Thank goodness my great grandparents came to NZ in 1860 (and four of my great grandfather's siblings came out during a short period of time thereafter). They were therefore spared the conditions described earlier in this thread.

There are no family stories left about why my forebears migrated, but my guess is that conditions in 1860 weren't a whole lot better.

Quite a few years ago I found a book in a NZ library (I have never been able to rediscover the book). The thesis of the book was that NZ was an Arcadia for the first European-origin settlers. There was a concept in the mid 19th century of a "competence". A competence was a plot of land of adequate size on which to build a simple house and grow sufficient fruit and vegetables and maintain livestock (sheep, cattle, chooks etc) to feed the family.

The land had not been over-grazed or over-planted, so stock and food crops thrived in ways that had not been seen in the "Old Country" within living memory. The book stated that early settlers were amazed by the fertility of the soil, and the size and flavour of the fruit and vegetables they were able to grow. As I recall, there were comments recorded about the size of cabbages and orchard fruits that would amaze us today.

For those Forest economic migrants, this must have seemed like a paradise in comparison with what they had experienced in their original home. My great grandparents were quickly able to buy a farm and build a two storey home; in the Forest he had been an iron miner with no land of his own.

Similar stories could be told of my great great grandparents on my mother's side, who emigrated from Alloa, Clackmannanshire, Scotland in 1852. From being a landless ploughman he became a landowner and farmer near Dunedin. I am sure that "good news" stories got back to Britain from people like my forebears, encouraging many relatives to fly the coop in the hope of escaping poverty.

Some five months later, news of a reply,

BNA Cardiff Times - Saturday 04 May 1878

A reply has been received to the petition forwarded to the Queen by the distressed women of the Forest of Dean, in November last. The answer was forwarded through the Woods and Forests Department. The Hon. Mr Howard admits that there is considerable distress in the Forest but he is informed that it is not of the appalling character indicated by Mr Nicholson, and that it is not, at all events at present, so urgent as to call for the interposition of the Queen or Government. The letter adds “it is doubtful whether the distress in Dean Forest is greater than it is in South Wales,” and goes on to say that “although the Forest of Dean is the property of the Crown, the distress is not due to the discharge of workmen employed by the Crown, as the coal and ironworks are held under grants, and the Crown revenues have suffered from the partial stoppage of the ironworks.”

Mr NICHOLSON was, I believe, the Rev. Thomas NICHOLSON, a Baptist Minister, of Yorkley,a leading light in publicizing the plight of the Forest folk and the provision of relief.