Good God! I think the term for all this is "It's ALIVE !!!!!!"This was NOT what I intended and unfortunately got sucked into arguing with a parochial idiot against my better judgement. Allow me to clear a few things up - most of what I DID say was purely for "truth's" benefit to give him enough hangable rope - daresay I have achieved this end? We can only hope - bigotry, prejudice and ego have naught to do with folk music - except as subject matter.

Go back to my earlier post where I asked for this NOT to occur and then got 'flamed' by the so-called "truth": I tend to retaliate, and sometimes with heat - my apologies.

However, one comment has struck a chord - regards the (to simplify the various postings and contentions) "MOST crimes were punished by death - few by imprisonment" is basically how it can be interpreted.
Sorry, whoever wrote that but it is incorrect. YES, execution was a preferred option for many crimes above debt, however, it was generally applied more to "repeat" "serious" offenders of those crimes (theft etc.)
The general response to crime was imprisonment - this is what lead to the use of the literally dozens of prison hulks along the Thames and other warterways that would support them. The corollary of this was then "Transportation" to colonies because once there, the prisoner had to serve out his/her sentence (the most common was a sentence of around 7 years going by Australian records) and then, should the convict wish to return home - he/she was then required to EARN their passage home and pay for it: A task about as achievable as buying your own Jumbo Jet and flying yourself around the world should you wish to go somewhere today (so far John Travolta's about the only one capable of it). The means to do so was WAY beyond all but the most wealthy of "settlers", "emancipated convicts" or "Ticket-of-Leaver's". If I recall aright, even the great John MacArthur was taken back to England in chains but through lack of prosecution released and had to pay his way back to Australia again (his wife paid for it because by then she was wealthier than he!)

The bottom line. England preferred to "dump" its convicts on the colonies NOT as labour, but to relieve the overcrowded prison system and to get them out of its collective hair. The fact that virtually NONE could ever afford to return was a bonus.

If you wish for confirmation of this then I suggest you read the first few volumes of "A History of Australia" by Professor Manning Clark. Worldly regarded (not widely, but WORLDLY) as the most accurate, unbiased and definitive history of Australia and its settlement and development of any history written.

And for "truth's" benefit that includes Britain and the British historians as well.

For the mistakes I made through heated comments or inaccurate quotings - I apologise. But NOT to "truth" as he is a moron with all the perception and acumen of a straining post. Save your prejudicial bleatings for your National Front brethren and leave the discussion fora to those with something substantial between their ears - Unfortunately in your case I'm afraid it's a case of "The lights are flashing, the bells are ringing, but there's no train on the line" OR alternatively he "has the six-pack but lacks the plastic thingy to hold it all together" OR as we say in Oz - a few snags short of a barbie / a few sandwiches short of a picnic / a few sheep short of a mob / a bit of lamb short of a roast / kangaroos loose in the top paddock - - - anyone getting the picture?????

Sorry guys - feeling somewhat 'whimsical'

THANKS FOR ALL THE SONG SUGGESTIONS ANYWAY - don't mean to shout - but can't italicise for emphasis here for some reason

Mutt