the colony. If this was so, the experiment was valueless, for Bligh gave himself concessions far in excess of those proposed for settlers,***** and Thompson admitted this in the statement ****** "that a common Farmer, who has to pay for everything, would by no means have such profits." Thompson asserted that the live stock and articles drawn from the public herds and stores were to be paid for in the produce of the farm. At that time very extended credits were given to settlers by government. As Bligh purchased his farm in January, 1807, and he was deposed in January, 1808, it is clear that the average duration of his credit did not exceed six months, and this was not excessive. Because Bligh had paid nothing into the public stores in return for goods and stock delivered before January, 1808, it is unfair to assume that he did not intend to pay anything. It is not possible, therefore, to accept the charge put forward by the insurrectionaries that Bligh was guilty of conversion of public property to private uses. At the same time it was a grave error of judgment and utterly indefensible for a governor to engage in farming, which secured a pecuniary profit to himself in his private capacity, when the success of the enterprise was dependent largely on concessions granted by himself in his official capacity.

[** See note 106.][*** See page 359.][**** See page 366.] [***** See page 168.][****** See page 367.]

Plan shewing Locality of Governor Bligh's Farm

On the 14th of February, 1807, Governor Bligh initiated his first big reform by the publication of a general order which prohibited absolutely "the exchange of spirits or other liquors as payment for grain, animal food, labour, wearing apparel or any other commodity whatever." Severe penalties were ordered for offences against this regulation; for a prisoner, the punishment was 100 lashes and hard labour for twelve months; for a settler, free by servitude, pardon, or emancipation, deprivation of all indulgences from the crown, imprisonment for three months, and a fine of £20; for all other persons, deprivation of all indulgences from the crown and a fine of £50. This regulation was the first indirect cause which led to the deposition of Bligh. Although a wise and salutary measure, it operated adversely against the pecuniary interests of all classes of the community. John Macarthur and William Minchin admitted in their evidence at the court martial on George Johnston that everyone in the colony, officials, military, and all others, trafficked in spirits by necessity for want of a proper currency. Spirits were imported at a few shillings per gallon, and were bartered at 100 to 200 per cent. profit. Imported spirits were distributed according to the rank and influence of the individual, and it is clear that the senior officials and most favoured individuals reaped the greater profit. The colonists in general lacked the public spirit that should have won support for this well-advised reform, while pecuniary loss provoked opposition that was active though secret. Lieutenant-colonel Foveaux stated * that the result of the restrictions was to make "the gentleman and the Man of character, who would blush at being detected in an illicit transaction, the tributaries of the daring and unprincipled Smuggler and distiller." This testimony from Foveaux, who was an open antagonist of Bligh, indicates the peculiar attitude of many colonists who were opposed to Bligh. Although unwilling to commit a breach of the regulations openly, they connived at and participated in the profits of an illicit traffic. As in the case of the abolition of slavery by the British Parliament, and in the case of the prohibition of Kanaka labour on the Queensland sugar plantations, the pecuniary interest of the individual had been injured in the endeavour to procure the welfare of the community at large.

[* See page 642.]