Emigration and the State, 1833–55: an Essay in Administrative History

Oliver MacDonagh

doi:10.2307/3678901

Emigration and the State, 1833–55: an Essay in Administrative History

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 February 2009

Oliver MacDonagh

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

This paper is concerned with an obscure and long defunct branch of the administration, which was instituted in 1833 and reached its climax by the middle 'fifties. The branch, which had not even a distinctive name, consisted at most of between twenty and thirty executive members, almost all half-pay naval officers, who were at first directly controlled by the colonial office, and, after 1840, subject immediately to the Colonial Land and Emigration Commission. Though the corps of emigration officers, or agents, as they were indifferently called, was established in the 1830's, it by no means belonged to a new race of administrators. It did not originate in political agitation, or Benthamic or parliamentary inquiry. Its purpose and function were scarcely defined; certainly it was innocent of doctrinaire intention. No celebrated public servant, except, indirectly, James Stephen, was concerned with its workings; no considerable attention was ever drawn upon its officers. Indeed, by and large, the British public was unaffected by, and probably ignorant of, its existence.

Type: Research Article
Information: Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 5 , January 1955 , pp. 133 - 159

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3678901 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 133 note 1} Hitchens', F. H.The Colonial Land and Emigration Commission (Philadelphia, 1931)CrossRef Google Scholar provides a valuable introduction to the work of this body. At first it was mainly concerned with the sale of colonial lands and the management of assisted emigration to the Australian colonies; but in time its other functions, the protection of voluntary emigration and the preparation and execution of passenger legislation, absorbed much of its attention. This paper is concerned only with voluntary emigration to North America, which forms a separate problem.

^{page 134 note 1} 9 Geo. IV c. 21.

_{page 134 note 2} The earlier passenger acts, the last of which had been repealed in 1827 in the course of a general dismantling of restraints on trade, had been partly mercantilist in intention. Cf. Adams, W. F., Ireland and Irish Emigration to the New World from 1815 to the Famine (New Haven, 1932), pp. 254 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 135 note 1} The food was provided and paid for by the passengers themselves.

^{page 135 note 2} Down to 1831, no inspections whatever were carried out at Belfast, P.R.O., CO. 384/27, 3567 New Brunswick, 19 Aug. 1831. The Commissioners of Customs believed that elsewhere in Ireland the inspections were satisfactory, but the first reports of the emigration officers showed that this complacency was quite unwarranted.

^{page 135 note 3} C.O. 384/28, unmarked, 25 June 1831, and 3238 Emigration, 8 Nov. 1831.

^{page 135 note 4} C.O. 384/30, 2375 North America, 19 June 1832, and 2844 Canada, 21 July 1832.

^{page 135 note 5} C.O. 384/33, letter from the mayor of Liverpool to Goderich, 4 Jan. 1833, and endorsements.

^{page 136 note 1} C.O. 384/39, unmarked memorandum, 4 Mar. 1833. See also Hitchens, , op. cit., p. 17Google Scholar. The officer was also advised to answer no letters but those from clergymen, parish officers, magistrates and landlords who wished to assist their tenants to emigrate.

^{page 136 note 2} E.g. Customs officers could still, and at some ports did, clear vessels which had not been inspected and passed by the emigration officer.

^{page 136 note 3} This was, in Low's last years of office, the subject of some dispute. In the end it was left an open question whether the payment, which was £50 per annum, was ex gratia for Low's public services, or in fulfilment of a promise made by the mayor, C.O. 384/47, 1373 Emigration, 6 June 1838; C.O. 384/52, 474 Emigration, 8 Mar. 1839; C.O. 386/23, pp. 5–7, 203–4, 23 Apr. and 6 July 1839. Elliot informed the council in 1839 that no other officer had this privilege, and it was not continued for Low's successor.

^{page 137 note 1} Hitchens, , op. cit., pp. 16–17Google Scholar. The mayor of Cork promised an office, and every ‘countenance and assistance’, C.O. 384/36, 559 Emigration, 10 Feb. 1834.

^{page 137 note 2} C.O. 384/35, 1985 Emigration, 6 May 1834; C.O. 384/36, 2791 Emigration, 5 July 1834.

^{page 137 note 3} C.O. 384/39, 124 Emigration, 4 Apr. 1835. The same air of patronage enveloped the Londonderry appointment, though here there were two candidates in the field. The merchants and shippers, backed by Sir Robert Ferguson, asked for a Lieut. Ramsay, who commanded a river steamer at the port, while the mayor and Dawson, the secretary to the admiralty, pressed the claims of Frederick Hamilton, ‘who has been most serviceable in supporting the Constitutional cause’. The colonial secretary observed that he himself had no candidate, and, in the end, it was Ramsay who was selected, C.O. 384/36, 2167 and 4475 Emigration, 13 May and 15 Nov. 1834; C.O. 384/39, 5 and 183 Emigration, 20 Mar. and 15 Apr. 1835; C.O. 386/20, pp. 79–82, 135–6, 22 Sept. and 2 Oct. 1837.

^{page 137 note 4} This ‘amateur’ element was emphasized, perhaps, by their being paid, not a flat salary, but the difference between half and full naval pay.

^{page 138 note 1} At this time scarcely any vessels were specifically designed for passengers. The great majority in the trade were timber, cotton and potash ships, which carried emigrants for the outward voyage as an alternative to sailing in ballast.

^{page 138 note 2} This description of the Liverpool trade, and the subsequent account of Low's early activity in Liverpool, is based (unless otherwise stated) on his eighteen reports to the colonial office contained in C.O. 384/32, covering the period May–Nov. 1833, and his twelve reports contained in C.O. 384/35, covering the period Jan.–Nov. 1834; and the endorsements upon these reports.

^{page 139 note 1} 9 Geo IV c. 21, sec. 7.

^{page 139 note 2} C.O. 384/35, 2151 Emigration, 19 May 1834.

^{page 139 note 3} Ibid., 56 and 129 Emigration, 1 Jan. and 20 June 1835.

^{page 140 note 1} Low also drew up complicated regulations for maintaining a quasimilitary order and discipline amongst emigrants at sea. It is interesting to note that an order-in-council, very much on these lines, was issued in 1849; see C.O. 384/81, 670 Emigration, 3 Apr. 1848. Since no authority to enforce it aboard ship was set up, it was altogether ineffective, Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H.C. 632, pp. xxvi–xxvii (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 140 note 2} This would, of course, raise the price of passages, but Low estimated that, since brokers could buy food in bulk, the extra cost to passengers would be only thirty shillings. If this were so, emigrants would lose little financially.

^{page 140 note 3} In fact, Lieut. Friend of Cork raised the important problems of epidemics and immorality at sea, which Low had not discussed, C.O. 384/38, 56 Emigration, 1 Jan. 1835.

^{page 141 note 1} The same abuses were found to exist in the Irish ports, although of course on a smaller scale, C.O. 384/35, 2151, 2241, 2689, 3608 and 40 Emigration, 19 and 24 May, 30 June, 8 Sept. and 31 Dec. 1834; C.O. 384/36, 4475 Emigration, 17 Nov. 1834. For the abuses in Cork in later years, see Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. ICmd. 7371, p. 243. H.C. (1847), VIGoogle Scholar; First Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. H.C. 415, p. 181 (1847–1880), XVIIGoogle Scholar; Second Report Select Committee on Emigrant Ships. H.C. 349, pp. 80–2 (1854), XIIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 142 note 1} Low justified this upon the ground that unsuccessful prosecutions ‘tended to weaken’ his authority.

^{page 142 note 2} The Times, 8 July 1834; undated cutting from the Liverpool Mercury contained in C.O. 384/33; A Passage Broker, Letter to Lieutenant Lowe, R.N., ihe government agent at the Port of Liverpool; with supplementary remarks (Liverpool, 1838)Google Scholar; etc.

^{page 142 note 3} C.O. 384/36, 2041 Emigration, 14 May 1834.

^{page 142 note 4} C.O. 384/32, 4703 and 5002 Emigration, 19 Sept. and 11 Oct. 1833; C.O. 384/35, 2253 and 2254 Emigration, 30 May 1834; etc.

^{page 143 note 1} Walkinshaw, E., A Vindication of Edward Walkinshaw (Liverpool, 1834)Google Scholar. For Low's earlier actions against Walkinshaw, see C.O. 384/33, 2937 Emigration, 10 June 1833. C.O. 384/35, 47 and 585 Emigration, 17 June 1833 and 15 Feb. 1834.

^{page 143 note 2} ‘Caution all emigrants, applying to you, who may be about to proceed to Liverpool, against being imposed on by that person’, copy of Low's letter published in the Limerick Times, 3 July 1834. See also C.O. 384/35, 2535 Emigration, 21 June 1834.

^{page 143 note 3} C.O. 384/35, 3605 Emigration, 8 Sept. 1834, Stephen's endorsement.

^{page 144 nopte 1} 5 & 6 Will. IV c. 56. The only valuable provision was the reduction of the legal quota of passengers to three for every five tons, instead of three for every four.

^{page 145 note 1} Durham Report, Appendix B, evidence of Skey, Morrin and Poole.

^{page 145 note 2} C.O. 384/35, 1823 Lower Canada, 30 May 1834.

^{page 145 note 3} C.O. 384/52, 47 Canada, 5 Jan. 1839.

^{page 145 note 4} Ibid., 509 and 778 Emigration, 30 Jan.–2 Feb. and 20 Apr. 1839.

^{page 146 note 1} C.O. 384/67, 1359 Canada, 17 Aug. 1841, and endorsements.

^{page 146 note 2} Report of Commissioners on Necessity of Amending Passengers' Act. ICmd. 3551, p. 6. H.C. (1842), XXVGoogle Scholar. The report discusses the new proposals, clause by clause, and throws much light upon the commissioners' debt to their officers, and their reasoning and purposes. See also Correspondence relative to Emigration to Canada. ICmd. 2981, pp. 72–9. H.C. (1841), XVGoogle Scholar.

^{page 146 note 3} Cf. Hitchens, , op. cit., pp. 97–117Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 4} C.O. 386/19, pp. 83–7, 6 June 1837; C.O. 384–61, 1273 Canada, 2 July 1840; C.O. 384–68, 169 Emigration, 26 Jan. 1841. For an example of a warning in the local press, see Nation (Dublin), 11 04 1846Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 5} C.O. 385/31, p. 246, 2 Sept. 1842.

^{page 146 note 6} Seventh Annual Report of Commissioners. ICmd. 8091, p. 4. H.C. (1847), XXXIIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 146 note 7} C.O. 384/78, 1209 Canada, 10 Nov. 1845.

^{page 146 note 8} E.g. Return of Emigration Officers in linked Kingdom. H.C. 255, pp. 7–22 (1854), XLVIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 147 note 1} C.O. 384/88, 7161 Emigration, 20 Aug. 1851.

^{page 147 note 2} For tributes to particular officers, see Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. ICmd. 7371 p., 344. H.C. (1847), VIGoogle Scholar; First Report Select Committee on Emigrant Ships. H.C. 163, pp. 171–2 (1854), XIIIGoogle Scholar; C.O. 384/86, 4876 and 9129 Emigration, 6 June and 31 Oct. 1851.

^{page 147 note 3} First Report Select Committee on Emigrant Ships. H.C. 163, p. 116 (1854), XIIIGoogle Scholar. The officer in question was Lieut. Lean of London, who was outstanding for his abilities and success.

^{page 147 note 4} Ibid.

^{page 147 note 5} E.g. C.O. 384/69, 574 Emigration, 23 Mar. 1842. Cf. MacDonagh, O., ‘The Irish Catholic clergy and emigration during the Great Famine’, Irish Hist. Stud., v (1947), 287–302CrossRef Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 6} C.O. 384/88, 7161 Emigration and 9669 and 10116 North America, 20 Aug. and 15 and 20 Nov. 1851.

^{page 148 note 1} C.O. 384/88, 9286 Emigration, 7 Nov. 1851.

^{page 148 note 2} Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. ICmd. 7371, pp. 8–9. H.C. (1847), VIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 148 note 3} C.O. 384/92, 11227 Emigration, 23 Dec. 1854.

^{page 148 note 4} Naturally there is little direct evidence as to the reality of these ‘dangers’, but there was obviously a temptation to take things for granted when one knew and liked the individuals concerned; cf. the Bache McEver case, C.O. 384/88, 3531 Emigration, 27 Apr. 1850. There is some reason to believe that Lieut. Hodder's great popularity at Liverpool derived from his leniency in enforcing the passenger acts, C.O. 384/86, 6897 North America.

^{page 148 note 5} C.O. 384/86, 10445 Emigration, 17 Dec. 1851.

^{page 148 note 6} This restriction was in addition to the existing passenger-tonnage ratio.

^{page 149 note 1} 5 & 6 Vict. c. 107.

^{page 149 note 2} Report of Commissioners on Necessity of Amending Passengers' Act. ICmd. 3551, pp. 3–4. H.C. (1842), XXVGoogle Scholar.

^{page 149 note 3} ‘It is enough to reflect on the condition of a vessel into which 200 or 300 people are crowding together, each one carrying his own box or bag of provisions, and perhaps the vessel intended to sail within 24 hours, in order to feel how impossible it must be to exercise an effectual superintendence under this head. The officers report that they often do detect deficiencies, and cause them to be supplied, but it is obvious that many other cases of a similar kind must escape the most vigilant attention’, ibid., p. 4.

^{page 149 note 4} Ibid., pp. 5–6, 15–24. Cf. Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H.C. 632, pp. 480–9 (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 150 note 1} First Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. H.C. 419, p. 44 (1847–1848), XVIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 150 note 2} Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. ICmd. 7371, pp. 17–18. H.C. (1847), VIGoogle Scholar. See also the annual reports of the commissioners for the years 1843–5.

^{page 150 note 3} C.O. 384/78, 1181 Canada, 3 Oct. 1846.

^{page 150 note 4} Papers relative to Emigration to British North America. ICmd. 7771, pp. 9, 39. H.C. (1847), XXXIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 150 note 5} Ibid., pp. 9–10.

^{page 150 note 6} Hitchens, , op. cit., p. 164Google Scholar.

^{page 151 note 1} Seventh Annual Report of Commissioners. ICmd. 8091, p. 20. H.C. (1847), XXXIIIGoogle Scholar. See also Hansard, 3rd Series, xcii. 1165.

^{page 151 note 2} Papers relative to Emigration to British North America. H.C. 50, pp. 103–19, 178–82 (1847–1848), XLVIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 151 note 3} Ibid., p. 132, Further Papers relative to the Same. ICmd. 9641, p. 15. H.C. (1847–1848), XLVIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 151 note 4} C.O. 384/80, 652 Emigration, 19 Apr. 1847. Only one was an emigration officer proper; the other was a purser.

^{page 151 note 5} Ibid., 651 Emigration, 19 Apr. 1847; C.O. 384/79, 588 Emigration, 12 Apr. 1847.

^{page 151 note 6} C.O. 384/79, 535 Canada. For the background to de Vere's undertaking, see Ward, W., Aubrey de Vere: a Memoir (London, 1904), p. 154Google Scholar.

^{page 151 note 7} Papers relative to Emigration to British North America. H.C. 50, pp. 41–4 (1847–1848), XLVIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 152 note 1} Hitchens, , op cit., pp. 137–8Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 2} C.O. 384/81, 1694 Emigration, 30 Aug. 1848; C.O. 384/84, 4584 Emigration, 22 May 1849.

^{page 152 note 3} Cf. Purcell, R. J., ‘The New York Commissioners of Emigration and Irish immigrants, 1847–60’, Studies, xxxvii (1948), 28–42Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 4} In my article, ‘The regulation of the emigrant traffic from the United Kingdom, 1842– 558’, Irish Hist. Stud., ix. (1954)Google Scholar, the passenger legislation and problems of the famine period, which I summarize in the present article, are discussed at length.

^{page 153 note 1} Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H.C. 632, pp. xx–xxx (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar; Second Report Select Committee on Emigrant Ships. H.C. 349, pp. iii–vi (1854), XIIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 153 note 2} 10 & 11 Vict. c. 103; 11 & 12 Vict. c. 6; 12 & 13 Vict. c. 33; 14 & 15 Vict. c. 1; 15 & 16 Vict. c. 44; and 18 & 19 Vict. c. 119. The 1855 Act consisted of 103 clauses; the 1828 Act had only seven.

^{page 154 note 1} The commissioners recommended that one food package in every ten, and one water cask in every five, should be opened. If there were any grounds for suspicion, even this would not suffice, C.O. 384/74, 607 Emigration, 9 June 1843. Even under the 1842 act, it was estimated that inspections should take three to four hours for the average vessel.

^{page 154 note 2} Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H.C. 632, p. 105 (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 155 note 1} C.O. 384/78, 1181 Canada, 3 Oct. 1846; C.O. 384/85, 3111 Emigration, 17 Apr. 1850.

^{page 155 note 2} C.O. 384/86, 5705 North America, 1 July 1851.

^{page 155 note 3} Ibid., 6983 North America, 30 July 1851. See also Morning Chronicle,15 July 1850, p.6.

^{page 155 note 4} Report Select Committee on Colonization from Ireland. ICmd. 7371, p. 482. H.C. (1847), VIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 155 note 5} C.O. 384/84, 2663 Emigration, 29 Mar. 1849.

^{page 155 note 6} Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H. C 632, pp. 745–7 (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 156 note 1} On the contrary, they withdrew some of their Irish officers in 1848. The assistant was stationed permanently at Tarbert, and, consequently, could give no direct help to the Limerick officer.

^{page 156 note 2} Partly as a result of the Hodder episode, and partly because of the strong recommendations of the select committee of 1851, the Liverpool staff was doubled during 1851–2. But, even with this increase, it was insufficient, as the evidence given before the select committee of 1854 amply demonstrates. See also C.O. 384/89, 5210 North America, 18 June, 1852; C.O. 384/99, minute of T. Murdoch, unmarked, 17 Mar. 1859.

^{page 156 note 3} C.O. 384/89, 6006 North America, 28 June 1852.

^{page 156 note 4} Ibid., 1924 Miscellaneous, 5 Mar. 1852.

^{page 156 note 5} Report Select Committee on Passenger Acts. H.C. 632, p. xv (1851), XIXGoogle Scholar.

^{page 156 note 6} Pressure from the treasury to economize was, of course, an important factor. After the commission was dissolved in 1872, the few remaining officers passed under the control of the Board of Trade.

^{page 156 note 7} Second Report Select Committee on Emigrant Ships. H. C 349, p. 10 (1854), XIIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 157 note 1} Capt. Schomberg, the chief officer at Liverpool in 1854, admitted that emigration officers were incompetent to judge such matters, ibid., p. 15.

^{page 157 note 2} E.g. C.O. 384/89, 4537 North America, 22 May 1852.

^{page 157 note 3} E.g. C.O. 384/93, 8043 Emigration, 15 Sept. 1854.

^{page 157 note 4} E.g. C.O. 384/89, 3379 North America, 23 Apr. 1852. The extent of the ill-feeling may be gauged from the behaviour of the shipper, who, in the course of a heated dispute, shook hands with a passenger ‘intending to show up the Government Officers in the Times’, C.O. 384/90, 4034 Emigration, 6 Apr. 1853; or from Elliot's nervous minute of 3 March 1854, which began, ‘These are not the days in which Trade is willing to be interfered with more than can possibly be helped’, C.O. 384/92, 1986 Emigration.

Article contents

Emigration and the State, 1833–55: an Essay in Administrative History

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests