Instalación Solar Térmica

After July 1820 all letters of introduction from the Secretary-of-State for grants in Van Diemen’s Land, were addressed to Sorell rather than Macquarie, whose authority until such time included the granting of land to settlers. The change in policy, advised by Under-Secretary Goulburn under directions from Lord Bathurst, was to remedy the inconvenience of settlers who proposed settling in Van Diemen’s

Land from having to wait for their letters to be transmitted to Macquarie before they could cultivate their assigned land grant.66 The change in policy was also to ensure that settlers took possession of their grants with as little delay as possible. Sorell was instructed, that on receipt of each letter from an intending settler, he was to give the necessary instructions to the Deputy-Surveyor for measuring the usual quantity in proportion to the capital which the individual possessed, the maximum grant being 2,500 acres, or four square miles. Re-alienation of the grant within five years was forbidden under the threat of forfeiture. Sorell was also instructed to regularly transmit to Macquarie, the lists of grants, to enable them to be registered and approved by Macquarie.67 The changes of policy in Britain which led to direct transportation of convicts to Hobart Town, the change in letters for land grants in Van Diemen’s Land being addressed to Sorell instead of Macquarie, and the arrival of free settlers in increasing numbers, all occurred around the same time. These changes meant that Sorell’s personal attention and encouragement in land grant matters, was directly exercised during a critical period of economic growth.

Sorell claimed that, as a result of Lord Bathurst’s directions, he instructed Evans to place all recently arrived settlers from England and Scotland on land proportionate to their capital.68 The criterion for allocating grants to settlers in the early twenties was the means at their disposal for improving and stocking ‘waste’ land. The official

65

HRA III, vii pp.807-8 n385; HRA III, iii p.324 Evans to Bigge, 23 March 1820. 66

HRA III, iii p.39 Goulburn to Sorell, 24 July 1820. 67

HRA III, iii p.39 Goulburn to Sorell, 24 July 1820; pp.929-30 n21. See Historical Records of Australia. Series I. Governors’ Despatches to and from England. Volume x. January 1819-December 1822 (Sydney, 1917), p.333 for a copy of the letter.

68

offer and form of introduction, which had been devised in the Colonial Office, signed by Robert Horton Parliamentary Under-Secretary, held out encouragement to emigrate, but only to those with at least £500 to employ in the cultivation of land, and it stressed the necessity for respectable character references.69 No free passages were granted. On arrival, as well as his grant of land, each settler received loans of stock and seed from the government, and rations for themselves, and their convict servants, for six months. Until 1818 they were guaranteed 10s 0d per bushel for all the wheat they grew, and 6d per pound for meat. All land grants were to be free of fees, taxes, quit rents or other acknowledgments whatsoever for a set period of time, after which they would be subject to quit rent. Quit rent for free settlers was 6d for every thirty acres after ten years, and for marines it was 1s 0d for every fifty acres after five years.70 Although the payment of quit rent was an essential condition of every grant issued in Van Diemen’s Land, its collection was never effectively enforced. On 22 March 1820, Evans told Commissioner Bigge that no-one had been appointed to collect quit rent, and there were 300 grants on which it had been due for two years.71 The problem of enforcing a significant compliance by settlers in

payment of quit rent continued through Arthur’s administration, until 1835, when

CO 210/156, f 330 cited L Robson, A History of Tasmania, Volume 1: Van Diemen’s Land from the Earliest Times to 1855 (Melbourne, 1983), p.108.

70

J Fenton, A History of Tasmania from its discovery in 1642 to the present time. (Hobart, 1978), p.52; Historical Records of Australia. Series I. Governors’ Despatches to and from England. Volume iii. 1801-1802 (Sydney, 1915), p.394; Historical Records. Series I. Governors’ Despatches to and from England. 1788-1796 (Sydney, 1914), pp.303-4, 543. For further details on quit rent, see S. Petrow, ‘Discontent and Habits of Evasion: The Collection of Quit Rents in Van Diemen’s Land, 1825–1863’ in Australian Historical Studies, Volume 32, No. 117 (October 2001), pp.240-256 71

Secretary-of-State for War and the Colonies, Baron Charles Glenelg, decided not to insist on payment.72

Another difficulty for Sorell was the problem of deceptive statements. Prior to 1820, Sorell had notified Goulburn, that with a view to preventing deceptive statements of property from settlers, and ensuring that each settler’s capital was used for

cultivation and improvement, he had referred to Macquarie for instructions and the general rules and principles by which Macquarie organized the granting of land.73 Nonetheless, there were instances of prospective settlers claiming absurdly high values for ‘goods and moveables’ to swell the worth of their schedule, and also of others claiming fictitious capital in order to secure large grants of land. Those without capital were able to deceive the governor by hiring money for the purpose, therefore a succession of valuable farms could be acquired with the same hired capital. The alienation regulation was ignored, and after 1820 land was regularly sold, and very often in the most public manner possible.74 Throughout his dealings with settlers regarding land, Sorell clearly gives the impression of preferring to uncritically promote economic growth, rather than hamper such growth by bureaucratic regulation.

Morgan, Land Settlement, p.8. 73

HRA III, iii p.74 Sorell to Goulburn, 30 December 1820. 74

J Dixon, Narrative of a voyage to New South Wales and Van Diemen’s Land in the Ship Skelton during the year 1820 with observations on the state of these colonies, and a variety of information, calculated to be useful to emigrants. By James Dixon, commander of the Skelton with an appendix, containing Governor Mc Quarie’s Report regarding Van Diemen’s Land, Tables of the population, List of Articles Suitable for Exportation etc. etc. (Edinburgh and London, 1822),, p.32; AOT NS14 NP14, W. Williamson to Agnes Wilson, 16 December 1820 cited Robson, A History of Tasmania 1,

p.108; E Curr, An Account of the Colony of Van Diemen’s Land: Principally designed for the use of emigrants. (London, 1824) facsimile Reproduction (Hobart, 1967),p.115.

A testament to Sorell’s vigorous promotion of settlers has been left by the then future agent of the Van Diemen’s Land Company, Edward Curr, who saw Sorell as the ‘most enlightened person’ in the colony.75 Curr was a resident in Van Diemen’s Land between February 1820 and June 1823. In his publication of 1824,76 he advised those who were determined to emigrate, to obtain the sanction of the

Secretary-of-State for the Colonial Department before departure. He believed that it was not strictly necessary to have permission, but without it, the new settler would not be entitled to a grant of land on his arrival in the colony; however, if the Lieutenant-Governor under any particular circumstances was disposed to give him land, it would probably be no more that half of what he would have obtained had his emigration been approved. Curr advised prospective settlers that the regular way of obtaining permission was by writing to the Colonial-Secretary requesting an order for a grant, and enclosing the recommendation of two respectable people as to the applicant’s character and his disposable capital, which must not be less that £500 to entitle him to a grant of land. However, Curr added that ‘many people arrive in Van Diemen’s Land possessed of much smaller sums’, that he assumed the minimum capital was not intended to be acted upon.77

Given the difficulties in formal land location previously noted, Curr’s advice is instructive. He advised the settler that in choosing his land his first consideration

Curr, An Account of the Colony, p.104. 76

Curr, An Account of the Colony, pp.93-4. Pike (General editor), ADB Volume 1, p.270. 77

was whether he principally intended to cultivate or to graze; the second was his need to be near the market and have access to good water carriage. He also suggested the need to try to obtain an equal proportion of rich soil, fresh water, and good natural boundaries, with an outlet on the rear of the grant which was not likely to be quickly located. Permission of the Deputy Surveyor-General needed to be obtained with all speed, as the first applicant was entitled to preference. Curr was one settler who was obviously very satisfied with Sorell’s approach to the colony, because in his

publication he advised prospective settlers to ‘treasure up every word’ they heard from Sorell, as they could be assured that it was the ‘sincere and impartial advice of the most enlightened person in the colony’.78

Thomas Godwin, in his emigrant guide published in 1823 similarly endorsed Sorell’s Van Diemen’s Land. He favourably compared costs of free settlers in Van Diemen’s Land and Illinois, and noted that on arrival in Van Diemen’s Land, a person of respectability received a free land grant, and was also allowed as many convict servants that he required to enable him to build his house, and to work on his farm.79

It is obvious that many settlers benefitted from the prosperity fostered by Sorell. The remarkable economic growth as shown by the surge in small industries, and more particularly in the pastoral industry are shown by the huge increases in the number of stock, especially sheep, and also in the production of crops, culminating in exports of

Curr, An Account of the Colony, pp.101-4. 79

T. Godwin, Godwin’s Emigrant Guide to Van Diemen’s Land more properly called Tasmania. 1823. Facsimile edition(Hobart, 1990), pp.30-1. He did not compare the cost of the voyages though.

wool, wheat, potatoes, salted meat and kangaroo skins from the colony. These are examples of opportunities seized by settlers effectively using their resources, including assigned convicts, in a young colony under a popular and successful leader, who was capable of managing both a convict and free population. The massive increase in the European population of the colony during the period under Sorell’s leadership from approximately 3,100 to 12,300 also testifies to his success in promoting new migration to the colony and its accompanying benefits as seen by prospective settlers and their families.80

See following chapter for figures on population and land. Between the 1818 and 1820 musters sheep increased from 127,883 to 182,468. In November 1822 total acres held 344,296; wheat 15,317 acres, sheep 165,208; cattle 41,863; swine 7,354 see Nicholls (ed.), The Diary of the Reverend Robert Knopwood, p.380. 54% of the population were convicts in 1820 and 46% in 1825, see R.W.

CHAPTER 7