Fifteen years equals 5479 days



 Ephraim spent a month in the Hospital at Port Arthur



Every now and then, while researching a family history, you come across something which surprises you and totally changes the visions you have had. When I was in primary school, I was given very poorly copied tracings of convicts to colour in and told that all the convicts were sent out for stealing a handkerchief or a loaf of bread. Countless other students in other schools had the same lesson. At one time, it was not fashionable to have a convict in the family and everything was done to hide the digressions of ancestors. Convicts almost seemed like imaginary beings. These lessons on convicts came between a lesson on Greek mythology and “Alfred burnt the cakes.” Tasmania's past was hidden in among many unrelated stories. Obviously schools were into teaching lack of depth, no understanding and irrelevance.

I started learning about convicts again, much later on and discovered that the chain around the leg was not a permanent fixture and that there were different classes of convicts and different systems of dealing with them. When Ephraim was sent off to Port Arthur, there were rules about how he was to be punished and how he was to be imprisoned. First, prisoners were to be held in solitary for a time – unless they were 60 years old or more. By my reckoning, Ephraim was about 50 but he had managed to have his age raised by 10 years so he may have missed out on this little gem. He also was still recovering from his broken arm so could not be put to work in the forests in a hurry.



Model of pig farm, Port Arthur



As time has passed, more and more records have surfaced and been microfilmed and it came to be that these included work books from Port Arthur. Only two of these remain and one of these covers the middle portion of Ephraim’s years at Port Arthur. Suddenly, instead of just placing him at the scene, I was able to see exactly what he was up to while a prisoner there. This document begins in September 1868, so he had already been there for nearly 12 months. At the top of the page, his sentence is given as 5479 days, the unexpired amount being 5057 days. A little bit of addition shows that his sentence has been backdated to the day of his arrest. Ephraim arrived at PA on 4^th November 1867. His first year will remain a mystery but at the end of 1868, he was working in the clearing gang. This would have been heavy work and he may have been grateful to move to the pig farm in December. One of his granddaughters told her family that he was the first man to bring pigs into Tasmania. Well, he certainly worked with pigs but this was a rather grand exaggeration of reality. For five months he tended the pigs before he was moved to the position of wardsman in the penitentiary. A little more research might give me a list of his duties there. October, he was sick in hospital and with no medical benefits, he missed out on his monthly pay of 1/1. That’s about 13 cents a month – not a big income, but I was surprised to find that convicts were paid at all. To get over his illness and get out into the fresh air, Ephraim spent a month looking after no 1 chain gang before moving back to the penitentiary for several more months. He became a private servant for three months before becoming cook at Long Bay which was a logging area just north of Port Arthur. I wonder how he felt on all those occasions that he had to cook lamb.

Building at pig farm Port Arthur

As this folio page ends, Ephraim has 3914 days of his sentence to go and has earned the grand total of £2.2.3. Unfortunately, the folio containing further entries no longer exists, but it is great to have been able to understand a little of his personal story at Port Arthur.



Fifteen years for a sheep

Bridget Doe was not the shy retiring type. When her husband came home to tell her that he had, had an altercation with John Harris, she went immediately into action. She assessed the situation immediately and decided that she needed to put her side of the story to the police first. She demanded a saddle from her neighbour, a neighbour with whom she was not on the best of terms, and pressed till she was given access to check the Dawes bedroom for the presence of Thomas Dawes.

In court, she confidently examined the witnesses and added her own colourful language to the proceedings. She accused the neighbour of “shooking” timber. I can remember this term being used occasionally many years ago but it seems to have disappeared now. Bridget also accused people of trying to “man blot” her husband. She was not going to give in easily. Bridget knew she was fighting for her future and that of her whole family.

The newspapers of the day loved sensation and this “crime” was reported Australia wide. A few years later it was used again in the Tasmanian courts to illustrate the dangers involved when trying to catch criminals. Ephraim Doe had earned himself a real reputation.

Despite the defence put up by the Doe family, Ephraim was found guilty of manslaughter, committed while trying to steal a sheep. It can hardly be imagined how Ephraim and Bridget had spent the two months between the inquest and the trial. Both had been charged and held in custody during that time. Did they see each other during that time? The evidence against Bridget was not strong and she must have had some hope of being found innocent. Ephraim would have known that his chances were poor. He sold his land in preparation of an unknown future.

Where Bridget spent the next few years is a mystery. She most likely stayed around the North West Coast of Tasmania as her children made appearances there several years later. I have found no more references to Bridget until she died 15 years later in Launceston. She would have had to support her two children for a few years until they were old enough to earn a living by themselves. For women, of her status, the only real option was housework. Ephraim was back in prison. What must his feelings have been? Fifteen years was a long sentence and Port Arthur had a reputation as a severe place to be. Were those sheep really worth it?

Hats on for Bridget

Convict bonnet for Bridget Doe

Roses from the Heart is a project by Christina Henri to make a bonnet to remember each of 25,000 women convicts who were transported to Tasmania.
Bridget Norton, wife of Ephraim was one of those women. She travelled out on the "Tory" in 1847. During the voyage, the women were kept busy making shirts. As Bridget was described as very industrious, I imagine that she was a very willing participant in this project. As a laundress, she most likely had to repair many a shirt before it was delivered back to its owner.

The bonnet pictured represents Bridget's work. It has been made from a shirt, using the cuff to form the peak.

New style for Bridget

The second design, features a pocket and front placket. Would Bridget appreciate being remembered like this?

Bridget Doe, the mother

It is about to be Mother’s Day and in this family, Bridget was the mother. I am sure that she would have enjoyed a day being looked after by a grateful family but it is unlikely that it ever happened. It seems that she had been married back in Ireland and she came out to Australia as a widow with one child. I have not been able to find any information at all concerning the child. She did not bring any child with her to Australia.

It seems that Bridget had a liking for shoes and this led to her downfall. Her theft seems very brazen as if she wanted to be caught. Ephraim thanked the judge when he was sentenced to transportation and maybe Bridget was just as grateful. It seems that she had been in trouble before. A second or third offence was much more likely to bring a sentence of transportation. Her story was printed in the Liverpool Mercury.

“On Tuesday, a woman named Bridget Norton, of shabby genteel appearance, appeared before the magistrates under the following circumstances. It seemed that on the preceding day, the prisoner walked into a shoe shop in St James Street, and intimated that she wanted some shoes for a friend of hers, who was troubled with swelled legs. Several lots were then shown to her and she chose four pairs, saying that if they could be sent to Sparling Street where she lodged, they would be paid for. The proprietor of the shop accordingly sent the shoes by his daughter who found the prisoner at the place stated. The prisoner with great politeness introduced her to the parlour, and taking the shoes said she would go and fetch the money. The messenger waited upwards of an hour, and her patience being exhausted, she sought the prisoner, when it was ascertained that she had decamped with the shoes. Information was immediately given to the police, which led to her detection shortly afterwards. The prisoner had previously been convicted of similar offences.”

Bridget knew manners! And she was of genteel appearance! She was a laundress from Ireland and described on her indent as being well behaved and industrious. Our Bridget was beginning to sound a bit classy! It was generally accepted that Irish women were rather low creatures, lazy, dirty and ill mannered. Bridget must have had a good upbringing or worked in a home where she picked up some style from the ladies.

It was not to last.  1859 found her sloshed in the bar of the Halfway Hotel at Jerusalem, “not quite drunk and not quite sober.” She had also been convicted of tippling with Edward Hunt, a perpetual drunkard. She had followed her husband in search of work or enjoyment and been found out of her area without a pass, resulting in a stint in the female factory.

Whatever her faults, Bridget was not going to take her husband’s involvement in the death of John Harris and his likely incarceration without a fight.

Norton Bridget Tried: Lancaster 20 Dec 1847 Embarked:                             7 years Arrived: 6 August 1848	Transported for stealing boots and shoes. Widow. Gaol Report: 4th conviction Stated this offence Well behaved, very industrious
Trade  Laundress,  Height  5 ‘2 1/2” Age 30,   Complex Dark, Head Round, Hair Dark brown, Visage oval, Forehead low, Eyebrows L Brown, Eyes grey, Nose medium, Mouth medium, Chin medium, Native place Athlone
Marks: None
Period of Gang Probation: 6 months Services 8/2/53 Station of Gang: Anson Class: 8/2/49 3 rd    Sept 2 /50 Married to Ephraim Doe
Offences and Sentences June 9/51(Married) Absent from her residence and abode 3 months hard labour.(IF) Approved 13/6/51 For Hobart April 19/52 QS Richmond Feloniously stealing of a satin waistcoat-discharged Mar 29/52 Richmond Felony remanded(WN) Mar 30/52 Fully committed to take her trial. Was tried at the QS Richmond on the 19th April 1852 for stealing a waistcoat- discharged T of L 10/8/52 Feb 5/53 Harbouring a prisoner of the crown for the purpose of tippling 6 months hard labour(GF) Appd. 11/2/53 Tried SC Launceston 17 October 1867 Murder,manslaughter-not guilty Con 41/1/6		Remarks 2/7/53 plus Ephraim Doe Notes by JJ See LC/445/2 Ephraim also charged See LC/445/2 Convict was Edward Hunt. He received 10 days solitary See Cornwall Chronicle Launceston Times

A night that changed all

Stringy Bark Forest, Bishopsbourne

When I first visited the land where Ephraim had lived at Stringy Bark Forest, it was all bush with a creek running through. The newspaper had given a thorough description of where the body of John Harris had been found near the saw pits but without knowing where the various huts had been, it was difficult to determine an exact layout. I looked everywhere for signs of sawpits and was told by a man on a neighbouring property that he had seen the remains of some on his property but that was the wrong direction.

Two men, Harris and Dawes, had lain in wait for Ephraim to catch him sheepstealing. They were determined to catch him – no one else. After a struggle with Ephraim, one of the men, Dawes went back to get the owner of the land, James Green. Harris had knocked Ephraim down and had him under his control. Green arrived at the spot at 9 o’clock at night and was still searching 6 hours later, even though, as far as he knew, Harris was in control of the situation. He said it was a clear night and sound was travelling great distances. His calls were not answered yet he kept searching. Surely, he was suspicious that something out of the ordinary had occurred. It took Green 6 hours to decide to go and ask the only man (Dawes) who knew where the altercation had taken place, where to find the spot where it had happened. That is a lot of patience on an August night. Dawes had not wanted to be seen in the matter and had gone home.

There was speculation that Bridget had been out stealing sheep with her husband. When the body of Harris was found, there were three deep wounds to the head and several knife cuts across the back of the hand. Ephraim had sustained a broken arm yet on his own, it was considered that he had caused all these wounds.

Stringy Bark Forest Bishopsbourne

In reading the newspaper articles on this crime, it is apparent that there were quite a few people living in huts in the bush in the forest and that the growth was quite thick. There was distrust between many of them and obviously stealing was common. Bridget used the word “shook” to describe this (The shepherd’s hut was shook). All the witnesses were out to discredit each other and it is quite difficult to discern the truth in any story. Interestingly, Jane Dawes, wife of Thomas Dawes maintained that she was married to her husband. A search of records indicates that she was not, but she married him a couple of weeks later. Morals suddenly became important.

Most of all, the newspapers give in insight into life on the land and the characters who lived there.

The missing years

I had been collecting information on my various families for some time, when I decided that my collection had grown from fitting neatly into a single display book to one bulging with papers sticking out in all directions. I had ten papers filed in each plastic sleeve and needed to organise. A trip to the shop provided me with several folders and a pile of plastic sheets. Gradually I arranged papers under names, dates and events. I thought I was doing really well. In the first year you come a long way when you start collecting. Back in the late 80s, it meant going through microfiche and books or newspapers one at a time but it made you really appreciate what you found and gradually, the file grew thicker. Next step was take one person at a time and put all the information in chronological order. It was then that I realised that there were years for which there was absolutely nothing. Far from having a comprehensive folio, I was missing about 30 years of Ephraim’s life.

Next came a call from my sister whose son had been to Port Arthur (as a visitor, not an inmate!) and asked at a display, whether Ephraim Doe had ever been there. Despite my Aunt having previously written and receiving a reply in the negative, records were now being indexed and the reply was different. Ephraim had spent time at Port Arthur! This was not recorded on his indent, so I returned to the Archives and was given another film on which it was just possible that I might find something. It was a matter of going through and checking everything as there was no order at all. It seems that some convicts who spent time under the assignment system and then the probation system had a second indent and the extra records were on this film. I trailed from one record to the next and suddenly it appeared. Along the bottom was written “October 17 1867, 15 years Port Arthur, manslaughter”. What a find!!!

Next I was off to the newspaper files where I checked all the papers for the relevant dates. I found a report on the trial and then backtracked to the original reports of when the incident had occurred. I ordered copies from two of the papers and a few days later in the mail, I received an A4 photograph of each page of broadsheet. This was a new challenge. The writing was miniscule and I had to find the best of the best in magnifying glasses to read it all. The cost was about $10 per page and now it is available for free over the internet!

This information could have been found years earlier, but for a grave mistake. The date of the offence was also meant to be written on Bridget Doe’s file, but the clerk accidentally inscribed it onto the file of the previous prisoner in the record book. Let us hope that the poor woman never suffered because of it.

Read about the tribulations of Bridget and Ephraim by going to Trove nla newspapers.

Did Ephraim look as dapper as this at Port Arthur?

Is it still a window when it is not there?

Ephraim was a friend in need for James Goss. James ended his days as a bankrupt, who was prone to epileptic fits and in his old age took to drinking rather more than was good for him.

James also built himself a house in Stringy Bark forest. Palings lovingly adzed, a shingle roof and a forest view.  What more could he ask for?  Windows, that’s what. Two empty spaces in the front needed to be filled.  Window sashes were a bit harder to build and glass not procurable from the forest. Wily James approached an empty house, “The Hermitage” and deftly removed a couple of the highly desired items. Unfortunately, when the theft was reported, a check of other buildings revealed that the windows in James Goss’s house exactly matched those missing from the Hermitage, four panes wide and with brass fittings. He was caught. A good lawyer was needed and he found one in person of Mr F R Lees. Witnesses were needed. Among them, who should volunteer other than one Ephraim Doe? Mr Lees read to him all of the depositions made before the committing magistrate and tutored Ephraim to make a statement in James’s defence.  Whether Ephraim’s statement even made it to court is debatable.

Other witnesses stated that James had inherited the sashes when he married a widow. They had belonged to her previous husband. The magistrate was not happy. The witnesses had been trained and in addressing the jury, he commented severely on Mr Lees conduct. Why were the other witnesses statements allowed in court? Maybe Ephraim went a bit too far. Three years later, his family again colluded to give a statement of events, this time in the defence of Ephraim and Bridget. Again, their stories were too similar.

The jury found James Goss guilty

Finders keepers losers weepers

Ephraim had acquired some tools and whether by fair means or foul it is impossible to tell. A witness has given evidence that they were purchased but there were witnesses of doubtful honesty at Stringy Bark Forest. He was very lucky to get away with this, it being only three days after his previous court appearance. These would have been very useful tools for cutting  and smoothing timber and would have been put to good use.
In a remote area, Ephraim had been gaining reputation rather on the shady side. Either the police were being very vigilant or he was on their list for regular surveillance.

Life was not meant to be easy



Ephraim Doe the Elder

 He looks rather content in this photo, probably taken in the late 70s or 80s. Life wasn't always so easy. Meat was not always on the menu though Ephraim knew how to get it. Evidence shows that he was cutting palings, a common source of income at the time and ploughing his land for crops. Did he ever try to run sheep on his land or was it easier to partake of someone else's flock? Having visited the area where he lived, I can see that it was not really sheep friendly, probably a bit wet underfoot and not the sort of land where grass grew freely all year land. Located in the shadow of Black Bluff, which is frequently capped with snow in winter, it would have been a chilly climate. James Green had a large property bordering Ephraim's. This was much hillier and had far better drainage. In fact, James Green was reported in the newspapers as being the first person to bring mechanical irrigation into Tasmania. Green had large flocks and Ephraim would have seen them as a viable target.
Whatever, Ephraim was only just managing to support his family on his farm. They had a little wheat but it needed to be ground into flour. Vegetables would have been seasonal, eggs available from chooks (if the native animals allowed them peace). I have found no evidence that there was a house cow. Shops were many miles away so the family had to be self sufficient. There was no school in the district and they did not attend chuch so socialising was amongst the other neighbours, many of them of dubious background. Altogether, the family lived an isolated life. Bridget would have been busy bringing up the two children but their only education was from chores or what they learned from the bush. Neither parent was able to pass on formal education. Did Bridget pass on sewing skills to MaryAnn? These were necessary in days when most people made their own clothes or purchased second hand articles. Mending and recycling were survival skills. Ephraim the younger would have learned to handle tools from an early age. Some of these also procured from another settler who took Ephraim snr to court to try to retrieve them. Ephraim was no stranger to the insides of the court room and he was to become even more familiar with the sight of the judge and jury.

Lamb Dinner for the Does

From his farm, Ephraim Doe had a view of the Western Tiers. It seems he wasn't all that successful at farming but both he and Bridget certainly had their dogs under control.It was later said at their trial in 1867 that Bridget could handle any dog They used dogs to hunt for kangaroo and to save thenselves from the law as Ephraim did in 1863. A man Oliver Lee had recently been sentenced on a charge of sheep stealing and his sentence was expected to be a deterrent to others. However, information was given to police that Ephraim was stealing sheep. Upon their arrival at his farm, they caught him red handed, carrying out a sheep's head. Quick as a flash, Ephraim tossed it to his dog, being held on its chain. Anybody knows it is not a good idea to disturb a dog when it is eating and this large dog was not going to disprove that idea. How those policemen eventually managed to rob the poor dog of his meal was not explained in the newspapers, but it was too late. The canines had been busy. Chewed and crunched as the sheep's head now was, there were no identifying marks left and when Ephraim was taken to court the lack of evidence led to his aquittal. He had been smart enough to get rid of the sheep skin at an earlier time. Ephraim must have stolen many sheep and he must have been pretty good at it. The amazing fact to be considered is not how often he was caught, but how often he got away with it!
Today, these two would just have to saunter up to the meat section in the supermarket and secrete a couple of packages under their clothes. How much easier things have become.