Why is this place significant?

Why is this place Category 1 / Category 2?

Early History The history of Coastal Otago (Te Tai o Araiteuru) relates to the tradition of the waka Arai Te Uru. These traditions and histories provide the basis for tribal identity. Muaupoko (Otago Peninsula) in particular provided a sheltered place for settlement, and Waitaha, Ngāti Mamoe and Ngāi Tahu, who remain associated with the area, all visited and lived in the vicinity. At one time up to 12 kainga existed in the lower Otago harbour. The coastline was a major trade route. Tauranga waka and associated nohoanga occurred up and down the coast, linking sea and land based resources. The mahinga kai and the varieties of plant resources were important to iwi, and with the Pakeha settlement and land sales starting in the late 1840s (particularly the sale of the 400,000 acre Otago Block) there was a significant loss access to land based food sources. The former Caversham Immigration Barracks are located in the Dunedin hill suburb of Mornington. The Māori history of Mornington is recalled in the name Pokohiwi, reflecting the ‘shoulder’ of the hill behind the harbour, but may also recall a historical figure from the Ngatiruahikihiki hapū. Vogel’s Immigration and Public Works Scheme (1870) In 1870 Julius Vogel, the Colonial Treasurer, announced an ambitious public works and assisted immigration programme. Borrowing millions of pounds, he spent huge amounts on New Zealand’s infrastructure and a government-subsidised immigration scheme. The 1870 Immigration and Public Works Act empowered the government to select and bring English immigrants to New Zealand. Around 170 recruitment agents worked throughout Britain, Scotland and Ireland to attract agricultural labourers and single women, in particular. They called for those who were ‘sober, industrious, of good moral character, of sound mind and in good health’. In 1873 the fare of £5 per adult was waived and passage was free. Colonial Architect (and Vogel’s father-in-law) William Clayton was a key figure in realising Vogel’s policy – more people required more buildings, including immigration and quarantine barracks. Clayton’s solution to facilitate the building programme was to develop a standard plan for government buildings. Plans for the Immigration Barracks represented the simplest of Clayton’s government buildings: timber rectangular structures and a gable roof of relatively low pitch. Utilitarian in character, Clayton used cheaper lapped weatherboarding ‘because the budgets for construction of provincial government buildings were not sufficient to use more expensive rusticated weatherboarding, and the buildings were not considered sufficiently important to warrant greater expenditure.’ Clayton’s standard plan enabled rapid construction - yet the simplicity of the plans ‘belied the wealth of engineering experience and architectural knowledge which generated them.’ The Caversham Immigration Barracks The Otago/Southland Assisted Passenger Immigration Scheme began in 1872 and a four acre site in Caversham was selected to house the immigrants. In May 1872 Clayton invited building tenders. The contract was let to Alexander Jerusalem Smyth under the supervision of inspector Andrew Dunn at a price of £4500. Only native woods were used: foundation piles were of broadleaf and totara, and the external walls were red pine (rimu). The building was finally completed on 25 June 1873. The Barracks were: exceedingly simple and unpretentious in design, [but] are erected upon the most complete system that could have been devised to fulfil the requirements…The building itself, which stands out prominently from its eminence, is not of any definable style of architecture externally, and its interior displays an equally marked lack of ornature. The single aim seems to have been to secure the greatest amount of practical utility, and in this respect the design has been completely successful. The entrance drive led to a large courtyard. On the left was the Barrack-master’s residence and on the right, the ‘engaging’ offices where employers could interview prospective employees. The Matron’s residence was nearby. The courtyard included two luggage stores, an ice house and wood and coal house. The two-storeyed main building was divided into four wings. The wings stood separate from each other, with the longest being the northern and southern. They were joined in the centre by the kitchen. The dining rooms were on the lower floors and the sleeping apartments on the upper. Lavatories, baths ‘and an abundant supply of water, are all at hand in convenient portions of the interior of the building.’ The form of the building reflected its purpose, which was to ‘keep each class of immigrants entirely distinct from the other, and once within the building the chances of communication between the single men and women, for instance, is as remote as if one or other were at Timbuctoo.’ The north wing accommodated single women and the south wing single men; dormitories each contained 96 bunks. Rooms were also provided for warders whose duty it was ‘to enforce the regulations and suppress the joviality of the young bloods when it exceeds the bounds of propriety.’ The kitchen was ‘built upon a scale of some magnitude’ and included fires which, in the winter, heated the water for the hot water pipes which circulated through all the building for heating. The ground surrounding the building was divided into four yards, which served as recreation and drying grounds. The Immigrants Immigration is a most necessary thing for the benefit of a Colony, but the import of certified scum is anything but desirable. This is not the first or second time we have had to draw attention to the utter recklessness and indiscretion shown in selecting immigrants…’ Dunedin’s existing settlers were unhappy with the new immigrants. The arrival, for example, of 30 single Irish women in 1874 caused much dismay as their last place of abode was a reformatory. Their attitude to immigrants was dismissive: females were ‘disposed of’ to service and all were seen as a cheap labour source to serve those already in the Colony. By 1874 ‘the common conversation of the town’ was that the ‘tainted cargo’ of the Assisted Immigration ships were ‘little short of a public calamity’: This time last year we were clamouring for quantity – numbers. We have got numbers with a vengeance; and now we are bitterly regretting the fact, if it entails the acceptance of the refuse of back slums, the useless of the workhouse, the flotsam and jetsam of over-crowded civilization. Nothing we can do now will atone for the negligence of our Agents.’ Often cases of drunk and disorderly behaviour at the Barracks were brought before the Court. A policeman was on duty at all times. One Caversham resident complained of the ‘rowdyism’ that went on around the barracks, day and night: The grounds, which are large, and could be made to accommodate at least a thousand people, are not fenced, and the immigrants are allowed to congregate at the hotel opposite, and also block up the road in front of the barracks, and conduct themselves in a most disorderly way… Caversham residents also noted the unseemly ease with which men scaled the wall between the male and female barracks. The wall was made higher. Life at the Barracks An inspection of the Barracks in October 1873 declared them to be ‘perfectly clean in all parts, the floor appearing as white as driven snow…The immigrants speak in the highest manner of Mr Duke the barrack master, Mrs Crawford the matron…and say that they are far more comfortable than they expected to be.’ The commonality of facilities such as the wash rooms and ironing rooms were reported to add good cheer – ‘we were greeted with some very pretty songs brought from our fatherland…We felt sorry that our entrance stilled the music.’ By April 1874 the Immigration Office had received thirty applications offering employment before the first immigrants of the year had even arrived. By June the Barracks had never been so full, housing 700 immigrants. For some the Caversham Barracks were a staging post before being moved on to other centres. For others, they obtained jobs in service but could not obtain accommodation and so remained at the Barracks. And others were described as ‘those lazy ones – the dregs of a large shipment, remaining. Not caring for work…’ Historian, Jock Phillips opined that ‘the migration of the 1870s was the most significant in New Zealand history’. Vogel’s scheme helped transform New Zealand from a Māori world into a more unified Pākehā one. These new immigrants arrived with youth, zeal, and the financial need to ‘make a home for their families in the New World. They formed the heart of Pākehā society for the next 50 years’. Immigrants were the agricultural workers who had begun to actively rebel in England; termed the ‘revolt of the fields’ they organised themselves into agricultural unions, demanding fair pay and favourable conditions. These expectations could not help but shape a more egalitarian New Zealand society. In the simplest terms, when it came to colonists vs immigrants, the immigrants in time proved the louder voice. After the Immigration Scheme Between 1871 and 1881 New Zealand’s population increased approximately 234,000 largely due to the immigration scheme. Between 18 September 1875 and 6 October 1875, for example, over 600 new immigrants arrived in Dunedin. In 1882 the scheme came to an end. The Caversham Immigration Barracks then fell into disuse for over a decade. In 1895 the NZ Wax Vesta Company Limited opened a match factory in the wooden building. In 1902 the Company vacated the old Barracks for a new purpose-built factory. Late in 1902 there was an outbreak of scarlet fever in Dunedin. Dunedin’s fever hospital had been demolished and no replacement provided. On 8 January 1903 application was made to the Government to use the Immigration Barracks as a temporary hospital. By 9 January the Health Department had taken charge of the building and within a day had it ready for patients. The Barracks were employed as a fever hospital for some months, ‘in spite of the protestations of the neighbours’. The end of the epidemic saw the Barracks empty again. Seeing no further use for the deteriorating buildings, in 1905 the Public Works Office advertised for tenders ‘for pulling down and removal of Immigration Barracks at Caversham’. The successful purchaser was John Overend Hewton (1845-1930). The Immigration Barracks reimagined Born in Ireland, Hewton made his way to New Zealand about 1872 when he married Annie Louisa Wallace. In 1873 he established himself as a grocer in Princes Street. He also had interests in flour mills and various properties at Hampden Downs and Otepopo. For a time, Hewton was also a councillor for the West Harbour Borough representing the Ravensbourne Ward. By 1897, however, Hewton was in debt. In 1901 his business and property became an ‘assigned estate’ – similar to bankruptcy. Yet in August 1905 Hewton was the successful purchaser of the former Immigration Barracks. A report of Public Accounts for the year show the ‘sale of material, Immigration Barracks, Caversham’ reaped £50. By January 1906 Hewton had cleared the site. In an age of waste not want not, Hewton ‘repurposed’ the barracks. Wood from the barracks was used ‘for building cottages, and [Hewton] is now having some erected between Hillside and Maria roads, South Dunedin…thus passeth the last of the once useful and indispensable Immigration Barracks’. The City Council considered taking Hewton to Court over these same South Dunedin cottages, considering them ‘a lasting disgrace to the city…[there was] nothing worse in the Old Country’. Solicitors felt the Council’s position weak and so they determined instead to order Hewton to make the cottages at least habitable. They also decided to increase the salaries of the Works Inspectors to discourage exterior financial incentives... Hewton had other plans for one wing of the Barracks. In March 1904 Mrs Hewton purchased Allotment 19, Blk VI of the ‘newly-subdivided Township of Montecillo’. When a new certificate of title was issued for the property in 1906, however, ownership was in John Hewton’s name. Hewton reconstructed on Allotment 19 one entire wing of the former Barracks, adding three fire walls across the width of the building which separated the wing into four apartments. Photographic evidence suggests Hewton retained the original roof pitch, as well as the size and positioning of windows and the front door. As the rebuild was a mirror image of the Barracks, so were the single storied outbuildings grouped around it. They appeared similar to single-storied structures which formed part of the original immigration complex. In 1906 Hewton was recorded living in Patrick Street, Mornington, which ran along the edge of Allotment 19. A carpenter, Walter George Wallace, was also living on site suggesting that building works were underway. At a City Council meeting in 1906, it was reported that Hewton ‘had divided his building into four houses, although the permit had been refused.’ The committee was to write to Hewton to inform him of the penalty. By 1907 the City Council noted Hewton’s Allotment 19 had various buildings and improvements on site – obviously he had dealt with the Council’s penalty rather than remove his ‘four houses’. The building work was likely complete by 1907 as there were several residents at the address, including Hewton, a grocer, and two apprentice bakers. By 1909, the former Barracks (now described as down a right of way from Patrick Street) also included living quarters for his son Thomas, as well as a baker and a carter. By 1911 it was home to John Hewton, Thomas Hewton, Miss Lulu Hewton (John’s daughter, Elizabeth Louisa), and two tradesmen. In 1911 Hewton retired to a farm in the Catlins. Thomas became the proprietor of the Ranfurly motor garage and from 1915 Lulu remained the only Hewton family member at the former Barracks. In 1917 the ‘right of way’ was renamed Elbe Street and this became the former Barrack’s official address. Newspaper advertisements for the period saw Hewton advertising to let ‘House, 5 rooms; newly done up, plenty of ground; splendid view’, and ‘4, 5-roomed Houses; 3s, 10s; conveniences; also Paddock for horses.’ The apartments, were not necessarily rented to transitory single men – in 1921 William Familton, a labourer, rented apartment 2; his widow remained there after his death and in 1950 the Familton’s son, William Thomas, was listed as occupier. In total, it was the Familton family home for 23 years. In 1917 John Hewton transferred the property to his daughter Lulu. In 1920 Lulu married James Amess and moved to Christchurch. In 1931 she sold Elbe Street to Thomas McCrosbie. The property then passed through various hands. In 2003 the present owner, GIenn Jordan, purchased the property. In 2018 the former Barracks remain as rental accommodation. A number of original interior features have endured the passing of the decades and the original exterior form of what was once the Immigration Barracks is readily apparent.

Current Description Setting The barracks are nestled into the shady side of the hill completely hidden from the street. The former barracks are the only occupier of Elbe Street, which is more akin to a driveway and runs off the suburban Patrick Street. Below the barracks is a hill of trees and shrubbery which leads down to Glen Road. The context of the site lends the former barracks a somewhat isolated and veiled character, despite being located between two populous suburbs. After turning off Patrick Street and following Elbe Street down to its natural end, the former barracks appear to the right. The immediate impression is one of an institutional building. It is long, narrow, and rectangular, without decoration. Exterior The two-storeyed building has a simple rectangular plan and a low pitched iron roof. It is clad in timber and is divided into four apartments by the regular insertion of brick fire walls. There are four brick chimneys. Two chimneys are located between apartments one and two, and another two between apartments three and four. The Barracks were originally built using balloon frame construction, with ship-lap weatherboard cladding on the exterior and match-lined timber on the interior. It has not been established whether the balloon frame survived the 1905 reconstruction, but it is likely that given the similar dimensions and spacing of windows that the same framing was used. Balloon framing developed in the early to mid-1800s as ‘smaller and standardised timber sizes’ came from the efficient sawmills. Buildings scientist Nigel Isaacs writes that this method also saw simplified joints (the earlier mortise and tenon joints required expensive skilled labour) and use of cut nails and later wire nails. This made timber framed buildings cheaper. Scantlings (timber less than five inches (125mm square) ‘provided support for more walls than the same volume of heavy timber framing.’ ‘Balloon framing’ was an outcome of these technological developments. In balloon framing, ‘studs were continuous from the bottom to top plate. The ground floor joists are notched into the sill and nailed to the studs, while the first floor joists are supported by a plate cut into the stud and also secured with nails.’ Isaacs writes that by the mid-nineteenth century ‘in widely separated parts of the world a remarkably similar form of construction using 100x50mm studs spaced at about 45cm centres was in use. Cladding and lining appropriate to the local climate and social standing of the building were then nailed to this frame. In New Zealand, by the 1920s, balloon framing had been largely replaced by platform framing. The narrow south east elevation fronts the building. A narrow walk way leads to a front door which is surrounded by five, mostly narrow, windows. Stairs run up the interior of the eastern window. The long north eastern elevation runs alongside the driveway, opposite a large garage dating from after 1947. The brick fire walls are an obvious delineation between each flat. The first apartment includes two narrow windows on the ground floor and three on the first. There was also a doorway which has now been blocked. The second, third and fourth apartments include entrance doors with small overhead porches, two narrow ground floor windows and three narrow first floor windows. The effect is symmetrical, utilitarian and functional. Along the rear narrow northwest elevation is a small lean-to which runs only the height of the ground floor. This elevation is asymmetrical as the lean-to has two windows of differing sizes and the first floor has only one narrow window. Moving round to the southwest elevation, the ground drops sharply away. Access to the basement of the barracks is via a narrow corrugated iron lean-to, attached to the side of the elevation. It provides a large workspace and storage area. This elevation looks over the bush to the valley below. It has a series of narrow windows, three up and three down for apartments one, two and four in the rear. Apartment 3 only has two windows upstairs and down. Interior (What follows is a description of apartment four/the rear apartment- the other apartments were tenanted and could not be inspected) The main door leads into a narrow entrance hall with tongue and groove ceiling. To the right is a narrow lean-to which steps down into a modernised bathroom. Adjacent to the bathroom is a small bedroom, also a step down and also housed within the lean-to. Opposite the bathroom door is the entry to the kitchen and living area. The kitchen is on the left with two windows set in the north eastern elevation. The cabinetry is old and could date to the rebuild of the barracks. Pride of place is held by the wooden mantel surround and cast iron stove. The stove is from the ‘Improved Zealandia’ range by Barningham & Co., a Dunedin firm which completed with the Orion ranges manufactured by rival H.E. Shacklock. It was first marketed in late 1907 and is likely to have been installed as part of the rebuild. The living area includes a large cupboard, the interior of which reveals the original tongue and groove floorboards. There is also a cast iron open fire and wooden mantelpiece surround. The walls may be scrim and the windows are generally bottom hinged awning windows. Returning to the hall, there is a narrow staircase on the left winding up to the second floor. The staircase and rail is simple and unadorned. The stairs are illuminated by a single narrow first floor window. Other than the low height of the railings, the staircase is unexceptional. At the top is a small landing providing access to three bedrooms. The ceilings have been replaced with fibrous plaster tiles. Overlooking the north eastern elevation are two bedrooms; the largest of which has two windows. The third bedroom overlooks the valley to the south west. Although there are three bedrooms, the space feels cramped and spare. The height of the doors reinforces this impression as they are set lower that the average door height. Comparative Analysis Immigration Barracks from the Provincial Government period (up to 1870) The country’s first immigration barracks were simple structures built by each provincial government to house newly arriving immigrants. Images show that these were often simple single-storey structures, with accommodation split into blocks to keep separate the different classes of immigrants – single men, single women, married couples or families. Dunedin’s first barracks were on the beach. It was a 20 metre long hut consisting of flax-bound posts, grass walls, and a thatched roof. Inside, single women were located at the far end, married couples in the middle, and single men by the door. There were no partitions and cooking was done outdoors. By the early 1870s, the Immigration Barracks on Princes Street were causing problems. Immigrants from the Charlotte Gladstone, for example, gained an ‘unenviable notoriety’. A crowd gathered around the Barracks as a ‘many of them became incapably drunk – a larger number drunk and pugnacious, or drunk and frolicsome; and their capers were of the coarsest description.’ Police were ordered to stand guard at the barracks and maintain order. Several were charged. The news spread throughout the colony. Examples of early immigration structures are shown below. None of the barracks from the provincial period appear to have survived. Of a similar type were Lyttelton’s Immigration Barracks. Clayton’s Standard Plans for the Vogel Era Barracks Clayton’s first immigration barracks were for Dunedin and Mt Cook in Wellington; his first quarantine barracks were on Quarantine Island in Otago Harbour and Matiu/Somes Island in Wellington Harbour. Preliminary plans for Clayton’s first barracks at Mt Cook were underway before the 1870 Act was passed – but the building was not finalised until 1873. No plans have survived for the immigration or quarantine barracks – although a plans’ register records that there were 19 plans completed in 1872 for Dunedin’s Immigration Barracks. Although Clayton’s plans for the barracks do not survive, photographs show the Caversham Immigration Barracks appear to be an example of his design - timber, two or three-storeyed, multi-winged, hipped roof, and a plain rectangular form. Quarantine buildings built on Otago Harbour’s Quarantine Island (1873) and on Soames Island (funding approved 1873) also appear to be examples of the standard design. On a grander scale Tauranga’s Government Buildings followed the same standard pattern. While exhibiting more detailing and ornamentation, Clayton’s Government Buildings in Wellington (designed 1874 and completed 1876) show the same basic scheme. Barracks designed by other architects As Clayton’s work load grew, barracks in smaller centres were designed by local architects. Dunedin architect David Ross, for example, designed the Oamaru immigration barracks; F Strouts designed the quarantine barracks on Ripa Island in Lyttleton Harbour; and Angus Kerr designed Invercargill’s Immigration barracks in Tay Street. The design of these barracks in no way mimicked Clayton’s standard plan. Invercargill’s Immigration Barracks, for example, were a more substantial two storey structure with a series of parallel gables. Buildings like Palmerston North’s ‘Immigration Depot’ conveyed a sense of authority with its main entrance set in a centrally placed gable that transected the main dormitory building. The size and style of the barracks reflected the size and status of the place. Feilding’s now demolished barracks must have housed only a few individuals – being a of a very modest size. While many were insitutional in design, some were more residential in form, for example Selwyn’s Immigration Barracks which were demolished around 1913. Extant structures associated with Vogel’s Public Immigration Scheme Of the immigration and quarantine structures designed by William Clayton few survive. The section of the Caversham Immigration Barracks, as described here, appears to be New Zealand’s only remaining structure left standing which was built specifically for immigration purposes. The other remaining buildings were for constructed for quarantine purposes. Portions of the single storey barracks appear to have survived on Somes Island, but not the two-storey barracks from the Vogel period. Neither the structures in Wellington or in Auckland have survived. Of the structures built for quarantine purposes on Quarantine Island in Otago Harbour, only the Married Persons Quarters survive. From the comparative analysis, it appears that the reconstructed Caversham Immigration Barracks is the only surviving example of a New Zealand immigration barracks. Further, it is one of a very few examples of surviving quarantine and immigration barracks built to Clayton’s standard plan. This gives the Caversham Immigration Barracks special significance.

Information Sources

Other Information

A fully referenced New Zealand Heritage List report is available on request from the Otago/Southland Office of Heritage New Zealand. Disclaimer Please note that entry on the New Zealand Heritage List/Rārangi Kōrero identifies only the heritage values of the property concerned, and should not be construed as advice on the state of the property, or as a comment of its soundness or safety, including in regard to earthquake risk, safety in the event of fire, or insanitary conditions. Archaeological sites are protected by the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, regardless of whether they are entered on the New Zealand Heritage List/Rārangi Kōrero or not. Archaeological sites include ‘places associated with pre-1900 human activity, where there may be evidence relating to the history of New Zealand’. This List entry report should not be read as a statement on whether or not the archaeological provisions of the Act apply to the property (s) concerned. Please contact your local Heritage New Zealand office for archaeological advice.