Difference between revisions of "Evan Nepean"

Latest revision as of 05:49, 9 March 2016

Family & Birth

"Nepean came from a Cornwall family, apparently of small fortune. One brother entered the Royal Engineers and another the Army. Both eventually rose to the rank of lieutenant general. Nepean went to sea, where he served as purser aboard several ships, including Jervis’. In 1782 he acted as secretary to the port admiral at Plymouth before coming to the Home Office. On June 6, 1782, he married Margaret Skinner, only daughter of Captain William Skinner and granddaughter of General William Skinner of the Royal Engineers, Chief Engineer of Great Britain. He had four sons and one daughter; two of the sons and possibly the daughter were born while he was Undersecretary in the Home Office." (R.R. Nelson, The Home Office, 1782-1801, Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1969, p.29)

He was the second of three sons of ‘Nicholas Nepean, Gent’ and his wife, Margaret Jones. His mother was from South Wales. The family appears to have lived at St Stephens near Saltash in Devon for several generations.

April 1721 – Nicholas Nepean was born, the son of Nicholas Nepeane and Willmot Davis.

12 June 1744 – Nicholas Nepean married Eleanor Letheby at Saltash.

21 April 1747 – Nicholas Nepean married Margaret Jones at Saltash.

30 October 1748 – Thomas Nepean, the eldest son, was baptised at Stoke Damerel in Devon. In 1797 he was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel in the Army.

15 January 1750 – Elizabeth Nepean was baptised at St Stephens by Saltash (the parish church). She died 5 July 1752.

9 July 1752 – Evan was born at St Stephens, near Saltash in Devon.

25 August 1752 – Evan was baptised at Saltash. (Cornish Baptisms in Find My Past)

2 December 1755 – Willmot was baptised at St Stephens by Saltash and died in 1758.

9 November 1757 – Nicholas was baptised at Saltash, Devon. He entered the Boyne on 1 December 1773, at the same time as his brother. He was discharged in October 1774 before she sailed for America and entered the Marines as a Second Lieutenant. He served in the American War. His career between 1783 and 1789 is unclear. He married Johanna Francina Carolina Wedekind at Stoke Damerel in Devon on 21 April 1784. He was listed as a Lieutenant in the Marines. (Her father and two other witnesses have Germanic sounding names.) His appointment as a Captain in the NSW Corps in June 1789 provided a rare opportunity for service during a time of peace. (Michael Flynn, The Second Fleet: Britain’s Grim Convict Armada of 1790, Sydney: Library of Australian History, 1993, p.457) He died in 1823.

10 August 1760 – George Frederick was born. He died in 1766.

Nicholas Nepean Senior is reported to have died at Saltash on 5 May 1794. According to family historians, he was at one time Mayor of Saltash.

Nepean’s Family

Evan Nepean Esquire, of St Martin Westminster, married Margaret Skinner of the parish of St Alphege, the only daughter of Capt. William Skinner, on 6 June 1782 at the Garrison Church (St Alphege) at Greenwich. (London Metropolitan Archives, Saint Alfege, Greenwich, Register of marriages, P78/ALF, Item 033)

They had one daughter and four sons:

• Sir Molyneux Hyde Nepean, born 1783, who became 2nd Bt. • Harriet, both 1788 • Frederick, born 1794 • William, born 1795, later a Major General, whose daughter Anna Maria Nepean married General Sir William Parke. • Evan, born 1800, who became the Canon of Westminster and a Chaplain in Ordinary to Queen Victoria.

Career

We lack details of his education, which must help to explain his later entry into the Navy at the advanced age of 20 or 22. He entered the Royal Navy on December 28, 1773, serving on HMS Boyne as a clerk to Capt. Broderick Hartwell. The Boyne had been a guardship at Plymouth, but in October 1774, sailed for North America.

He was promoted to purser in 1775, presumably on board the Boyne, and it would seem that he did not return home with her in March 1776. He served as secretary to Admiral Molyneux Shuldham in Boston in 1776 and again at Plymouth (1777-78), when Shuldham was Port Admiral there.

From 1780-1782 he was Purser on HMS Foudroyant for Captain John Jervis (later Lord St. Vincent).

Lord Shelburne appointed him as Undersecretary at the Southern Department, which soon became the Home Office, apparently on the recommendation of Jervis, who has been described as a friend of Shelburne’s.

1791-92 Leave

November 1791 to June 1792 – Nepean sailed to the West Indies on government business, although in reality, it was leave to enable him to recuperate.

12 November 1791 – On this date, the newspapers reported his imminent departure for the West Indies:

"Yesterday at noon a Cabinet Council was held at Lord Grenville’s Office on the above business [a petition from the West India merchants for protection], which was attended by the Lord Chancellor, Mr Pitt, the Duke of Richmond, Lords Grenville and Hawkesbury (who came to town on the occasion), when it was resolved, that Evan Nepean Esq. Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, be sent with proper instructions from Administration to the Earl of Effingham, Governor of Jamaica, and will take his departure on or before Thursday next." (London Chronicle, 10-12 November 1791)

"Evan Nepean, Esq. one of the Under Secretaries of State, is preparing for a voyage to Jamaica, in one of the first packets which can be got ready. Of the extent of his Commission in that island, we are not informed; but he will certainly have some extraordinary powers; and be enabled to take measures for preserving the peace of all our West India settlements.

"Mr Pollock, the Chief Clerk, will transact the business of the office, during the absence of Mr Nepean." (Gazetteer & New Daily Advertiser, 12 November 1791)

Other papers referred to the real reason for his departure:

"Mr Nepean has at last resolved to abandon the excessive fatigues of office until his health is re-established. He will, therefore, in the course of this month, set out for Lisbon." (Morning Post and Daily Advertiser, 12 November 1791)

"It is with extreme concern we learn, that ill health is one inducement for Mr Nepean’s going abroad. His Physicians have recommended a warm climate to him, and the business which we yesterday stated, leads him to prefer Jamaica to any other place." (World, 15 November 1791)

However, there was speculation as to other reasons:

"We have the best authority for saying, that Mr Nepean is not going to Jamaica, expressly upon the business which some of the prints have assigned him.

"Some months ago, that Gentleman, whose public services merit every reward, either of honour or profit, that can be conferred upon him, succeeded to a lucrative office in the Island of Jamaica. His personal appearance there is necessary, before he can enter upon possession of it. He has for these three months past, had the intention of crossing the Atlantic, for that purpose, but the completion of which, urgent official business has obliged him to postpone.

"It is extremely probable, that Mr Nepean may be charged with dispatches for Lord Effingham. . ." (World, 14 November 1791)

23 November 1791 – "We feel great pleasure in hearing that Mr Nepean has been, for two or three days, much better than usual. His departure, it is said, only awaits for the arrival of Mr Dundas, whose attendance is every day expected." (World, 23 November 1791)

25 November 1791 – "Mr Nepean is so far recovered from his indisposition, that he intends to set off for his destination at Jamaica in a few days." (Lloyd’s Evening Post, 23-25 November 1791)

29 November 1791 – Nepean set off from Whitehall to Deptford.

30 November 1791 – "Yesterday morning Mr Nepean set off from his house at Whitehall for Deptford, where he will embark for Jamaica, to which place he is destined by Administration, with instructions to the Earl of Effingham how to act during the present disturbances in the French West India Settlements." (Lloyd’s Evening Post, 28-30 November 1791)

4 December 1791 – "Mr Nepean, lately gone to be sworn into possession of a lucrative patent employment, in the island of Jamaica, is a rare instance of universal approbation and good fortune uniting in the same person. He has been secretary to the several secretaries of state for the home department, since the Marquis of Lansdown’s last administration; and, from the irreproachable propriety of his conduct, has had the happiness to escape the evil workings of envy, and the shafts of malice. His great attention to business, having, in some degree, impaired his constitution, which was naturally good, it is the sincere wish of all who know him, that the sea air, and the warmth of a more southern climate, may reinstate his health, and that a period as short as possible may restore him to his family and friends." (Observer, 4 December 1791)

10 December 1791 – "John King, Esq. is appointed Under Secretary of State, in the room of Mr Nepean, during his absence in the West Indies." (London Chronicle, 8-10 December 1791)

20 December 1791 – "By letters received on Saturday, we learn that Mr Nepean, who had been detained at Portsmouth by adverse winds and weather for some time, was expected to sail the next day; to all who know the private and public worth of this excellent character, the settled tranquillity of the present season must afford sincere pleasure." (World, 20 December 1791)

March 1792 – Nepean was sworn in as Clerk of the Supreme Court in Jamaica, of which he was the patentee. (General Evening Post, 22-24 May 1792) (His Jamaican appointments were reportedly worth £10,000 p.a. – General Evening Post, 7-9 June 1792)

Return

24 or 25 May 1792 – Nepean arrived at Portsmouth in the Diana at 9 o’clock in the morning and took a post chaise for London, arriving in the afternoon and immediately called on Mr Dundas, ‘who was at dinner with the Minister’. (Diary or Woodfall’s Register, 26 May 1792; Lloyd’s Evening Post, 25-28 May 1792; London Chronicle, 26-29 May 1792) He arrived at his home in Privy Garden that evening in perfect health. (Evening Mail, 25-28 May 1792)

30 May 1792 – Nepean was received by the King at the Levee. (London Chronicle, 29-31 May 1792)

It seems he was little different on his return. In June 1794, Sir Jerome Fitzpatrick wrote to Nepean: ‘I know you are incessantly hurried. . .’ (TNA FO95/5/3)

1794 – Nepean was appointed Under-Secretary of State for War, following Dundas across from the Home Office.

1795 – He was appointed Secretary of the Board of Admiralty.

1797 to 1816 – Nepean is listed as occupying an Admiralty property in the parish of St Martins in the Fields.

c.1799 – Nepean built Loders Court at Loders in Dorset.

1801-24 – Nepean was listed as occupier of a property in Fulham originally listed as owned by Sir Philip Stephens, the former Secretary of the Admiralty (along with Earl St Vincent). (LMA Land Tax Records, MR/PLT/4809, etc)

16 July 1802 – He was made a Baronet following the Peace of Amiens.

1804 – He was appointed Chief Secretary for Ireland. His office was in Duke Street, Westminster.

1805 – He was appointed a Commissioner of the Admiralty.

1806 to 1812 – Following Pitt’s death, he held no public office for six years.

1810 – Land Tax returns for Loders, in Dorset, list Nepean as the owner of several lots. (Dorset History Centre; Dorset, England; Dorset Land Tax Assessments; Call Number: Qde(L)31/1-43; Years: 1781-1832)

1812-1819 – Nepean was Governor of Bombay.

1822 – He was appointed Sheriff of Dorset, but died shortly thereafter.

22 October 1822 – Nepean died at Loders in Dorset.

Patrons

Lord Shelburne

As noted, it was Shelburne who plucked Nepean from obscurity and appointed him as Undersecretary of one of the most important departments of state.

Precisely how he came to know Lord Shelburne is not certain, but Shelburne’s friend and follower Captain John Jervis probably recommended him. Nepean had served as purser aboard Jervis’ ship in 1780, and enjoyed his friendship thereafter. (Nelson, The Home Office, p.29)

In 1782, in the brief period when Secretary of State for the Southern Department, Shelburne was part of the highly unstable Rockingham Administration. He was a leading member of the push for Economical Reform, and it is likely that in choosing Nepean, he was selecting an outsider whom no one could suggest was a personal favourite. The fact that Nepean survived the subsequent change of government tends to support that.

However, the appointment demands explanation. To select a ship’s purser as the Undersecretary of a major department of state must have caused a great deal of comment and concern at the time. And yet at present, we have no real insight into the reason for the appointment, how it was received, or how he was able to so quickly establish his authority (such that he was acceptable to the Pitt Administration).

Sir John Jervis

Nepean had served as purser on Jervis’s ship, the Foudroyant, and Jervis wrote of his ‘superior talent for business, unremitting diligence, and integrity’. (Martyn Downer, Nelson’s Purse, London: Corgi Press, 2005, p.93) Jervis was at this point in his ascendancy, which must have worked to Nepean’s advantage.

Jervis was a friend of Shelburne’s and it was apparently through this means that Nepean was recommended. (John M. Norris, Shelburne and Reform, London: Macmillan & Co., 1963, p.245)

While Jervis was from Staffordshire, he was MP for Launceston from 1783 (organised by the Duke of Northumberland through Shelburne) and then Great Yarmouth from 1784. He seems to have sponsored several men of little means and great ability from the south-west. In addition to Nepean, he also sponsored Richard Bowen, who was from Ilfracombe.

Administration

It is universally acknowledged that Nepean rose through his outstanding administrative ability and a capacity for hard work.

William Knox, the MP, wrote of him as ‘intelligent, attentive and obliging’. In 1791, Grenville wrote that Nepean was ‘killing himself’ by his hard labour. Huskisson said he was ‘no less remarkable for his indefatigable attention to business, than for his upright & honorable conduct’. Indeed, his hard labour is seen as having contributed to his ill-health between 1789 and 1792 when he was often away from the office. In late 1789 and early 1790, when the Second Fleet was being commissioned, he spent a great deal of time at Bath. He recovered in 1790, but suffered a relapse in 1791, and in December, took a voyage to the West Indies to escape the winter. He had returned to England by June 1792. (Nelson, The Home Office, pp.29-30)

Frost argues that Nepean was effectively reporting to Pitt in the preparations for the First Fleet. He may have overstated the case. His one example is a directive, apparently directly from Pitt to Nepean, for an estimate of the cost of the expedition. But this was a direct Treasury responsibility (Nepean to Middleton, 12 December 1786, TNA CO201/2/53)

Patronage

Having risen through the patronage of several key figures, Nepean was old-fashioned on the question of merit, and sponsored those who had served him well.

Family

Nepean undoubtedly used his position to promote his brothers’ careers. Flynn writes that the appointment of Nicholas Nepean as a Captain in the NSW Corps ‘was probably related to the influence of his older brother’. He provides no evidence, although he does refer to Evan’s support for his younger brother in his dispute with Thomas Gilbert (on the Second Fleet). (Flynn, The Second Fleet, p.457)

Alexander Davison

Alexander Davison was introduced to Nepean in late 1782 or early 1783 when he returned from Quebec, having been given a letter of introduction by Sir Frederick Haldimand, who was Governor of that province. The relationship between the two men was formed in this period, and over the next two or three years, Nepean was active in pressing Davison’s interests in Canada, and his persistent intervention in favour of his being awarded valuable leases prompted the suspicion of Brook Watson. (Downer, Nelson’s Purse, pp.98-99)

Following Davison’s return from Canada in early 1786, he and Nepean often socialised together. (Downer, Nelson’s Purse, pp.103-104) In 1804, when Davison was gaoled over the purchase of a seat in parliament, Nepean spent a day with him in prison. (Downer, Nelson’s Purse, p.336) In late 1808 or early 1809, he also gave character evidence in Davison’s corruption trial, declaring him to be ‘a very honest and honourable man. . . incapable of committing a fraud’. (Downer, Nelson’s Purse, p.438)

Downer suggests that it was through his contacts with Lord Sydney that Davison obtained the contracts for stores for NSW. The more obvious contact was Evan Nepean. (Downer, Nelson’s Purse, p.105)

In 1794, Davison was the conduit to Nepean of concerns expressed by James Bowen at the creation of the Transport Board (and a concern that he would miss out on a place on the new board because he was on active service). The letter commences ‘I have just seen Bowen. . .’, which suggests that Nepean, Davison and Bowen all know each other. (TNA HO42/29/231)

Arthur Phillip

It is possible that Phillip met Nepean while the latter was purser of the Victory. In September 1779, Phillip asked the Admiralty for permission ‘to go the cruise as a volunteer in the Victory’. (Cited in Alan Frost, Arthur Phillip, 1738-1814: His Voyaging, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1987, p.97) There is no evidence that he did so, but this was the very time when Nepean was on board the Victory.

In late 1784, Phillip was employed by Nepean on spying operations in the south of France. He was away for almost twelve months, sending back reports on the state of French shipping in their southern ports. And at the end of that period, he seems to have been employed again – he was certainly paid by Nepean in November 1785 for another twelve months’ work. (Frost, Arthur Phillip, pp.131-133)

It was Lord Sydney who recommended Phillip as the Governor of the proposed convict settlement, and it is generally agreed that it would have been Nepean who suggested him to the Home Secretary.

A private letter from Phillip to Nepean, written on 3 September 1787 from Rio de Janeiro, begins ‘My Dear Nepean’ and concludes with the salutation ‘my dear friend’ and sends greetings to ‘your good little woman and child’. He also asked for his greetings to be passed on to Pollock and his family. (TNA CO201/2/190-191a)

The following letter from Phillip to Nepean, written from Sydney on 22 August 1790, after the arrival of the Second Fleet, also shows the familiar relationship between the two men.

"My Dear Nepean,

"The Neptune sails tomorrow & I hope a few days will give us sight of the Gorgon.

"Your brother is well & sends his love to you all, in which I join him. Tell your friends in Downing Street I am much obliged by their remembrance & polite letters. They should have been answered but my head & my side pleads hard to be excused. I wrote barely five lines to Lord Lansdown; when you see him, assure him that I am sensible of his politeness & the friendship with which he honors me.

"Health & pleasure attend you my worthy friend.

A Phillip" (TNA CO201/5/204-204a)

The Marquis of Lansdowne was the same Lord Shelburne who had patronised Nepean, and to whom Phillip had written in 1779 about a position on the Victory, suggesting that the relationship between these two men reached back to that period.

On 14 August 1793, when he was back in England and taking the waters at Bath, Phillip wrote to Nepean concerning the provisions needed for the colony. The letter opens, ‘My Dear Nepean’ and closes with a passage that shows some familiarity with Nepean’s family:

"I hope you have had a good account of Mrs Nepean & the young ones. To ask you to write would be unfriendly, but I should be happy to hear that you are all well, or in a fair way of being so. As to myself, I am drinking the waters & shall continue to do so for fifteen or twenty days.

"I am, dear Nepean, Most faithfully yours. . ." (TNA HO42/26/325-326 at 326)

On 9 March 1794, Phillip wrote to Nepean again from Bath.

"It is with great pleasure, my dear friend, that I congratulate you on the happy addition to your family & Mrs Nepean’s being so well.

"I hope your cold has left you & now promise myself the pleasure of finding you both in health when I return to town. Let me be very kindly remembered to the good lady in the Strand. . .

"I shall thank Barnes for her good news when I see her."

The letter reported a discussion with Lane about the desirability of preventing any discontent on the part of the Americans by having some confidential person buy up all the provisions they had to export. (TNA HO42/29/45)

Philip Gidley King

King was a Lieutenant on the Sirius on the First Fleet, and was later Lieutenant Governor of Norfolk Island and then Governor of NSW.

King was also familiar with Nepean, and in several letters asked for his respects to be passed to Mrs Nepean. (See, for example, letter of 21 July 1791 from the Cape, TNA CO201/6/333aa)

Sir Jeremiah Fitzpatrick

Fitzpatrick was a surgeon and the former inspector of prisons in Ireland. Following the outbreak of war, he was by Henry Dundas as inspector of troop ships and then inspector of convict ships. See the note on Fitzpatrick, but particularly:

17 March 1794 – Fitzpatrick to Nepean. To render himself more capable of giving advice to the Transport Service, he had attended the embarkation of the cavalry on the previous Saturday. He was firmly of the view that if they were to remain on board for any considerable time, it would prove unfortunate for the poor animals. He enclosed a few general remarks. ‘Your manner of receiving me at all times induces me to believe you approve of my general ideas, therefore you are so frequently supplied with them.’ (TNA HO42/29/102-102a)

The documentary record makes it clear that it was Nepean who convinced Dundas to appoint Fitzpatrick, and when he moved to the Admiralty in March 1795, Fitzpatrick was concerned that he had lost the protection he had required to do his job.

James Bowen

In 1789, James Bowen was appointed by Sir Charles Middleton as inspector of naval transports at Deptford.

In 1794, Davison was the conduit to Nepean of concerns expressed by James Bowen at the creation of the Transport Board (and a concern that he would miss out on a place on the new board because he was on active service). The letter commences ‘I have just seen Bowen. . .’, which suggests that Nepean, Davison and Bowen all know each other. However, Bowen’s letter to Davison open, ‘Dear Sir’, implying a sense of subordination on his part. (TNA HO42/29/231-231a, 251-251a)

In 1792, James Bowen’s younger brother, Richard, wrote a memorandum about his efforts to procure provisions in India for the settlement at NSW (which were brought back on the Atlantic, on which he served as naval agent). He wrote that he had the honour of being ‘personally known’ to Nepean. (Memorandum, TNA CO201/7/202a)

Others

14 March 1794 – John Lodge, who was Inspector of Woollens for the East India Company wrote to Nepean. He had heard that his [Lodge’s] good friend, Alexander Davison had been induced by his present engagements to largely give up his woollen concerns and that the house of Messrs Watson & Co were now requesting the annual order for Canada. As he had not done any business with that house, he was concerned that he would lose that custom without the interference of some good friend. ‘To you, my dear sir, I have always looked upon as my patron in everything relative to this concern’ and he hoped he would enjoy his countenance again. (TNA HO42/29/98-98a)

Nepean and William Richards

William Richards was the contractor for the First Fleet, the Lady Juliana and the Boddington and Sugar Cane.

There is no evidence of any particular relationship between Nepean and Richards during the preparations for the First Fleet or the Lady Juliana. However, Nepean was aware of Richards’ solicitude for the convicts of the First Fleet.

It was William Richards who first raised the issue of provisions for the convict children on 5 April 1787 when two arrived on board the Prince of Wales with their mothers. He pointed out that no provision had been made for the victualling of children and that they were barely subsisting on their mothers’ allowance (suggesting that they were not newborns). Richards wrote Evan Nepean direct that he was concerned about their welfare and declared that he would take proper care of them. (Richards to Nepean, 5 April 1787, TNA CO201/2) On 18 April, Nepean reported that Lord Sydney had expressed the view that the convict children were entitled to a small portion of provisions and ordered that it should be supplied. (Nepean to Middleton, 18 April 1787, TNA CO201/2)

They also had dealings over the supply of fresh provisions for the convicts in foreign ports, On April 25, Nepean was corresponding with Richards directly on this question, in spite of the fact that he had no direct responsibility for commissioning the ships:

As the transport ships must touch at some places on their way to Botany Bay from whence fresh beef may be procured have you made any sort of agreement with the Navy Board for their supply whilst they remain at such places? If not I could wish that you would make some proposal for the supply of the marines and convicts on board the transport ships with fresh meat, and I will talk with Sir Charles Middleton upon it. By your supplying them with fresh meat you must consider that your salt provisions will be saved & calculated accordingly. The price of provisions at the Cape for example cannot be known now, or what proportion it can bear to the price or value of the salt meat but notwithstanding which I should think that some mode might be fallen upon for getting fresh meat for these people without much expense to the Crown and without injuring your contract. The sooner I hear from you the better upon that subject. (Nepean to Richards, 25 April 1787, TNA HO13/5/165-6)

The terms of the contractual arrangement with Richards were still being renegotiated as late as the 4th of May. On that date, Nepean wrote to Middleton. It was a matter of doubt whether Mr Richards’ agent, upon his arrival at any of the ports which Captain Phillip may touch at upon his passage, will be able to provide fresh provisions for the marines and convicts at a price not exceeding what is paid by him in England for the salt ration. ‘You know as well as I do how necessary it is that fresh meat should be supplied, and if the price should exceed, would there be any objection, upon a fair statement of the increase, to allow Mr Richards the amount of it, that he may not be a sufferer from this necessary measure. If the fresh meat should not amount to the price of the salt ration, the saving by the same rule will be accounted for by the contractor.’

The transports could not take on board all the provisions necessary for victualling the marines and convicts for 8 months, which made it necessary that something of this sort should be done, ‘and that Mr Richards’ agent should, if there happened to be the appearance of a tedious passage, be left to purchase any other species of provisions, besides fresh meat, and to account with the Navy Board in the same manner. I mean for their supply only whilst they remain in port, for example, at Rio de Janeiro or at the Cape of Good Hope.’ (Middleton In Letters from Evan Nepean, 1786-1787, National Maritime Museum (NMM) MID/1/131)

Richards and Nepean also corresponded over the contracts and bonds. For example, on the 25th of April, Nepean wrote to Richards seeking to clarify which convicts in an attached list had contracts and bonds. Richards replied the following day (from Portsmouth), providing details by name and ship, although some of the names on the list were entirely unknown to him. As late as the 8th of May, Richards was still trying to reconcile different lists. (Nepean to Richards, 25 April 1787, TNA HO13/5/165-6; Richards to Nepean, 26 April 1787, TNA CO201/2/315-7; Richards to unknown, 8 May 1787, TNA CO201/2/334) Nepean was later consulted in relation to the payment of some of Richards’ accounts.

Richards submitted his various proposals for managing the hulks to the Treasury, but some of these were forwarded to Nepean in 1788, so he knew of Richards’ interest. (The letter is dated 14 October, but the cover note says it was read on the 13th. See Richards to Treasury, 14 October 1788, and Steele to Nepean, 27 October 1788, TNA HO35/9)

It was the Navy Board who let the contract for the Lady Juliana, but once again, Richards corresponded directly with Nepean over fresh provisions in foreign ports. On 30 March 1789, William Richards wrote to Evan Nepean pointing out that the ship must stop at least once, ‘and no agreement for the furnishing the convicts with fresh provisions during their stay at such place or of the expense of watering etc has yet been made or even thought of with the Treasury or Navy Board.’ Richards’ letter also contained proposals to ship provisions and clothing for the NSW settlement. (Richards to Nepean, 30 March 1789, Public Record Office, TNA CO201/4/73-74)

Nepean was also involved in providing clearance for Richards to negotiate directly with local justice officials for the transportation of their convicts, and for reassuring them that Richards had their authority. Once again, Richards was involved in keeping records of the convicts on board. On the 21st of May, he wrote to Evan Nepean, enclosing a list of the female convicts on board. Agreeable to Nepean’s request, he had added the names of five children and those of two women who had been set at liberty following Lord Sydney’s order. (TNA CO201/4/103-109)

By April of 1790, there was some familiarity between Nepean and Richards. In that month, Nepean advised Richards that they were contemplating another fleet of ships. This was raised by Richards when he wrote to Nepean on the 29th of April, providing details of the payments he had been given for the First Fleet and the Lady Juliana.

"Wm Richards Junr’s respects. Waits on Mr Nepean & hopes the accounts of money issued to him on account of the Botany Bay business is satisfactory. Mr Nepean was so kind as to inform WR that another embarquation of convicts was in contemplation. WR suggests that as he has had (in consequence of the agreements he made with different counties for transports per the Lady Juliana) some letters offering to pay for the conveyance of male convicts in the same mode, & WR makes no doubt but if he was authorized to make such agreements again he might save government some expense in their transportation.

"If it should meet Mr Nepean’s wish, WR will be much obliged for an answer." (Richards to Nepean, April 1790, CO201/5/255-255a)

This was the contract for the Third Fleet, and it would appear that, in Nepean’s mind at least, it was not clear that it was automatically be awarded to Camden, Calvert & King.

In 1793, when he thought he had reached an accommodation with his creditors, Richards wrote to Nepean, seeking employment in government. His father’s actions shortly thereafter in seeking his son’s bankruptcy no doubt brought any such hopes (if there were any) to an end.

Attitude to the Convicts

Whatever his public position, in private, Nepean showed little compassion for the convicts. The following letter, written privately to Middleton on 12 February 1787, suggests that ‘necessaries’ were regarded as comfort food and not as medicines, and Nepean could see no reason why the convicts should enjoy the same supplies as the tars:

"I have now understood from Mr White and Captain Phillip that no necessaries have been provided for the sick. Under this description are currants, barley, sugar, rice, spices etc applied for before, but as it has not happened we must make the best of it. I am totally ignorant of the quantities requisite and find it impossible to make any estimate at the Navy Office for sea service, but I cannot think that the same quantity should be allowed to this banditti. I should think one half the proportion or at most two-thirds would answer the purpose, particularly so as they are to be disembarked. . ." (Privately owned & transcribed by Alan Frost, #1643)