Australian Dress Register

Itis evident that the uniforms were designed in a way that would afford theconvicts no pleasure in the wearing. The cloth of which they are constructed isa coarse weave and fibre, rough against the skin of the convict. The colouryellow was associated with humiliation, and the issue of parti-coloured or‘magpie’ uniforms was used to further humiliate, possibly because of theassociation of parti-colour or ‘motley’ with the medieval fool. Convictuniforms were easily identified, making it almost impossible for the convict to hide his shame from the general dress_reg_live. Sodisliked was the uniform that some convicts gambled away their issued clothinguntil they had nothing of it left. Having no uniform to wear may have beentolerable in the summer months but the harshness of the Tasmanian winter wouldhave provided a different but very real displeasure.

The convict story is important in understanding Tasmania's European history. Thecolonisation of Van Diemen's Land was intended to offer relief to the problemof an overcrowded British prison system. In 1836 75% of the European populationof Van Diemen's Land were convicts, former convicts or of convict ancestry.Port Arthur became a penal settlement for repeat offending criminals, and for alarge portion of the prison’s operation these men and boys experienced areformation system based on corporal punishment. Convicts worked in leg ironsin hard labour gangs, the threat of the cat of nine tails or solitaryconfinement for disobedience keeping them in order. This was replaced by apunishment system of enforced isolation, resulting in many of the prisonersexperiencing excessive mental suffering.  The Convict uniforms are an important part ofthis history; they enable us to further understand the hardships enforced bythe British colonial government. The uniforms were designed to be practical butnot comfortable, made from harsh wool fibre and dyed yellow, the colour ofdisgrace, to further humiliate the convict. Parti-coloured clothing was easilyrecognised as prison uniform, making it difficult for any convict to escape. Theuniforms were made by the convicts themselves, with those with appropriateskills assigned to tailoring workshops. Labouring was considered part of thereformation of the convict, along with scholastic and religious instruction.Port Arthur is famous for its harsh environment; many convicts attempted escapefrom the prison settlement, manipulating the uniforms using bush dyes andlearned tailoring techniques but most attempts were unsuccessful, resulting infurther hardship and brutality on return to Port Arthur.

Theinformation used is a research collaboration of staff and volunteers of theQueen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery

This garment was a part of a collection of Tasmanian convict uniforms collected by antiquarian J.W. Beattie. The garments had been on public display in Beattie’s Port Arthur Museum in Hobart, before being purchased by the Launceston City Council in 1927 for its museum, the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery. Early exhibition practices were not well informed and much damage has been caused to the garments during this period through excessive light exposure and poor display arrangements.  Beattie's collection has also been featured in exhibitions at the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery.

1. Colour - Yellow and Black

2. Fibre - Wool with Cotton or Linen Interfacing

3. Weave - Plain Weave

4. Location for all parts - Garment including facings are wool, interfacing is cotton or linen

The cloth of which this convict waistcoat is made is a wool fibre. Appraisals by the Tasmanian Guilds wool classer identified the fibre as originating from the Suffolk sheep breed. The Department of Agriculture confirms that Suffolk sheep were first introduced into Australia in 1904. This information supports the opinion that the cloth was not woven locally even though there were convicts assigned the tasks of cloth production at the Darlington penal station on Maria Island as well as spinning of woollen yarn at Female Houses of Correction (known colloquially as as Female Factories). The cloth has a plain weave of approximately 26 ends per inch (Warp) and 20 picks per inch (weft). Suffolk sheep produce a coarse, springy and hard-wearing fleece which made a cloth that is durable but rough and uncomfortable against the skin. The cloth has been felted to increase its durability as well as the water repellence of the cloth. Research into the dyes used on the cloth has been undertaken by the Chemistry Department of the University of Tasmania; the study confirms the presence of tin and chromium on the cloth, indicating that a natural dye has been used. This knowledge also helps date the cloth, as synthetic dyes were not used until 1856.

Onarrival in Van Diemen's Land under the Probation System, all convicts were assessed for previous work experience and skills. Labour was intended to be part of the ‘reformation’ of the prisoner along with scholastic and religious instruction. Capable tailors were assigned the task of hand sewing convict uniforms. The waistcoat is stamped with a broad arrow, signifying government ownership, and the letters ‘WD’ which indicates that the waistcoat has been issued by the War Department (and is thus post 1855), with the letter ‘A’ stamped just beneath. Tailor Stephen Larkins was hired to instruct the convicts of the Separate Prison in 1867. The trade of tailoring was considered to be very suitable employment for the prisoners, as they spent most of their time confined to their cells under a strict rule of silence and devoid of community. The waistcoat is finished with top stitching on the front edges and keyhole-stylebuttonholes have been well shaped using blanket / buttonhole stitch and finished with a bar tack. Small metal buttons would probably have been used to fasten the front. A cross stitch with a bar tack to neaten the button stitching has been applied; the buttons were possibly sewn onto the waistcoat once it was issued to a convict. The collar is constructed from 2 bias-cut rectangles angled at each end and folded rather than seamed on the top edge. This design would benefit fabric economy as well as minimising the work in the construction of the garment. The folded top edge has also created a sturdy finish. The front neckline has been cut on a straight angle, allowing the collar design to work, resulting in a collar that is crossed over at the front rather than meeting neatly together. This waistcoat has a raw edge around the armhole opening, inconsistent with the construction techniques used in all other areas of the garment. This may have been a standard practice of the era, allowing a fitted jacket to be worn over the top of the waistcoat without bulk around the armhole, as there is some evidence to suggest the same practice being applied in higher-class garments as well.

Garment stamped with a broad arrow and the letters ‘W.D.’, indicating government property, issued by the War Department. The War Department issued clothing to convicts from 1855. Prior to this the department was known as the Board of Ordnance,and earlier uniforms bear the stamp ‘B.O.’

The majority of the convict waistcoat is a straight grain construction with exception of the collar, which is bias cut. The design of the convict uniforms is considerate of fabric economy. The style of the bias cut collar would have produced very little cloth waste.

The waistcoat would have been fastened with buttons, possibly of black painted metal. There are thread remnants, suggesting that the buttons have been removed.

As convict uniforms were not intended to be luxury garments, padding and lining that would enhance the quality of the uniform have not been used. Interfacing of linen or cotton has been used to strengthen the facing supporting the buttons.

The Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery has many men's convict uniform articles in its collection including a yellow jacket, three parti-colour vests, a yellow vest, a pair of corduroy trousers and a cape that is associated with the Cascades Female House of Correction. The collection also contains knitted wool caps, leather hats and shoes and a blue and white check/gingham neckerchief.

The garment shows signs of ageing and poor past handlingand display practices, but exhibits no significant signs of general wear, thebutton holes are in good condition and have not been discoloured or stainedfrom use. The internal colour of the garment is excellent with no sign offading.

There is no evidence of repair, although the buttons appear to have been removed.

There is insect damage on all main body panels and the back collar section.