1
results found in
3 ms
Page 1
of 1
2 Feb 1803 Note — continued (2
to which by the transportation the Convict may have happened to be
transported in the first instance, it
was not in its nature incapable of being remarked, without the
succession of the bondage. The bondage in like manner was not under
this system incapable of being
detached from the confinement and remitted by itself
the confinement continuing unremitted: but, +
+ as it was only in virtue of the bondage i:
e: the profit not made by the Court servant that the Traitor could have any
interest in keeping him in any sort of confinement
as the individual purchaser of the service. the Master of the
Convict would hav it was not natural that any such
separation should ever have taken place in practice.
Under the new system
confinement became fixed to a spot certain,
circumscribed by the by the courts of the settlement, the Governor
— now an Agent of the Crown, standing in the place of the Master
— the bondage might by a
parochial indulgence, declared or undeclared, be remitted, without
the intervention of any formal written instrument, and without
the remission of the confinement: the confinement might also be
remitted, and at any time before the expiration of the exile, though not
without a formal instrument for the purpose.
Under the old system, the distance of the
spot, to which the Convict was to be transported in the first
instance, made in an indirect way, in most instances, though not
necessarily a correspondent addition to the duration of the
exile. The right to the service of the Convict being sold for
the whole seven years, if accordingly he was kept in bondage in the last
day of that seven years
it could not even be in his power the day
after to find himself the day after on British ground so early as the next
day. He would have to wait in the first place for the sailing of a
ship bound to a port in Great Britain from the spot
on Colony in which
the
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1