Page:History of New South Wales from the records, Volume 1.djvu/432

318 SHIPS FOE ENGLAND. 1788 Phillip was not attached to the garrison but to the settle- »Juiy. ment, and consequently he was a civil and not a miKtarv officer. The appointment, however, serves to illustrate the Military distinctly military character of the organisation under wHich Son"*^ the colony was founded. It was essentially a Camp in the first instance, and was governed according to military ideas. Phillip made the appointment in question under section ii of the Act of 1787, which directed the Provost-Marshal to execute the judgments pronounced by the Criminal Court.* Every sentence passed by that Court was carried out under his supervision, and he was responsible for its due execution. The ships The Fishbum storeship is detained until a proper place can be pro- " ^ vided for the spirits ; and the rains have for some days prevented the landing the remainder of the provisions from the Golden Grove, therefore those two ships will sail together, I hope by the end of August ; the other ships have all cleared, and preparing to sail. The Fishbum and the Golden Grove sailed for England on the 19th November, carrying the despatches written be- tween that date and the 2nd October. By '^ the other ships,*' Phillip meant the Alexander, Prince of Wales, Friendship, and Borrowdale, which sailed on the 14th July, carrying the despatches written previously. There were thus only two opportunities for sending letters direct to England during the year. The three ships which sailed for China in the first week of May did not carry any mail for Eng- Maiisfor land. They were under charter to the East India Company, England, j.^ ^^rry cargocs of ^Hea and other merchandize" from Canton to London. They had been unloaded in Sydney Cove much more quickly than the other ships, on account of the express instructions given on that point, ^^ a very consider- able saving " being thereby effected in freight. diaobedience of orders, of plunder, or of outrage." And he declared that he did not know *' in what manner the army was to be commanded at all, unless the practice was not only continued, but an additional number of Provosts appointed." The power of the Provost-Marshal to punish *' onhis own authority " is not only not allowed in the present day, but is expressly forbidden by the Army Act. — Tovey, Martial Law, p. 64. • Post, p. 455. Digitized by Google