Tasmanian shipwreck legend
By David R. Griffiths


A local tourist information sign gives an intriguingly false story of the past


 In the far south of Tasmania verbal history of the State’s third worst shipwreck, fostered by opposition to the convict system,  challenges official versions 166 years on.   The verbal story shows links to known facts, and some possibility exists that the official version is less than the whole truth.  As the story unravels, this is a fascinating example of how history transforms into legend.

A Southport local, descended from a convict forefather when asked about it, defended the truth of a tourist sign which describes a massacre of convicts during the wreck of the George 111, saying "politicians were corrupt then and they are still corrupt today".

However it is also highly unlikely that during a shipwreck soldiers could have fired on convicts in the sea, let alone even load their weapons.

I originally exposed inaccuracies in the tourist information in an article in the region's Huon News 10/9/1998.  Recently revisiting the area it became apparent to me that rather than being merely wrong, the local version was a verbal history artefact.

The sign on the changing rooms at the beach describes local attractions and states: "George 111 reef lies south of Southport Island and was named after the convict ship George 111 which was wrecked there whilst on her way to Port Arthur.  The convicts were released into the sea but were shot by the ship's officers. "A ten year old cabin boy was saved by the captain's wife who hid him under her dress.  He was the only convict who survived the wreck."


part of the report in the Hobart Courier, April 17 1835

By contrast The Hobart Courier of April 24, 1835 reports the results of the Board of Inquiry appointed by Governor Arthur to inquire into the wreck.  The report states that 81 convicts survived, and lists their names.

"It was naturally to be expected that on the striking of the ship, the prisoners would endeavour to extricate themselves from a situation which must have appeared to them one of imminent peril, and it appears they broke down a barricade of the prison with a view to get on deck.

"It was at this period that the sentries over the main hatchway, in obedience to the positive orders they then received, to keep the men below … fired - and painful as it is for us to report upon a subject of such a distressing nature, that, at such a crisis, man should feel himself compelled, through a sense of duty, to add to the desolation of the scene and fire upon his fellow creatures, yet it is gratifying to observe, from the concurring opinions of all the officers, according to the then existing state of circumstances, it was absolutely necessary that the prisoners should be kept down, for had they at that time got on deck, the long boat upon which alone the survivors could look with any hope of rescue, would have been rendered useless, and thus to all human appearances a much greater loss of life would have ensued."  The report concluded:  "The conduct of all was most praiseworthy and entirely free from blame of any description."

The Hobart Courier reported evidence from convicts including James Elliott: "I was in the hatchway several minutes before I could get up. The soldiers kept me down and threatened to fire; I heard two shots fired:  the first shot killed Robert Luker, and about three or four minutes after another shot was fired and I saw another man fall."

Following newspaper reports that four bodies had been washed ashore near the wreck with gunshot wounds and sabre cuts, the Coroner had 17 bodies disinterred. It was concluded that the wounds were caused by the rocks. These rumours, still being passed on, are most likely the basis for the verbal history on the Southport sign.

The gentleman I met said his forefather was one of the last convicts sent to the Colony, and arrived in the 1850's, which is nearly two decades after the wreck.

The second part of the legend relates to: "A ten year old cabin boy was saved by the captain's wife who hid him under her dress.  He was the only convict who survived the wreck." Forty Juveniles were among the 220 convicts, but the Captain's wife was not on board the ship. More than likely this part of the legend relates to a painting by H. E. Dawe, which was also produced as a lithograph, "The power of maternal affection when George the Forth convict ship was wrecked in April 1835 near Van Diemen's land" (Tasmania).  The painting depicted a soldier's wife, Mrs Martin, heroically described:

"She contrived to secure herself on the forechannel of the ship among the Laniards and although the sea ran mountains high with frost and rain the poor creature was exposed for 48 hours to the weather with two babes suckling at her bosoms and her elder child held between her knees.." 



In fact Mrs Martin endured only 8 hours on the wreck until the ship's long boat returned at 6am for its second load.  Not to mention that, although the date of the wreck is correct Dawe got the name of the ship wrong, calling it the "George the Forth" not "Third" (Forth presumably being a variation of spelling at the time).   Embellishment of the story occurred almost immediately. The powerful image of the woman protecting children has merged with the rumours of a massacre in the legend that survived.  Two years after the wreck in 1837, a lithograph was produced for sale to the public with typical Victorian era melodrama, and convicts also built their own legend, no doubt passed on verbally inside prisons and after they were released.  The wreck was also politicised by opponents of transportation within the Colony, it immediately took on a life beyond mere events as a result of the aspirations, and resentments of those involved.   (Image reproduced with permission Mitchell Library, State Library of NSW)

After my first visit to the area I wrote a story about the wreck, and contacted G.A. Mawer, author of “Most Perfectly Safe” as part of my research.  Mawer had not heard the local story but commented: 

“It is hard to see how (they) could have got it so wrong. The convicts were not released but freed themselves.  Some were shot, but before release, and by the military, not ship’s officers.  I have never seen reference to a cabin boy, but Major Ryan had his 6 year old son with him.  Mrs. Martin was not the Captain’s wife, who if he had one, was not aboard.  How could the cabin boy be a convict?  There were 81 convict survivors."

Mawer concluded:  "I suspect it is a classic example of the distortions of oral history.”

Southport, Tasmania

Having recently visited the area again I sought out a local opinion, finding the local identity who averred to the truth of the tourist sign, and also sought out local historians.  Subsequently I wrote another story for the Huon News on the significance of the oral history

Bruce Poulson  researched the history of the area between Southport and Recherche Bay. He commented: "I have read a dozen or so accounts of the wreck and aftermath and the topic has come up a couple of times in interviews with old-timers (although there are only six over-90 left from the original families).

"The older sign at Southport Beach was erected either by the old Esperance Council or the State Government during a minor historical revival about the time of the commemoration of D'Entrecasteaux's visits. "The new plaque was put there last year as part of "The Huon Trail" tourism initiative, a joint project between the Huon Kingborough Tourism Association and the two Councils (Huon and Kingborough).   The sign near the George 111 monument itself at Southport Bluff belongs to the TPWS (Tas. Parks and Wildlife Service). It is the best of the three and gives a balanced report on the disaster mostly from original sources.

"There have always existed two views ... right from day one, so to speak: (1) those who believed that unnecessary killings had occurred and (2) those who accepted the Coroner's findings, even though the inquest, when it adjourned to Southport, was probably held too late to tell whether the disinterred bodies contained gunshot etc.  One old timer, still alive, insists that the grave-diggers told his father of foul play. This view has been the majority one in this largely ex-convict district for generations."   Mr. Poulson said.


Looking over the facts and various opinions, despite the fact that it would be easy to reject the legend as erroneous, which was my first reaction,  there is possibly a level of insincerity in the official version at least with the conclusion of the Inquiry:  "the conduct of all was.. entirely free from blame of any description".    During the time before it was decided to release the convicts, the lower decks flooded leading to loss of life; other convicts succumbed no doubt due to the poor diet; and inadequate clothing.  Old oatmeal had been loaded on the ship as a cost cutting measure, clothing was thin and only overcrowded conditions would have protected the convicts from the chill of the Southern Ocean in Autumn.  Poor winds had delayed the ship and many convicts were suffering from scurvy which resulted in the ship's doctor urging the Captain to take a shortcut through the D'Entrecasteaux Channel rather than the seaward side of Bruny Island, the usual approach to Hobart.   And the infirmary flooded in the wreck killing the sick and dying, but 81 convicts, barely more than a third of those embarked, did survive. 

This much at least is true, that the possibility of a "massacre" tags onto rumours of the time, and the "cabin boy" connects with the lithograph of Dawes' painting ("..her elder child held between her knees..")

Two major well researched sources on the wreck are "The Convict Ships" by Charles Bateson (1959), and "Most Perfectly Safe" by G. A. Mawer (1997). Bateson gives as full a description of the events of the wreck as possible, Mawer adds valuable circumstances both before during and after the voyage, which give a context into events. 

Copyright © David R. Griffiths 2001
return to index