Hi David, Maybe wealthy was a bad choice of word - I just mean comparatively wealthy, ie. few if any ag labs would have come out unassisted. Artisans would come both assisted and unassisted. I'm basing this on my own ancestry; which includes 13 different immigrant families/individuals who came to Australia: - 1 convict - 1 military - 8 assisted - 3 unassisted 2 of the unassisted were of genuinely wealthy background (1 from Irish landowning gentry; 1 from an English artisan/entrepreneur family). The 3rd must have had reasonable finances too, as he was able to open a general store on arrival in Brisbane. The 9 assisted include some government schemes, some private schemes, and 1 sponsored family (from Germany, the rest were from UK). Most paid at least part of their fares, and most received subsidised or free land orders on arrival. Apart from my families, I don't have any overall figures but I believe the assisted proportion would be high at particular times eg. Qld in the 1860's development boom, and lower at other times eg. NSW & Vic during 1850's gold rushes. There were a great variety of schemes both public and private; details can usually be found on the different state archive websites (though I have not come across comparitive figures). BTW I don't think any less of my ancestors who took advantage of assistance schemes. They also came out for a better life for their families eg. ag labs in England became farmers here. In several cases they were also religious non-conformists and found more freedom to follow their faith. Regards Steve David Daniell wrote: > Hi Steve, > Are there any published records that (effectively) show the ratio of > assisted to unassisted immigration? > Asking because I am surprised that you say the unassisted would have > been "wealthy". > David > Auckland > > >