English Emigration to New Zealand, 1839–1850: Information Diffusion and Marketing a New World

Economic History Review, LIV, 4 (2001), pp. 680–698

English emigration to NewZealand, 1839-1850: informationdiffusion and marketing a new

world1

By PAUL HUDSON

Emigrate! Emigrate! Emigrate!2

T he migration of over 50 million Europeans to North America, SouthAmerica, Africa, and Australasia during the nineteenth and early

twentieth centuries was an unparalleled population movement. Althougharound one quarter of European emigrants eventually returned home,3this population redistribution transformed the ethnic complexion of theglobe and revolutionized the international economy. Investigating howthis movement took place and, more importantly, understanding why thisinternational migration took the shape that it did, have been importantareas of interest for historians.

The economic investigation of European emigration is based upon theassumption that labour allocated itself across international boundaries inresponse to ‘labor market disequilibria’.4 Utilizing national economic dataand net emigration statistics, quantitative investigations have focused onthe relative importance of so-called ‘push’ or ‘pull’ variables as determi-nants of European emigration.5 In essence, push and pull factors relateto the comparative importance of economic factors pushing people fromtheir homes, for instance poverty, or pulling people to certain destinations,for instance higher wages. Overall, quantitative studies of European andBritish emigration have been somewhat inconclusive,6 though more lighthas been shed on the process of European emigration when scholars havelooked at time series rather than cross-section data. For instance, aninvestigation of Swedish emigration to the United States, looking at wagelevels, harvests, birth rates, and levels of previous emigration (as a proxyfor chain migration), concluded that push factors were as important as

1 I am most grateful to Stephen Constantine, Colin Pooley, Charlotte Erickson, Jock Phillips, andDavid Green, and also to the ESRC which financed the research for this article.

2 PRO, Colonial Office (hereafter CO), 208/291. Press advertisement for passages to New Zealand,Chard Union Gazette, 4 Jan. 1841.

3 Baines, Emigration from Europe, p. 35.4 Tomaske, ‘Intercountry differences’, p. 843.5 Quigley, ‘Swedish emigration’; Wilkinson, ‘Long swings’; Hatton and Williamson, ‘Mass

migrations’.6 For a review of these studies see Gould, ‘Inter-continental emigration’; Baines, Migration in a

mature economy; Erickson, Leaving England; Baines, ‘European emigration’.

Economic History Society 2001. Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden,MA 02148, USA.

681english emigration to new zealand, 1839-1850

pull factors.7 Other studies have indicated that emigrants worked duringperiods of prosperity in order to move abroad to buy land and were not,therefore, necessarily pushed out by adverse economic conditions.8 Onthe one hand Hatton and Williamson conclude that the dual action ofdemographic change and wage differentials formed the principal cause ofEuropean and British emigration,9 while on the other hand Pope con-cluded that ‘most’ British emigrants went to Australia because ofenhanced employment prospects, not because of better wages.10

In line with many quantitative studies of European emigration duringthe nineteenth century, Baines has been unable to find a set of economicvariables which consistently explained emigration from England andWales. However, his pioneering work suggests that a residual explanationfor inter-county differentials might lie in the availability of informationfor prospective emigrants.11 Indeed, investigating the relative importanceof push and pull factors presupposes that potential emigrants were inpossession of ‘sufficient information’ about various destinations to makean informed judgment.12

A limited amount of research has shown how information and itsdiffusion may have been an ‘important link in the chain’ of Europeanemigration.13 Danish emigration agents, who provided information andtickets, diverted emigrants from one area of the world to another.14

Studies have also pointed to the fact that information was crucial for theBritish emigrant. Letters from people already abroad were an importantsource of knowledge for those considering emigration, and often becamepublic property (though it is difficult in such instances to distinguishwhether information acted as a catalyst for emigration or whether ‘chainmigration’ was taking place). Such letters contained details of employmentprospects or wages and prices, and could be supplemented by newspaperreports or the testimonies of returned emigrants.15 Indeed, English emi-grants going to Australia were ‘well informed, self selected, and literate’,16

and the increase in emigration to New South Wales in 1841, mostly atthe expense of emigration to North America, suggests ‘that better infor-mation about assistance and about emigration fields . . ., lies behind thelimited English take-up of free passages to Australia’.17 Whatever thelimitations inherent in determinist studies, they have been able to indicatethat information, and its availability, made an important contribution to

7 Quigley, ‘Swedish emigration’, p. 124.8 Wintle, ‘Push factors’, p. 534.9 Hatton and Williamson, ‘Mass migrations’, pp. 26-8.10 Pope, ‘Australian migration’, pp. 144-5.11 Baines, Emigration in a mature economy, pp. 221, 279-80.12 Idem, Emigration from Europe, p. 7.13 Hvidt, Flight to America, p. 176.14 Idem, ‘Danish emigration’, pp. 176-7; Runblom and Norman, From Sweden, pp. 189-97.15 Erickson, Invisible immigrants, pp. 4-9, 35. For a good example of non-British emigrant routes

see Templeton, ‘Swiss connection’, pp. 393-414.16 Haines ‘Indigent misfits’, p. 246.17 Erickson, Leaving England, p. 191.

Economic History Society 2001

682 paul hudson

the direction and timing of nineteenth-century emigration.18 In otherwords, knowing how to get to a certain destination and being aware ofthe circumstances that might be faced on arrival had an important roleto play in channelling emigrants to certain parts of the world.

Unfortunately, for emigration scholars at least, to indicate that infor-mation might be important for prospective emigrants amounts to littlemore than an obvious statement of fact. It is inconceivable that emigrants,except in the most acute cases of economic distress, made their decisionwithout some access to information, however dubious the source mayhave been. The crucial question for scholars, therefore, is not whetherinformation was available and made a difference to emigrants, but whatwas the relative importance of information as a catalyst for emigration,compared with economic or social factors. Unfortunately it has proveddifficult to investigate empirically the assumption that information andits diffusion affected the origins and characteristics of English emigrants.Most notably, it is difficult to observe the impact of information onmigration flows independently of other variables. A major obstacle is alack of data on information diffusion which can be related to a specificemigration route.19

Analysing English emigration to New Zealand between 1839 and 1850provides an opportunity to illuminate the role of information diffusion inthe emigration process,20 and may help to identify the relative importanceof information diffusion compared with economic and social conditions.There are three main reasons for this. First, prior to 1839, New Zealandwas not a conventional destination for English migrants.21 It was notuntil the New Zealand Company,22 established in 1839, put together acomprehensive colonization project that ‘official’ British settlements wereestablished in New Zealand. No migratory tradition existed betweenEngland and New Zealand and, thus, the start of colonization can beseen as the start of information diffusion. Second, whatever criticismsthe Company faced during this period of New Zealand’s colonization(and there were many), it was not criticized for an inability to promoteitself or the colonization project. Indeed, the directors of the Companywere gifted self-publicists (or ‘puffers’)23 who sold New Zealand tonumerous emigrants, many of whom were duped by the extravagantclaims of the directors. Furthermore, during this period and especiallyfrom 1839 to around 1841, the Company was the only ‘official’ channelthrough which information could reach prospective emigrants. Third, andmost importantly, Company data refer to applications from all people

18 Tomaske, ‘European emigration’, p. 853; Runblom and Norman, From Sweden, pp. 138-40;Baines, ‘European emigration’, pp. 526-8.

19 See, however, Holt, ‘Family, kinship community and friendship ties’, pp. 39-70.20 For Scottish emigration to New Zealand during this period see McClean, ‘Scottish emigration’.21 New Zealand was, however, the home of approximately 2,000 European missionaries, whalers,

sealers, and entrepreneurs by 1839. A British settlement, planned in 1825, was abandoned asimpractical in 1826: see Burns, Fatal success, pp. 18-22.

22 Hereafter cited as the Company. For an introduction to the British colonization of New Zealandsee Marais, Colonisation; Hudson, ‘English emigration’; Olssen, ‘Mr Wakefield’.

23 Burns, Fatal success, p. 86.



who wanted to go to New Zealand, not just those eventually selectedaccording to the Company’s eligibility criteria.24 This is crucial as thedata illustrate how effective the Company was in diffusing informationby measuring all expressions of interest from prospective emigrants, notjust those chosen as emigrants by the Company. For example, if theCompany decided that it wanted to concentrate on sending single womento the colony then it might choose single women from applications itreceived. Thus, if only details about emigrants who went to New Zealandwere available, the selection process would skew the analysis and not bea true reflection of information diffusion.

I

The Company organized emigration on the basis that systematic coloniz-ation was the most effective way to colonize the British empire. In theCompany’s view, migration was meant to be a positive process for theworthy emigrant. This has important implications for the analysis, aspotential emigrants would not apply to the Company if they thought theywould be unacceptable. Ostensibly, agricultural labourers and childlesscouples were sought as emigrants. However, the Company’s selectioncriteria never actually restricted the ‘type’ of emigrant who applied orwas eventually chosen. An analysis of characteristics of emigrants chosento go to New Zealand by the Company in this period illustrates thatthey did not differ significantly from the characteristics of all applicants.25

In other words, the Company had to work with the applications it receivedfrom prospective emigrants, and thus chose emigrants in accordance withthe characteristics of those who applied.26

Indeed, the Company tried to judge each application on its merits, butin the end was more concerned with filling its ships. The cost of sendinghalf-empty ships to New Zealand was too much for the directors tocontemplate, and essentially the Company’s recruitment and selectioncriteria were geared to ensuring that money spent on emigration was wellspent.27 Crucially for this analysis, it is clear that the Company marketedNew Zealand and diffused information so that a certain number ofemigrants could be sent to the colony, rather than exclusively marketingthe destination to a specific audience.28

To ensure that potential emigrants knew about the benefits of emi-gration to New Zealand, the Company established an information mech-

24 For further details on the distinction between ‘applicants’ and ‘emigrants’ see Hudson, ‘Englishemigration’, pp. 58-65.

25 From 1839 to 1850, 41% of applicants were eventually chosen as emigrants: Hudson, ‘Englishemigration’, p. 125.

26 However, the characteristics of those applying to the Company still differed from those emigrat-ing to the US in 1841. More people with ‘industrial’ skills chose the US while more with ‘traditional’skills chose New Zealand. Clearly this may be evidence that emigrants chose a destination thatsuited them, or that they were prepared to misrepresent themselves to the Company: see Hudson,‘English emigration’, pp. 197-201.

27 Ibid., pp. 104-5.28 Ibid., pp. 263-7.


684 paul hudson

anism which was designed to bring together demand for labour in NewZealand with a presumed supply of potential emigrants in England. Thismechanism, the emigration department, was established in 1839 by H.F. Alston, the Company’s superintendent of emigration. The emigrationdepartment was responsible for the day-to-day administration of theCompany’s emigration, and most closely involved with emigrant recruit-ment and information diffusion.29 New Zealand was an unknown desti-nation for potential emigrants and the principal method used to informpeople about the colonization project was a system of local recruitingagents.30 These agents were put in place to provide ‘information [inparticular districts] as to the objects of the Company and the prospectsof the colony’.31

Very briefly, from 1839 to 1850 the total number of agents employedby the Company was 125. The appendix lists those who operated inEngland during those years. This includes agents who were solely con-cerned with the sale of land, those who sold land and recruited emigrants,and those who simply recruited emigrants.32 The number of agentsemployed to recruit emigrants in England varied: there were 49 activeagents in 1839,33 and 54 in 1844.34 Not all were recruiting at the sametime. Agents themselves were recruited by the Company through thenational and local press.35 Advertisements were placed in The Times,Chronicle, Sun, Globe, Standard, Spectator, Examiner, Weekly Chronicle, andColonial Gazette. Advertisements also appeared in 34 provincial news-papers which included the Kent Herald, Aberdeen Journal, BirminghamGazette, and Cornwall Gazette. The occupations of those who applied towork as agents varied. For example, the agent for Gravesend, WalterRaymond (agent 33), was the Superintendent of the Star Steam PacketCompany.36 The agent for Birmingham, Joseph Phipson (agent 16), wasan insurance salesman. Phipson later extended his agency to deal withdestinations other than New Zealand. The agent for Exeter, WilliamLatimer (agent 25), was editor and proprietor of the Western Times.37

In their efforts to inform potential emigrants about New Zealand,Company agents went into the local community to recruit. In the main,three techniques were used by agents to induce applications. First, thelocal press was used extensively. George Whiting (agent 51), of Maid-stone, advertised every week for four months in the local press, including

29 For further details on systematic colonization and the organization of the Company see ibid.,pp. 96-120.

30 For a description of duties and remuneration see ibid., pp. 114-16.31 CO 208/291: ‘Instruction to agents’. Agents of the New Zealand government were asked to

provide a similar service in the 1870s: see Arnold, Promised land, p. 76.32 CO 208/280. Calculated from nine lists that date from June 1839.33 Ibid., ‘Alphabetical list of agents’, 1839.34 Ibid., ‘Alphabetical list of emigration agents’, 1844.35 Agents employed by the Company in England are identified in the appendix, where the

occupations of agents, and links with other colonization authorities such as the South AustralianCommissioners, are provided. For agents employed elsewhere in Great Britain see Hudson, ‘Englishemigration’, pp. 347-9.

36 CO 208/1/678, Raymond to Ward, 24 June 1839.37 CO 208/1/610, Latimer to Ward, 18 June 1839.



his own paper the Maidstone Gazette, attempting to make the availabilityof free passages ‘known’.38 Second, agents would post handbills in thearea. The agent for Buckland posted handbills in the surrounding townsand villages,39 although this was considered to be an inefficient methodof informing prospective emigrants about emigration to New Zealand.40

Third, agents toured the local area giving lectures and meeting poten-tial emigrants.

By looking at the Company’s advertising and recruitment strategies inthe 1840s, this article will ascertain how important information diffusionwas in defining the origins of New Zealand’s first ‘organized’ Englishemigration. It will establish how effective the Company was in diffusinginformation at a county and local level through agents, briefly looking atother methods of information diffusion through land purchasers andnewspaper advertisements. In order to assess whether the Companycreated its own unique emigration stream or merely diverted emigrantstowards New Zealand, it will also look at the information required byprospective emigrants.

II

In its emigration literature the Company regularly referred to New Zea-land as an excellent destination for English emigrants, English capital,and for the spread of English institutions and religion. Moreover, theCompany was instituted in order to re-establish ‘the old English spirit ofcolonisation’ of the eighteenth century.41 Overall therefore, the Company’scolonization discourse was heavily focused on recruiting the English, andthe national distribution of applications reflects this. Between June 1839,when the Company first accepted applications from prospective emigrants,and July 1850, when it surrendered its charter to the British government,14,963 prospective English emigrants (82 per cent of total Britishapplicants) expressed an interest in going to New Zealand. The Com-pany’s recruitment strategies were also heavily focused on the English,as 72 per cent of local agents employed by the Company were basedin England.

Map 1 illustrates the rate of applications, per 10,000 of the countypopulation in 1841, received by the Company from English countiesbetween 1839 and 1850. Superimposed on this is the distribution ofagents employed by the Company from 1839 to 1850.42 For example,people resident in Devon sent between 5.1 and 10 applications to theCompany per 10,000 of the county population during this period. Thepresence of agents and their efforts to diffuse information did not neces-sarily mean people would become interested in emigrating to New Zea-

38 CO 208/3, Whiting to Alston, 27 Oct. 1839.39 CO 208/3/334, Ludlam to Ward, 14 Oct. 1839.40 CO 208/3/499, Raymond to Alston, 31 Oct. 1839.41 Wakefield and Ward, New Zealand, p. 1.42 English counties are based on the 1851 census. For problems relating to the geographical

analysis of emigration see Baines, ‘European emigration’, p. 530.


686 paul hudson

Map 1. Rate of application per 10,000 of county population, with distributionof agents employed by the New Zealand Company, 1839-1850Source: see text

land, especially at the county level. Indeed, the distribution of agentsdoes not wholly explain why interest in emigrating to New Zealand variedbetween counties. For example, Hampshire was served by eight Companyagents who recruited emigrants from a county population of 355,004.Hampshire had a rate of applications of nearly 20 per 10,000. However,Nottinghamshire had no agents working in the county yet managed arate of application close to 15 per 10,000.

Counties, of course, are large administrative constructs which areunlikely to capture the precise effects of information diffusion. At thecensus registration district level, applications to the Company varied moreclosely with agent activities.43 Maps 2 and 3 represent rates of applicationsfrom districts in southern England in conjunction with towns and villageswhere local agents were appointed. They illustrate an important relation-

43 The English registration districts reproduced on maps 3 and 4 are based on the classificationand data used in the 1851 census. For an analysis of applications, and emigration, from all Englishdistricts see Hudson, ‘English emigration’, pp. 275-83.



Map 2. Rate of application per 10,000 population, by census registrationdistrict, south-eastern England, 1839-1850Source: see text

Map 3. Rate of application per 10,000 population, by census registrationdistrict, south-western England, 1839-1850Source: see text


688 paul hudson

Map 4. Kent registration districts, Maidstone and HollingbourneNote: The circled figure is the number of applicants from each place.Source: CO 208, 272, 273

ship between applications at the district level and information diffusionby local emigration agents. For instance, map 2 indicates that in Kent,served by eight agents, districts with higher rates of applicants were, ingeneral, in areas served by agents of the Company. Districts withinSussex, Hampshire, and Surrey illustrate this pattern particularly clearly.Map 3 indicates that the work of agents was important in the recruitmentof emigrants from Somerset, and from parts of Wiltshire, Devon, andCornwall.

A more detailed analysis of applications at the sub-district level indicateshow extensive the influence of agents could be and points to the existenceof quite substantial areas in which agents diffused information andrecruited potential emigrants.44 Map 4 focuses upon two registrationdistricts in Kent where one agent, George Whiting (agent 51) recruitedemigrants: Maidstone and Hollingbourne. People from these two districtsshowed a lot of interest in the New Zealand colonization project. Boxley,Thurnam, Hollingbourne, and Lenham were important areas of recruit-ment outside the town in which Whiting was based, and the spread oftowns and villages from which applicants originated is quite wide; Yalding,Hunton, Otham, Chart Sutton, Sutton Valence, Detling, and Staplehurstwere all important areas of recruitment for Whiting and the Company.

Map 5 takes the analysis of information diffusion one step further bylooking at the recruitment activities of two agents in Somerset: GeorgeMurley based in Langport (agent 45) and G. Toms in Chard (agent 19)who were active in three districts, Langport, Chard, and Yeovil. Thenumber and geographical spread of towns and villages that provided

44 Bailyn, Voyagers, p. 113. Bailyn uses the term ‘catchment area’ with respect to the influencethat ports had in attracting local emigrants.



Map 5. Recruitment by agents in Chard, Langport, and Yeovil, SomersetNote: The circled figure is the number of applicants from each place.Source: CO 208, 272, 273

applicants to the Company are remarkable. Seemingly, the presence oftwo agents working in three English districts illustrates that the influenceof agents, and their impact upon the spread of information, could beextensive. Indeed, Toms used his position as editor of the Chard Gazetteto advance the cause of the colonization project and to induce appli-cations. He claimed in a letter to the Company:

As my paper uniformly advocated the interests of the Colony and has beenthe means of exciting public attention to it in this neighbourhood I cannotthink you will deem me unreasonable in asking for any advertisements whichyou may wish to circulate in the county. I am agent here for the Companyand doing all I can for it.45

The importance of local agents to the process of information diffusionat the local level can be illustrated by the timing of agent appointments.Murley of Langport was appointed agent in July 1841, two years afterCompany recruitment had begun.46 Despite this relatively late start,Langport had one of the highest rates of applications from Englishdistricts (103.8 per 10,000), and the highest from Somerset. Indeed, only18 applicants out of a final total of 188 who originated from the Langportdistrict submitted their applications prior to July 1841.

The analysis of applications at the local level assumes that agents couldinfluence potential emigrants in towns and villages as far apart as, say,

45 CO 208/14/491, Toms to Ward, 22 Feb. 1841.46 CO 208/14/438, Murley to Dillon Bell, 21 July 1841.


690 paul hudson

Map 6. George Whiting’s recruitment tour of Kent, October 1839Note: The circled figure is the number of applicants from each place.Source: CO 208, 272, 273

Maidstone and Staplehurst. There is substantial evidence to indicate that,through providing information in the local community, agents were indeedable to influence potential emigrants. Tours undertaken by local agentsshow that the catchment areas in which agents had influence could bequite extensive. Map 6 represents a recruiting tour undertaken by GeorgeWhiting in October 1839. The number of applicants Whiting received inOctober is indicated. His tour took him to nine towns in Kent, and wasadvertised through posting hand-bills which stated that he would be incertain towns at specified times: 22 October 1839, 9 am, Harrietsham;11 am, Headcorn; 1 pm, Staplehurst; 4 pm, Goudhurst. And on 23October: 9 am, Horsmonden; 11 am, Brenchley; 1 pm, Yalding; 3 pm,Wateringbury; 5 pm, Town Malling.47 Whiting was able to recoup theexpenses he incurred on this tour. He claimed £1 14s. for printing 2,000handbills, £11 4s. for advertising in local papers, and £2 4s. for payingsix men who posted ‘bills’ over his 50-mile ‘circuit’.48 Whiting’s tourseems to have been a relative success with 148 applications received fromthe areas he visited. It is clear that Boxley, Farleigh and Staplehurst wereimportant on this tour. Indeed, all applications from Farleigh receivedduring 1839-50 originated from it.

Of course, different application rates from separate, but adjoining,districts might indicate that economic or demographic forces were atwork which enhanced, or indeed masked, the efforts of agents. It couldbe argued that poor economic conditions or a rapidly increasing popu-lation were more important in fostering application to the Company thanknowing about the ‘advantages’ of emigrating. However, a detailed analy-sis of adjoining districts suggests that economic and demographic factors

47 CO 208/291/28, Emigration poster, 12 Oct. 1839.48 CO 208/230/ p. 201.



were not more important than the diffusion of information. The neigh-bouring districts of Alton and Alresford in Hampshire saw very differentrates of applications: Alton had the highest in England and Alresfordsupplied just one application. While general structural problems affectingagriculture and the rural economy throughout Hampshire may explainwhy people were likely to leave Alton and Alresford, there are no clearpush factors which account for the discrepancy. The only difference wasthe presence of Abraham Crowley as Company agent in Alton. In otherwords, the location in which the agent decided to concentrate his timeand effort in recruiting seems to be the crucial factor in differential ratesof applications at the local level.49

III

The agent system was an effective method of informing potential emi-grants about the costs and benefits of emigrating to New Zealand, butit was not the only one. Overall, there were three, less direct, channelsthrough which potential emigrants obtained information on New Zealand.These less direct methods may account for the poor correlation betweenagents and recruitment at the county level, but were not powerful enoughto mask that correlation at the local level. First, people who purchasedland in New Zealand were an important source of information. Indeed,purchasers of land prepared to emigrate to New Zealand seem to havebeen particularly influential. Edward Hopper, land purchaser and settler,nominated 25 people in six families as emigrants and ‘engaged several’of them to work for him in New Zealand.50 Landowners nominated farmworkers to come with them and some would nominate up to 20 peoplewho were neighbours.51 For example, Richard Eaton of Halesowen, apurchaser of land in Wellington, took his family of seven as well as aservant, Sarah Draper, and two agricultural families.52

When it became known that a land purchaser was preparing to emigrateto New Zealand, he would be ‘daily solicited by a number of labourersand mechanics’ for help in obtaining free passage.53 Indeed, talking toland purchasers who had positive comments to make about New Zealandinduced applications from prospective emigrants:

Having had some conversation a short time ago with a young gent of thename of Slater lately residing here, and who has purchased a section of landin New Zealand, on the subject of emigrating to that colony and from therepresentations he made regarding the future prospects of emigrants beinghighly favourable I make an application to the Directors for myself and ayoung man by the name of James Elliot with two young females.54

49 Hudson, ‘English emigration’, pp. 203-12.50 CO 208/2/564-5, Hopper to Ward, 23 Aug. 1839.51 CO 208/3/22-3, Harrison to Ward, 14 Sept. 1839.52 CO 208/3/850-1, Eaton to Ward, Jan. 1840.53 CO 208/3/195, Bannister to Alston, 23 Sept. 1839.54 CO 208/19/90, Sutton to Company, 13 Sept. 1841.


692 paul hudson

Second, newspapers were an effective means by which prospectiveemigrants became aware of New Zealand as a viable emigrant destination.For instance, prospective emigrants wrote directly to the Company whennews from New Zealand was reported in the press.55 Furthermore,advertising by the Company, in national and local newspapers, encouragedpeople to approach the Company. In general, newspaper advertisementsinduced people to seek further information about prospects in NewZealand, and prompted potential emigrants to consider the relative meritsof available destinations.56

A striking example of how the Company used advertising to stimulateapplications, without agents becoming involved, can be found in London.At the beginning of July 1839, J. Truscott of Blackfriars Road, London,was asked to print 4,000 ‘placards of emigration to New Zealand’ toadvertise the availability of free passages. By 8 July, he had posted 2,800in the ‘Town and environs’ of London.57 This burst of publicity coincidedwith the beginning of the Company’s recruitment of emigrants, and wasparticularly effective: 871 (21 per cent) of London applicants approachedthe Company before August 1839.

Third, studies have observed that the activities of ‘interested parties’,generally clergymen or parish officials, were important in diffusing infor-mation about the benefits of emigration to Australia.58 The New ZealandCompany also used this method of recruitment and information dif-fusion.59 For instance, William Friend, the registrar of births and deathsfor Sleaford in Lincolnshire, wrote to the Company on behalf of fiveyoung men ‘desirous to emigrate to New Zealand’; Reverend Townsend,from Whimple near Honiton in Devon, wrote to the Company on behalfof young agricultural emigrants in his area; John B. Nelson, magistrate forBirmingham, wrote to the Company on behalf of a prospective emigrant:

I am requested by John Lewis, Blacksmith of Birmingham, to solicit yourkind aid in enabling them to emigrate to New Zealand under the auspices ofyour Company. They are a worthy family, and earnestly intent upon emi-gration, as every avenue of success in their native land seems completelyclosed, and their wants are daily become more and more urgent.60

IV

The diffusion of information to prospective emigrants was a complexprocess. While local agents provided ‘their’ information, prospective emi-grants were able to gather information from different sources. Indeed,receiving basic information from the Company’s agents was only the

55 CO 208/27/192, Unknown to Ward, 30 March 1842.56 CO 208/3/423, Richardson to directors, 5 Oct. 1839; CO 208/3/463, Philips to Company, 20

Oct. 1839; CO 208/19/347, Grimes to Company, 20 Sept. 1841.57 CO 208/203/ p. 5; CO 208/291. Poster advertising free passage to New Zealand.58 Haines, ‘Indigent misfits’, p. 225; Hudson and Mills, ‘English emigration’, pp. 68-70.59 CO 208/172/ pp. 31-2. Alston to Rev. J. A. Ross, 22 Sept. 1840.60 CO 208/27/230, Butcher to secretary, 4 April 1842; CO 208/27/238, Friend to Ward, 2 April

1842; CO 208/27/224-5, Nelson to Dillon Bell, 2 April 1842.



start.61 Applicants requested information on a wide variety of issues. Forexample, what was the soil like for growing vegetables; what was the soillike for brick making; was there much building going on around thesettlements?62 Other applicants were concerned about the climate in NewZealand,63 and some asked about the price of food in the colony.64

Crucially though, prospective emigrants requested information becausethey wanted to compare the advantages that would be gained fromemigrating to New Zealand with those that might be gained from emigrat-ing to another country, for instance Australia. Indeed, requests for infor-mation were made by people who had been considering emigration forsome time but were unclear where they wanted to go. Some emigrants,for example, needed information ‘to form a more clear [sic] perceptionof the advantages New Zealand may possess over South Australia or NewSouth Wales’.65

For scholars, the important point here is whether the Company wascompeting with other destinations for a relatively fixed pool of prospectiveemigrants, or whether its information diffusion process created a newstream of emigration. Although this is particularly difficult to assess, theevidence that survives for this emigration suggests that the Company wasindeed in competition with other destinations. Recruiting agents were notan unusual feature of emigration during the mid-nineteenth century, andthere were agents throughout England who represented the differentdestinations available.66 The Company’s agents were in direct competitionin their search for emigrants with agents for other emigrant destinations.In Falmouth the Company agent felt that ‘the public . . . here is directedto South Australia and many have embarked and are still on the pointof going. Few are acquainted with New Zealand.’ He suggested a localpress campaign, with ‘large placards’ in ‘different market towns’, to enticeapplicants to his agency.

Many applicants were clear that they wanted to emigrate to somelocation in Australasia, and so asked for relevant information from theCompany.67 Applicants stated that they ‘understood that Port Philip inAustralia is preferable to your colony for emigrants, but this I havequestioned and do so from accounts I have read, but I still requiremore information’.68 The following letter to the Company illustrates thatprospective emigrants were concerned about their future in England andwere prepared to consider the relative merits of Canada and New Zealandbefore making their decision. However, the duration of the voyage toNew Zealand, and consequent problems with returning to England,

61 CO 208/19/27, Russell to directors, 14 Sept. 1841.62 CO 208/14/382, Pinniger to Dillon Bell, 29 July 1841.63 CO 208/27/487, Osbourne to secretary, 4 April 1842.64 CO 208/5/315, Poppleston to Ward, 22 Feb. 1840.65 CO 208/5/873, Lindsay to Company, 26 May 1840.66 CO 208/1/377, Whiting to Company secretary, 30 Oct. 1839. Other studies of British recruit-

ment methods include Hedges, ‘Northern Pacific Railroad’; Broeze, ‘Private enterprise’; Harper, Emi-gration.

67 CO 208/5/188, Newman to Ward, 5 Feb. 1840.68 CO 208/14/356, Pemis to Company, 14 July 1841.


694 paul hudson

sending for friends and kin, or the well-known dangers involved in long-distance ocean transport, seem to have been a prominent concern:

Gents, I and a few friends hopeful of our circumstances and fearful of losingour little all in this country, are determined to emigrate and our choice offuture home is between Upper Canada and New Zealand my object in writingto you is to ask you to be so obliging as to put before me such informationrespecting New Zealand as will enable us to see the merits of that countrythe advantages it offers emigrants of sober industrious habit. We have fre-quently read paragraphs and articles in the Newspapers relating there but notbeing in circumstances that would justify in taking such a step we didnot pay so much attention. P.S. What is the average length of time onthe passage.69

Prospective emigrants informed the Company that they had investigatedthe advantages and disadvantages of various colonies and that, on balance,New Zealand was seen as the country which would offer most hope fortheir futures:

Having a firm determination to emigrate from this country and being desirousof selecting the colony most favourable for improving my condition. Afterconsidering the encouragement of emigration to the various colonies of Aus-tralia and elsewhere I feel that more encouragement is held out for emigratingto New Zealand than elsewhere.70

The activities of William Roberts of Sherborne in Dorset are illustrativeof the competition, and also interaction, between rival destinations. Rob-erts was an agent of the South Australia Commissioners and had sentmore than 300 emigrants to South Australia since the beginning of 1839.However, due to circumstances which Roberts does not make clear, hewas in contact with 50 families who were let down, and not providedwith free passage by the South Australian Commissioners. He wrote tothe Superintendent of the New Zealand Company requesting permissionto send these people to New Zealand.71

V

As noted earlier, Baines suggests that the availability of information couldhave been an important factor behind emigration from England andWales in the second half of the nineteenth century.72 Other studies haveindicated that people who had access to information which helped themto decide where to go, and indeed how to get there, were more likely toemigrate,73 and this study reinforces the hypothesis that information,

69 CO 208/27/828, Audley to Company, 13 April 1842.70 CO 208/19/620, Swift to Dillon Bell, 23 Sept. 1841.71 CO 208/8/740, Roberts to Alston, 28 Sept. 1840.72 Baines, Migration in a mature economy, pp. 207-12.73 Hudson and Mills, ‘English emigration’, pp. 66-71.



provided here via a network of local agents, was a crucial component ofthe emigration process. However, the Company needed to induce poten-tial emigrants to consider New Zealand as a viable emigrant destinationin competition with other destinations. By using an extensive system oflocal recruiting agents, the Company attempted to divert emigrants’attention towards New Zealand rather than encourage emigration per se.Indeed, the directors of the Company recognized this, and Wakefieldsuggested that assisted emigration to New Zealand would tap into the‘streams of emigrants’ already proceeding to the United States.74

Erickson has noted that the increase in emigration to New South Walesin 1841 suggested that a ‘reservoir’ of emigrants existed who were ableto respond to the provision of free passages.75 The actions of the Com-pany and their agents indicate that they also thought so. The Companyhad to market and portray New Zealand as a destination with moreadvantages than existing and established colonies and, therefore, recruit-ment agents had to exploit the emigration potential which existed inEngland. Indeed, George Whiting was enthusiastic about Kent as anemigration region for New Zealand stating that, in his judgement, over4,000 people had left the county in the previous two years, mainly forSydney and South Australia, and he was sure some could be induced togo to New Zealand.76 Agents were quite aware that an emigrationpotential existed and marketing the destination was an important compo-nent of successful recruitment:

a number of their friends are first waiting the result to make up their mindsto go also. I think the sooner the better. They are from an unusual districtwhere there has been, and still is, a great desire to emigrate, which onlyrequires a beginning to make it go on briskly.77

It seems that the Company may have created another emigration routefor people already considering emigration. New Zealand was perceivedas one of a number of viable destinations, and prospective emigrantsused the Company’s information to try to maximize the well-being thatcould be obtained through emigration.78 Many letters from applicantsmention the benefits of South Australia compared to New Zealand, orthe opportunities available in the United States, and illustrate thatinformation on ‘where to go’ was as important as deciding ‘should I go?’.

University of Exeter

74 Wakefield and Ward, New Zealand, p. 21.75 Erickson, Leaving England, p. 173.76 CO 208/1/718-21, Whiting to court of directors, 11 June 1839.77 CO 208/27/521, Russell to Alston, 6 April 1842.78 Borgas, ‘International migration’, pp. 457-60.


696 paul hudson

APPENDIX: Emigration agents employed in England by the NewZealand Company, 1839-1850

1 Capper and Gole, 5 Adam St, Adelphi, London.2 David Ramsay, 5 Adam St, Adelphi, London.3 E. H. Mears, 62 Gracechurch St, London.4 Thomas Hepworth, Ely Place, Holborn.5 Filby and Major, 157 Fenchurch St, London: full-time shipping and emi-

gration agents.6 Abraham Crowley, Alton, Hants.7 D. Gillingham, Andover, Hants.8 Mr Wills, Axminster.9 George Bush, Bath.

10 Charles Dene, Barnstaple.11 Richard Johnson, Blackburn: wine and porter merchant for Dublin firm.12 Greenwood Bros., Bradford, Yorkshire.13 William Adye, Bradford, Wiltshire: agent for South Australia Commissioners.14 Alfred Phillips, Bristol: agent for South Australia Commissioners.15 C. Nicholls, Buntingford, Hertfordshire.16 Joseph Phipson, 11 Union Passage, Birmingham: agent for Protestant Dis-

senters Life and Fire Assurance Company.17 R. W. Clarke, Beccles, Suffolk.18 William Stinson, Bedford19 G. B. Toms, Chard, Somerset: editor Chard Gazette.20 James Powell, Chichester: town clerk.21 George Henry Booth, Chester: agent for South Australia Commissioners.22 Nathaniel Kettle, 5 Priory Terrace, Dover.23 Robert Bradshaw Todman, Dover24 Thomas Woollcombe, Devonport: director of New Plymouth Company.25 William Latimer, Exeter: editor and proprietor of Western Times.26 A. B. Duckham, Falmouth.27 R. B. Stone, Eastbourne, Sussex: agent for South Australia Commissioners.28 Matthew O’Brien, Falmouth.29 William Nollist, Farnham.30 Alfred Ludlam, Farringdon.31 Thomas Wilkinson, Gainsborough.32 Rolfe, Goudhurst, Kent.33 Walter Raymond, Gravesend: superintendent of Star Steam Packet Co.34 Samuel Finney, Guildford, Surrey.35 Harry Hughlings, Halifax: agent for South Australia Commissioners.36 Richard Hartley, Halifax37 Mr Kingston, Harpenden.38 Charles Bond, Hastings: editor of Cinque Ports Chronicle.39 Adams, Hawkhurst, Kent.40 William Stevenson, Hull.41 Charles Morris, Heytesbury, Wilts.42 Joseph Coverdale, Ingatestone, Essex.43 William Hunt, Ipswich.44 Thomas Webster, Kendall.45 George Murley, Langport, Somerset.46 John Potter, Leeds: sharebroker and commission agent.



47 Samuel Fildesley, Ranclagh Shut, Leamington: coal merchant48 Thomas Charles Elliott, 49 High St, Lewes.49 Capt. Whitehead, India Buildings, Liverpool.50 Dr Rudge, Axminster, Somerset.51 George Whiting, Maidstone: editor of Maidstone Gazette, agent for South

Australia Commissioners.52 William Saxton, Market Drayton.53 John Railton, Manchester.54 John Ransom, Norwich.55 J. W. Haythorne, Nottingham: merchants agent.56 William Loraine, Newcastle upon Tyne.57 G. B. Lee, Patrick Brompton, North Yorkshire.58 Garratt and Gibson, Portsmouth.59 Mr Rowe, Penzance.60 E. Wrigley, Rochdale.61 Joseph Collin, Saffron Walden, Essex.62 Edward Kelsey, Salisbury.63 Joseph Clarke, Southampton.64 F. W. Jerningham, Southampton.65 John Dunlop, Southampton.66 William Fenton, Stafford.67 John Reeves, Taunton.68 Rev Baden Powell/Dr Hinds, Tunbridge Wells.69 Harrison, Wakefield.70 George Frampton, Weymouth.71 Henry Edwards, Woodbridge, Suffolk.72 Francis Wiltshire, Wootton Bassett.73 G. Lee, York.74 Hulke, Deal.

Footnote referencesArnold, R., The farthest promised land: English villagers, New Zealand immigrants of the 1870s

(Wellington, 1981).Bailyn, B., Voyagers to the west: emigration from Britain to America on the eve of the revolution (1987).Baines, D., Migration in a mature economy: emigration and internal migration in England and Wales,

1861-1900 (Cambridge, 1985).Baines, D., ‘European emigration, 1815-1930: looking at the emigration decision again’, Econ. Hist.

Rev., XLVII (1994), pp. 525-44.Baines, D., Emigration from Europe 1815-1930 (Cambridge, 1995).Borgas, G. J., ‘Economic theory and international migration’, Int. Mig. Rev., 23 (1989), pp. 457-85.Broeze, F., ‘Private enterprise and the peopling of Australasia, 1831-1850’, Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd

ser., XXXV (1982), pp. 235-53.Burns, P., Fatal success: a history of the New Zealand Company (Auckland, 1989).Erickson, C., Invisible immigrants: the adaptation of English and Scottish immigrants in nineteenth-century

America (1972).Erickson, C., Leaving England: essays on British emigration in the nineteenth century (Ithaca, 1994).Gould, J. D., ‘European inter-continental emigration, 1815-1914: patterns and causes’, J. Eur. Econ.

Hist., 8 (1979), pp. 593-679.Haines R., ‘Indigent misfits or shrewd operators? Government-assisted emigrants from the United

Kingdom to Australia, 1831-1860’, Pop. Stud., 48 (1994), pp. 223-47.Harper, M., Emigration from north-east Scotland: willing exiles (Aberdeen, 1988).Hatton, T. J. and Williamson, J. G., ‘What drove the mass migrations from Europe in the late

nineteenth century?’, N.B.E.R., 43, 1992.Hedges, J., ‘The colonisation work of the Northern Pacific Railroad’, Mississippi Valley Hist. Rev.,

XIII (1926), pp. 311-42.Holt, S. C., ‘Family, kinship community and friendship ties in assisted emigration from Cambridge-

shire to Port Phillip District and Victoria, 1840-67’ (unpub. M.A. thesis, La Trobe Univ., 1987).


698 paul hudson

Hudson, P., ‘English emigration to New Zealand, 1839-1850: an analysis of the work of the NewZealand Company’ (unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Lancaster Univ., 1997).

Hudson, P. and Mills, D., ‘English emigration, kinship and the recruitment process: migration fromMelbourn in Cambridgeshire to Melbourne in Victoria in the mid-nineteenth century’, Rural Hist.,10 (1999), pp. 55-74.

Hvidt, K., ‘Danish emigration prior to 1914: trends and problems’, Scand. Econ. Hist. Rev., 14(1966), pp. 158-78.

Hvidt, K., Flight to America: the social background of 300,000 Danish emigrants (1975).Macdonald, C., A woman of good character: single women as immigrant settlers in nineteenth-century

New Zealand (Wellington, 1990).McClean, R., ‘Scottish emigration to New Zealand, 1840–1880: motives, means, and background’

(unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Edinburgh, 1990).Marais, J. S., The colonisation of New Zealand (1968).Olssen, E., ‘Mr Wakefield and New Zealand as an experiment in post-Enlightenment experimental

practice’, N. Z. J. Hist., 31 (1997), pp. 197-218.Pope, D., ‘The push-pull model of Australian migration’, Aust. Econ. Hist. Rev., 16 (1976),

pp. 144-52.Quigley, J., ‘An economic model of Swedish emigration’, Qu. J. Econ., 86 (1972), pp. 111-26.Runblom, H. and Norman, H., eds., From Sweden to America: a history of the migration

(Minneapolis, 1977).Templeton, J., ‘The Swiss connection: the origins of the Valtellina-Australia migrations’, Aust. Hist.

Stud., 104 (1995), pp. 393-414.Tomaske, J., ‘The determinants of intercountry differences in European emigration’, J. Econ. Hist.,

XXXI (1971), pp. 840-53.Wakefield, E. G. and Ward, J., The British colonisation of New Zealand (1837).Wilkinson, M., ‘Evidence of long swings in the growth of populations and related economic variables’,

J. Econ. Hist., XXVII (1967), pp. 17-38.Wintle, M., ‘Push factors in emigration: the case of the province of Zeeland in the nineteenth

century’, Pop. Stud., 46 (1992), pp. 523-37.


Documents

English Emigration to New Zealand, 1839–1850: Information Diffusion and Marketing a New World