Definition
Returning from transportation was a criminal offense under English law consisting of a transported convict's unauthorized return to England (or, where applicable, Great Britain or Ireland) before the expiration of the term of transportation imposed as punishment. Transportation was a sentence by which convicted offenders were removed from England and banished to a penal colony — most notably to Australia — for a fixed term or for life. A convict who came back before the lawful period ended committed a new and independent offense, classified as a crime against public justice.
---
Common Confusion
The offense should not be confused with the underlying sentence of transportation itself, nor with escape from lawful custody. Returning from transportation was a distinct substantive crime that arose only after the original sentence had been lawfully executed and the convict had actually been transported. A convict who escaped before being shipped, or who evaded the transportation process entirely, faced different charges. The distinction mattered procedurally: the prosecution for returning from transportation required proof of the original sentence, proof that transportation had in fact occurred, and proof of the premature return.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term is almost entirely a creature of English criminal law and belongs to a specific historical window: roughly the late seventeenth century through the mid-nineteenth century, when transportation was an active sentencing practice. Researchers encounter it primarily in:
1. English criminal statutes. The offense was codified and repeatedly amended by Parliament. Rapalje & Lawrence's truncated citation — "4 and 5 Will." — almost certainly refers to 4 & 5 Will. IV, pointing to early Victorian-era consolidating legislation, though the offense has older statutory roots reaching back to acts of William III and the Transportation Act of 1718 (4 Geo. I, c. 11), which made unauthorized return a capital felony. Researchers working with pre-1850 English criminal statutes should expect to find multiple overlapping acts addressing this conduct.
2. Penal reform literature and colonial records. The practical administration of transportation — including the tracking of returnees — generated substantial documentary records in both English court archives and Australian colonial records. Researchers using Law Mind sources that touch on English criminal procedure or colonial penal history will find this term embedded in that context.
3. American legal materials. Transportation as a sentence was never adopted in the United States, so this offense has no American equivalent or application. Rapalje & Lawrence's inclusion of the term reflects their dictionary's dual Anglo-American scope and its coverage of English law that American practitioners might encounter in treatises or inherited common law materials. American researchers should treat this as a purely English doctrine with no domestic analog.
4. Terminological traps. Older sources use "transportation" in two senses: the penal sentence and the general act of moving people or goods. Context almost always resolves the ambiguity, but researchers skimming digests should take care not to conflate the two. Similarly, "return" in this context means unauthorized physical reentry into the jurisdiction, not a legal or procedural return of process.
The severity of the offense evolved over time. Under early statutes it was a capital felony — a transported convict who returned could be hanged. Later reforms reduced the penalty and eventually the sentence of transportation itself was abolished, rendering this offense obsolete. By the time Rapalje & Lawrence were writing in the 1880s, transportation had effectively ended and the offense was of historical rather than practical significance.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence define the offense tersely: "Coming back to England before the term of punishment is determined. It was an offense against public justice." The use of the past tense ("it was") confirms the entry's retrospective character — the authors recognized the offense as effectively defunct by 1883. The classification under "offenses against public justice" is consistent with Blackstone's taxonomy in the Commentaries, where similar crimes involving the frustration of lawful criminal sentences were grouped together. No other source dictionary in the current Law Mind shelf addresses this term, which reflects its obsolescence. The Rapalje & Lawrence entry, while accurate, is notably brief and omits the capital felony history of the earlier statutes — a meaningful gap for researchers trying to understand the full legal weight the offense once carried.
---
Jurisdictional Note
This offense existed in English law and extended by statute to Scotland and Ireland in modified forms. It had no counterpart in American law. Researchers working in Commonwealth jurisdictions — particularly Australian legal history — may find relevant colonial statutory materials that interacted with or mirrored the English provisions.
---