As a prisoner, it would be hard to travel. why would england send prisoners to australia of all places? and why did the australians call the prisoners pommies? i have done lots of reserch but still can find the answer.
thank you!!!
2007-09-28 06:07:23 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Homework Help
Put it like this: If you had horrible neighbours living near you, wouldn't you like they went away?
Pommys/Poms: Prisoners Of her Majesty's Services
2007-09-28 06:13:59 · answer #1 · answered by fed up woman 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you are thinking about just moving them to a remote island, than yes. However, you forget that England did not own Iceland, and would not start a war with the Icelandic people just for a place to house their dissidents No one really claimed Australia except the British, and since it was a royal colony, they had the jurisdiction to send their prisoners there. It was also just about as far away from the island of England as a person can go, so it would be a more effective punishment than sending a person to Iceland.
2016-05-20 23:33:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Transportation had existed since the late 17th cent as a method of getting labour for the plantations in our West Indian and southern American colonies, although African slaves made up most of the labour force. After the American War of Independence, we had to find somewhere else to send our convicts, although people were still being transported to Bermuda as late as the 1860s. New South Wales was founded in 1788 as was seen as a suitable alternative. Most of those transported were convicted of a capital offence and in theory could have been hanged. Yes, we did need to colonise NSW, but transportation was believed to have been a more humane way of punishing criminals, especially those whose crimes today would be classed as 'petty'. This was the age of 'enlightenment' and there was a strong move to reduce the number of capital offences on the 'Bloody Code', so judges were more and more inclined to commute the death sentence to one of transportation. Whether transportation was more humane, is open to debate. Many people died en-route and the conditions on the ships were appalling. However, many convicts did very well for themselves in the end, by obtaining early tickets of leave and some land and building up farms or businesses
2007-09-28 21:03:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We had to send them somewhere and when America won that little war against the English back in 1782 we couldn't send them there any more so chose Australia instead. Most transportation sentences were only for 7 or 14 years, but most of them stayed on after their sentences finished.
As for the origin of the term Pom or Pommie, no-one knows for certain. The commonly held theory is that it stood for "Prisoner Of His/Her Majesty" (POHM) or "Prisoner Of Mother England" (POME). There's no proof though.
2007-09-28 06:24:34 · answer #4 · answered by Mental Mickey 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There was a population and over crowding problem in the cities. Basically the infrastructure of the cities was not developed enough to take the huge nos of people coming from the country. Therefore as Australia was a new coloney with much work and labour needed it was the best place to overload the over crowded people. So your get rid of the 'worst' so to speak i.e. criminals. Well if you stole an apple you were on that boat to Aus. Also many of the English thought many would die on the journey so that was a un-publicied bonus.
2007-09-28 06:20:00 · answer #5 · answered by A . Z . 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People could be imprisoned for stealing a loaf of bread. There was no real criminal justice system, so people were assumed guilty. Lots of poverty - so lots of theft (for example). We started popping them on prison ships and sending them out to see to get them away from us. Then we just sent them as far away as we could in the hope that they wouldn't come back. As far as I remember, we didn't pay passage back for them. There are some interesting books on it - especially Robert Hughes
The Fatal Shore: History of the Transportation of Convicts to Australia, 1787-1868
2007-09-29 02:02:01 · answer #6 · answered by DR.MAZ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have more of a question to add to this one than an answer. I hope that's ok. I am wondering how one would go about finding someone, by family name, that could have been sent to Australia from England during this time.
Thank You
2007-09-30 03:03:30 · answer #7 · answered by Dorothy E 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
prisoner of mother England
we sent them there to colonise the place, knowing they could never return...
2007-09-28 06:14:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This Wikipedia articles gives a full account of the reasons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convictism_in_Australia
This one is a bit more interesting:
http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/convicts/
If this or any other answer to your question helps you resolve this issue, please select a "best answer." This motivates people to help you and rewards their research in your behalf.
Cheers,
Bruce
2007-10-02 06:10:00 · answer #9 · answered by Bruce 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it was a vary cheep way of filling up a vary large place why Elsa deport somebody for stealing a loaf of bread
2007-09-28 07:52:28 · answer #10 · answered by NEIL K 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋