Maori
The Maori history of this area relates particularly to coastal Otago (Te Tai o Araiteuru) and the tradition of the waka Arai Te Uru. Muaupoko (Otago Peninsula) in particular, provided a sheltered place for settlement. A settlement in what is now central Dunedin is believed to have been used as late as 1785 but was unoccupied in the 1820s when the area was described by Thomas Shepherd. Although ancient trails (ara tawhito), seasonal settlements (nohoaka) and canoe mooring sites (tauraka waka) were evident at the commencement of Dunedin, most soon vanished or were incorporated into colonial roads.
History of Dunedin’s Gaol
Dunedin’s first gaol was erected in September 1848 at a cost of £80. It was located at the foot of Bell Hill, now the corner of Stuart and Cumberland Street. In 1851 when Henry Monson the first gaoler was appointed, the wooden gaol consisted of two large cells and one day room. The Province’s Civil Engineer, John Turnbull Thomson, designed the gaol although his architectural experience hitherto lay in the construction of stone bridges. According to Judge A.J. Johnston, the goal was ‘engeniously misconstructed’.
In October 1855 Thomson’s gaol was burned to the ground when Monson tipped burning embers down the cesspool to purify it. Wind blew embers against the outhouses which quickly caught alight and spread the fire to the gaol. The lone prisoner bravely fought to save the goal and was badly burned for his efforts.
Following the fire, the Superintendent of Otago, James Macandrew, proclaimed the Immigration Barracks as a temporary gaol until new accommodation could be erected. The Barracks, one block towards the harbour, were owned by Macandrew who sold them to the Otago Provincial Council to serve as the gaol. The triangular section of land fronted Stuart, Castle, High and Dunbar Streets (once Gaol Street) and stood adjacent to the original bed of the Otago Harbour. The land was vested in the Superintendent of Otago and his successors for ever as Reserve No. 3, site for a public gaol, in June 1858.
Modifications were made to make to the barracks over the following years to make them suitable for a gaol. The cells were described as six feet, six inches by six feet, six inches. The bunks were so narrow that only one person could go to bed at any time. Yet prisoners were not confined to the gaol exclusively and a sentence of hard labour meant exactly that. Prisoners contributed greatly to the development of Dunedin through the draining of swamps, harbour reclamation, building roads and the removal of a large portion of Bell Hill. Octagon hill, about three and a half metres high, was also removed by prison work parties. Roads were formed, including the main routes along Cumberland and Castle Streets and roads on both sides of the harbour. Dunedin’s prison labour system became well known nationally and internationally. In 1874, for example, a prison officer from Melbourne made a study of the work carried out in Bell Hill.
In 1857 the Provincial Council set aside £2000 and plans were procured for a new gaol. By 1859, however, no progress had been made. During an inquiry in 1859 into the temporary wooden gaol, Monson noted that it ‘has never been secure…Any prisoner could have taken and pulled any part down, and could have taken out even the windows with his hand and escaped.’
In April 1859 it was announced the newest set of plans and specifications for the erection of a new gaol were ready. In January 1860, however, a report to the Supreme Court again noted the present gaol was inadequate but that the new gaol had not progressed. The plans had been sent to the central government but the decision had been deferred as the government was contemplating the erection of one gaol for the whole colony.
The decision to build was eventually made. Tenders were accepted in May 1860 and by June the foundations had been dug out. In August 1861 the Supreme Court noted the new goal was nearly finished. The new gaol, fronting Stuart Street, was a two storey bluestone building with a central tower built to hold about 134 prisoners. Although some problems were apparent, contemporaries felt it would afford sufficient accommodation despite the probable increase in crime due to the recent discovery of gold.
By October 1861 the new gaol was already said to be overcrowded and in December tenders were called for additions to the building. A debtors’ prison was built next to the prison with a frontage on Lower High Street. In 1862 a gaoler’s house was built and in 1863 further accommodation for female prisoners and lunatics was added. This provided accommodation for 176 prisoners in total. Sanitary conditions were later improved but at the expense of accommodation and barracks at Tairoa Heads were used for the overflow of prisoners.
Maori
On 6 November 1869, 74 Maori prisoners from the North Island were transferred to Dunedin gaol to serve between three and seven years. These were warriors of the Pakakohoe sub-tribe of Ngati Ruanui (part of Titokowaru’s army) who fought in the land wars in south Taranaki and captured at Patea in 1869. In August 1871 another five Maori prisoners were received from the East Coast of the North Island. All were convicted of high treason, the warriors were sentenced to hard labour. Almost a quarter were invalided due to the crowded conditions of their incarceration aboard a hulk in Wellington harbour. A day room was converted into a dormitory for their accommodation. While the Dunedin community was apprehensive about having these warriors in their midst, contemporaries soon noted that their, ‘obedience, industry, and attention, is highly spoken of, and the example and precept of the chief Rihare Watone Ngawakataurua, is cited as being in the highest degree satisfactory.’
Maori prisoners went out daily in gangs to work on projects such as harbour reclamation, the Botanic Gardens, Otago Boys High School, and forming roads in Andersons Bay, Kaikorai Valley and Pelichet Bay. For the year ended 31 March 1871 it was recorded that Maori prisoners had worked a total of 9268 days on Dunedin public works.
A report for the year ending 31 March 1873 noted that the Maori prisoners had recently been discharged under an amnesty. Resident Magistrate, Isaac Newton Watt, described them as ‘exceptional prisoners, who were treated exceptionally’.
The beginning of centralised penal reform
The Dunedin gaol came under the spotlight in 1883 when a central government inquiry was launched into apparent irregularities in prison management. The inquiry was prompted by ‘disorganisation and discord prevalent among the staff; habitual disobedience of the Prisons Act… [and] incessant complaints of officers and prisoners.’
The inquiry was conducted by Colonel Arthur Hume. In 1880 Hume was appointed to the new position of Inspector of Prisons. During his tenure, Hume’s principal achievement was to establish a national system of prison administration. This national regime was based on methods used in English gaols between 1863 and 1895, known as the ‘English System’. The system was based on classification of prisoners, where different types of offenders were held in different prisons, and each inmate was to have their own cell to avoid ‘contamination’. Advocating prisons as a deterrent, conditions were to be notably inferior to the lowest standard of living in the general populace. Hume’s endorsement of the ‘matured experience’ of England, although a typical colonial preference, ultimately inhibited New Zealand’s search for its own penal philosophy.
Hume’s attempts to implement the ‘system’, however, were frustrated by the need for economy and for many years the colony’s prisons remained overcrowded and dilapidated. It was not until the late 1880s that Hume was able to embark on a building programme which eventually led to an improvement in prison accommodation. In 1889 Hume reported that he had trialled the English separate cell system in the new Christchurch prison which had ‘effected great economy and reform’. New prisons were being built at Auckland and Wellington to give effect to the new system and, he reported, a new prison should be ‘at once erected at Dunedin’. Contemporaries also noted that increasing pressures on Dunedin’s prison accommodation made a new building essential.
Design and Architecture of the Dunedin Prison
Plans for the new Dunedin Prison were completed in 1892 by John Campbell, chief government architect from 1889, although the official title of Government Architect was not created until 1909. His projects included Government House, Parliament Buildings and the Dunedin Law Courts. Campbell also designed national models for buildings, for example post offices, which could be reproduced throughout the country. He became known for his Edwardian Baroque style of government buildings. It has been written that although Campbell ‘was a quiet and unassuming man; his buildings are by contrast so ostentatious that they command attention. Although many have been demolished, probably more examples of his work are known to New Zealanders, although anonymously, than buildings designed by any other architect’.
Campbell’s design for the new Dunedin Prison was to be ‘as unlike a gaol as possible, in view of its central position’. The design was based on the New Scotland Yard building in London, completed in 1890. Scotland Yard was designed by Norman Shaw (1831-1912), considered to be the father of the modern Queen Anne style, and the Dunedin Prison mimics a number of Shaw’s design elements. The Queen Anne style emerged as part of the Domestic Revival in English architecture, designed to be picturesque and a freer building form which supplanted the classicism and medievalism of Victorian gothic. It is oft quoted that the prison’s architecture ‘exactly demonstrates the then-current reaction in New Zealand against gross Victorian stylism’.
Both Shaw’s and Campbell’s designs are Queen Anne in style which includes a sweep of steps leading to a carved stone door frame; rows of painted sash windows in boxes set flush with the brickwork; and a central triangular pediment set against a hipped roof with dormers. Both Scotland Yard and the Dunedin Prison have cupola domes. Both designs include red brick with paler stone striped elevations, ‘dividing the height with a strongly marked line which gives a greater apparent width to the structure’. The designs also combine refined and elegant elements with a brick warehouse appearance. The elegant features include white mouldings on the gable, English Tudor windows, cupola domes and dormer windows in the roof. Delicately modelled brick facades also demonstrate Campbell’s competence in exquisite detailing. Although the Dunedin Prison is ‘somewhat smaller it is considerably more delicate and refined than its London counterpart’.
Campbell designed the prison in four blocks surrounding a central courtyard, although there was an adjunct to the north elevation containing a smaller courtyard for the gallows. This courtyard prison design was unusual at the time and is now thought to be unique. The administration block faced the railway station and the three prison wings were built in a U shape behind. The administration block was two storied, the prison wings were three high. Barred windows punctuated the exterior walls. Cells lay behind the windows and beyond them were corridors enabling circulation around three sides of the courtyard at each of the three floor levels. The prison was designed with 72 cells: 52 for men and 20 for women. The design was substantial and the prison was to be the fourth largest in New Zealand. Occupying an area of just 2661 square metres, however, over time it became one of the country’s smallest prisons.
According to art historian, Peter Entwisle, the prison’s form and age make it singular in New Zealand. Prison buildings, which only came into existence about 1800, are classified into four general architectural styles: radial, telephone poll, courtyard and campus. Dunedin Prison is now nationally unique in its representation of a courtyard prison. Lyttelton Gaol was the only other prison built in the courtyard style but it was closed in 1920 and has since been demolished. A comparison with the more prominent Australian prisons indicates that only two are of a courtyard design. Both of these prisons, however, are pre-Victorian and relatively small structures. Even a brief review of British and American prison designs indicates that courtyard architecture is rare. Entwisle’s research, then, indicates that the Dunedin Prison represents a rare type of courtyard design both nationally and internationally. He concludes that in New Zealand ‘it is the only surviving courtyard prison but in Australasia it is the only Victorian one and probably the only one of the sort ever built. In the greater English-speaking world it only seems more unusual. There may be parallels in the United States and Canada. There is one in Britain, but this is not like most New Zealand buildings whose types when sought internationally are usually numerous. Rarity of kind is only one merit in a building. But the Dunedin Prison has it in abundance’.
The prison building’s ornate architecture and imposing mass also became a key element in the surrounding area. With the police barracks and art gallery close by to the south, and the railway station, Otago Early Settler’s Museum, and the law courts soon added to the immediate area, the collection of civic buildings became ‘one of New Zealand’s most architecturally distinguished urban spaces.’ In this impressive heritage precinct ‘the prison building is an essential element...the prison, despite its purpose, adds a note of grace and surprisingly domestic charm’.
Construction
By 1893 there was still no sign of construction beginning on the prison. Hume’s report of that year hinted at the reason why.
I very much regret…that no determination has yet been arrived at in reference to Dunedin, and I can only add to what I have already said on this matter, that the present ancient and obsolete buildings will simply collapse before long, unless immediate and decided action is taken. It is believed that the opposition of the few who opposed building on the present site is now removed, and it is hoped in the cause of humanity alone, a new building will at once be sanctioned and commenced.
It seems that the Dunedin City Council had for many years been negotiating with the Government to reuse the gaol site as a market place. It was in the centre of the city and close to the railway station and the wharves. Deputations from Dunedin businessmen to the Minster of Justice concerning the site were made in 1892 and 1893. One submitter ‘did not suppose there were three persons in Dunedin who were in favour of erecting a gaol there’. By June 1894, however, the government was putting increasing pressure on the Council which eventually decided to withdraw its opposition to the new gaol.
The prison was to be erected on the ‘co-operative system’ at a cost of £10,000. This was a commonplace system during the 1890s for government works. It allowed for co-operative contracts to be let out to gangs of workmen. During the year ending 31 March 1896 six concreters, 28 stonemasons, 175 bricklayers, 125 bricklayers’ labourers and three general labourers were employed on co-operative work contracts. The labour cost for building Dunedin Prison was a little more than one shilling per man hour.
The specification was issued in November 1894. The concrete was to be approved Portland cement, 1 part cement, 6 parts hard bluestone and two parts sand. The government would supply 100,000 ordinary bricks and 50,000 pressed bricks. The remainder were to be supplied by the contractor and should be ‘hard, sound, square, of regular size and shape, and well burnt’. Pressed bricks were to be used on exterior except those facing the courtyard and the back of the buildings facing Gaol Street. All partitions, piers, foundations, and other brickwork were to be built in ‘English bond in the very best style of workmanship.’ All the exterior walls of the buildings were to be built hollow, with a 2.5 inch air space between. Other specifications dictated that ‘white stone shall be Oamaru stone, from the Totara Tree quarries, of the very best uniform quality and of equal colour, and carried by rail and not by sea. Bluestone shall be Port Chalmers stone, from the hardest and best quarries, of the very best uniform quality.’ The roof was to be Countess Westmoreland green slates. The mantelpieces to all fireplaces were to be wrought polished slate of plain design. The cell doors were to be 6 feet, 6 inches (2 metres) by 2 feet, 4 inches (66 centimetres). All external doors were heart totara; all internal doors were heart of red pine.
In January 1895 tenders were called for building materials. Walter and Charles Gore and another company C.A. & W.J. Shiel supplied the bricks. The total cost was £1699. The tender for timber, advertised nationally, was won by Charles M. Howison of the City Sawmilling Company. The contract was for £668 and the final delivery date was 2 August 1895. Ironwork was supplied by Cossens & Black.
Work began on 15 January 1895 with the ground being cleared. Two weeks later trenches were dug for the foundations. H. Norman of the Public Works Department supervised the work. Local architect, James Hislop, was given charge of the technical part of the work.
Construction did not progress as quickly as expected, however, and questions were asked in parliament in July and August 1895 about the delays. Discussion centred on the size of the workforce and problems with the co-operative system. In December 1895 Hume visited Dunedin to check progress and met with the gaoler Charles Phillips. Phillips suggested a number of improvements in a report he later sent to Hume. Phillips noted, for example, there were ‘only 2 baths in each of 2 cells or rooms for the male prison. (50 prisoners). It is suggested that two bathrooms be erected, one in the exercise yard, to contain 3 baths each…[there is also] no store room, no associated ward for D T cases or lunatics, or others requiring special observation and attention often ordered by surgeon; and no padded cell provided for. There are no punishment cells.’ Hume accepted the modifications.
The exterior was finished by April 1897. Varying completion dates appear in different sources. The confusion seems to have arisen with the erection of a plate above the central door indicating the prison was completed in 1896. This is incorrect. The sign was made in more recent times by a prisoner who did not check the date of opening. Although, the exterior was finished by April 1897, extra work and the fittings delayed its opening. On 19 May 1898 the District Engineer declared all building work completed and on 16 June 1898 the prison was occupied. The total cost of the prison on completion was £16000.
The same year the new prison building was begun, in 1895, the new police barracks were erected on the acute angle of the section of land which made up part of the old gaol. Contemporaries noted that the ‘new Police Station and the Gaol, now on the eve of completion, are also of a highly ornate character quite opposed to the sombreness of their functions’.
The remaining old gaol was dismantled in May 1899 by Sandilands and Co. The demolition did not proceed without incident. On 11 May the bodies of three executed prisoners were exhumed. The remains were left on the grounds pending an order for their removal.
In the interval, however, some person, presumably a collector, took a fancy to the skull of the late Captain William Jarvey, executed for the murder of his wife, and annexed it. The police hope that anyone offering for sale a skull “other than their own” will be made to account for it.
The subsequent search for the skull proved fruitless.
In 1902 the Dunedin Law Courts, also designed by John Campbell, opened on this site. An archaeological investigation in 2002 on part of this site found the old gaol’s foundations for one of the cell blocks running beneath and through the Law Court’s foundations. Excavations also revealed part of an old exercise yard and substantial structural timbers. Artefacts including glass, ceramics, a clay pipe, nails, button, spoons, bones and sawn greenstone were also recovered. As the archaeological investigation revealed excellent surviving evidence of the construction history of the old gaol from a relatively small survey area, it is likely that further remains of the old gaol lie beneath the current prison.
Inhabitants
The new prison was presided over by Samuel Charles Phillips (c.1836-1909). Phillips residence was adjacent to the old gaol but when the building was vacated the house became uninhabitable. Rats thrived in the drains and in the disused gaol. The smell proved unbearable. After an inspection, arrangements were made to demolish both the house and the old gaol in mid 1899. The Phillips were unable to find suitable accommodation nearby and so changes were made to a portion of the administration block to house the couple. A separate gaoler’s residence never eventuated and until Phillips’ retirement in 1903, the couple slept with loaded pistols under their pillows.
By 1896 prison staff included the gaoler, a surgeon, a matron and assistant matron, a principal warder, four warders and three assistant warders. Conditions for prison wardens were almost as limiting as those for inmates. For example, until 1915 prison officers had to work at least two years before getting married and then had to apply for permission. Neither was there annual leave or sick leave. Single officers were required to live in the prison and had to obey a 10pm curfew on their days off.
Aside from the resident ghost (apparently a policeman killed by inmates), the prison has also been tenanted by serial murderer Minnie Dean and more recently by David Bain. Almost everyone who had been arrested or convicted of murder in the South Island would have spent some time at Dunedin Prison.
Alterations
World War One created staffing problems in the prison service. Hume reported in 1916 that there was a shortage of officers throughout New Zealand. The solution in Dunedin was the relocation of police staff from the adjoining barracks to the prison’s administration block. It became the only building in the country to be shared by the Police and Justice Departments. The Defence Department also moved in at a later date and occupied part of the building until 1958.
Various repairs and alterations took place over the course of time. Certainly during the 1970s both the exterior and interior were partly compromised by alterations. A number of wooden windows, for example, were removed from cells and replaced with steel framed casement windows. Prison doors were replaced with lighter wooden doors. An inmates gym and recreation/dining room were added to the central courtyard. The small courtyard, housing the gallows, was converted to the laundry room and hotwater cylinder room. The original spiked fence was also removed.
Shortage of female accommodation in 1958 saw plans produced for altering part of Dunedin Prison for use as a women’s prison. The police continued to utilise the administration block. The Secretary for Justice was unsure about the wisdom of the decision.
Many of the women transferred to Dunedin will be serving long sentences and I have been hesitant about transferring them to this old-fashioned and depressing building. However, now that the decision has been made I wish to do everything possible to mitigate its cheerlessness by the use of adequate heating, colour and other aids which will improve the surroundings. Would you please ask your Architects to keep this in mind.
Male prisoners and the Defence Department were accommodated elsewhere and the first five female inmates arrived on 4 August 1959.
Christchurch Women’s Prison opened in 1974. Thereafter Dunedin became a male remand and short sentence prison and remained so until 2007. In 1994 the police removed to new premises on Great King Street. Dunedin Prison was vacated early in 2007 with the opening of the new Otago Corrections Facility in Milton. So ended 151 years of continuous prison accommodation on this site.
The Dunedin Prison is now being offered for sale. Although the Dunedin City Council does not have an interest in owning the building, there has been very strong community support for finding a suitable commercial adaptive reuse for the Prison. Articles have appeared in the local media; heritage advocates and members of the public have united to promote the Prison’s cause. A Dunedin Prison Charitable Trust has been formed to undertake feasibility investigations into options and future uses.
