From Segregation to Assimilation

‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ A Thematic Study of Policies and Practices in Australia 1800 – 1970

A Report to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts

Celmara Pocock The University of Queensland September 2008

i

Contents Contents.............................................................................................................................................................................i List of Tables....................................................................................................................................................................v List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................................v Preface.............................................................................................................................................................................vii

1.

INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1

Approach...............................................................................................................................................4 Chronologies ....................................................................................................................................................................5 Narrative Construction...................................................................................................................................................5 Identification of sites and locations .............................................................................................................................8

2.

THE HISTORIES .............................................................................................. 9

Segregation ...........................................................................................................................................9 Van Dieman’s Land (Tasmania) .................................................................................................................................10 South Australia...............................................................................................................................................................12 Victoria............................................................................................................................................................................19 New South Wales ..........................................................................................................................................................22 Queensland.....................................................................................................................................................................25 Torres Strait ..............................................................................................................................................................28 Northern Territory........................................................................................................................................................28 Western Australia ..........................................................................................................................................................31 Assimilation ........................................................................................................................................37 Tasmania .........................................................................................................................................................................39 Victoria............................................................................................................................................................................40 New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory .........................................................................................41 Queensland and Torres Strait......................................................................................................................................43 South Australia...............................................................................................................................................................45 Northern Territory........................................................................................................................................................47 Western Australia ..........................................................................................................................................................49

3.

NARRATIVES .................................................................................................. 52

Narratives of Intent.............................................................................................................................52 Segregation Policy .........................................................................................................................................................52 Protection..................................................................................................................................................................52 Conversion................................................................................................................................................................53 Labour........................................................................................................................................................................53 ‘A Dying Race’..........................................................................................................................................................54 Failure ........................................................................................................................................................................54 Assimilation....................................................................................................................................................................55 Assimilation Practices .............................................................................................................................................55 Assimilation Policy ..................................................................................................................................................55 Disruption .................................................................................................................................................................55 Colour ........................................................................................................................................................................56 Coercion ....................................................................................................................................................................56 Deception..................................................................................................................................................................56 Failure ........................................................................................................................................................................57 Narratives of Effect .............................................................................................................................57 Adaptation ......................................................................................................................................................................58

ii

Disadvantage ..................................................................................................................................................................58 Gender.............................................................................................................................................................................58 Institutionalisation.........................................................................................................................................................59 Home...............................................................................................................................................................................59 Protest .............................................................................................................................................................................59 Narratives of Experience ....................................................................................................................60 Administration and Control ........................................................................................................................................60 Hardship .........................................................................................................................................................................61 Loss..................................................................................................................................................................................61 Rejection .........................................................................................................................................................................62 Reunion...........................................................................................................................................................................62 Inequality ........................................................................................................................................................................63 Cross Reference to Narrative Triggers................................................................................................63 Evocative Narratives ...........................................................................................................................64 Being Aboriginal............................................................................................................................................................64 Separation .......................................................................................................................................................................66 Mother & Child .............................................................................................................................................................67 Aboriginal Pride.............................................................................................................................................................68 Aboriginal labour...........................................................................................................................................................68 Colonial Economies......................................................................................................................................................70 Dependency....................................................................................................................................................................70

4.

A NARRATIVE FRAMEWORK .......................................................................71

Control ................................................................................................................................................72 Race ....................................................................................................................................................76 Religion...............................................................................................................................................78 Education............................................................................................................................................79 Economics .......................................................................................................................................... 81

5.

LOCATING HISTORIES AND NARRATIVES ............................................ 84

Places and the Spaces Between...........................................................................................................84 Patterns in Space and Time ................................................................................................................86 Segregation .....................................................................................................................................................................87 Assimilation....................................................................................................................................................................89 Narrative Framework and Places........................................................................................................ 91 Places of Segregation .......................................................................................................................... 91 Tasmania .........................................................................................................................................................................91 Victoria............................................................................................................................................................................92 New South Wales ..........................................................................................................................................................93 Queensland.....................................................................................................................................................................93 South Australia...............................................................................................................................................................94 Northern Territory........................................................................................................................................................95 Western Australia ..........................................................................................................................................................96 Places of Assimilation .........................................................................................................................97 Tasmania .........................................................................................................................................................................97

iii

Victoria............................................................................................................................................................................97 New South Wales and ACT ........................................................................................................................................98 Queensland.....................................................................................................................................................................99 South Australia...............................................................................................................................................................99 Northern Territory..................................................................................................................................................... 100 Western Australia ....................................................................................................................................................... 101

6.

EXEMPLARY PLACES................................................................................... 103

Nineteenth Century Protectorates .................................................................................................... 103 Wybalenna ................................................................................................................................................................... 104 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 105 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 105 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 106 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 106 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 106 Poonindie..................................................................................................................................................................... 107 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 107 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 109 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 109 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 109 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 111 Loddon River .............................................................................................................................................................. 112 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 112 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 112 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 112 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 112 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 113 Protection on the Frontier..................................................................................................................114 Hermannsburg Mission............................................................................................................................................. 114 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 114 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 115 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 115 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 116 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 117 Drysdale River Mission (Kalumburu)..................................................................................................................... 119 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 119 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 119 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 119 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 120 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 120 Moola Bulla ................................................................................................................................................................. 120 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 120 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 121 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 121 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 121 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 122 Coranderrk................................................................................................................................................................... 123 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 124 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 125 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 125 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 125 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 125 Protection in the Twentieth Century................................................................................................. 126 Cummeragunja............................................................................................................................................................ 126 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 127 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 127

iv

Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 127 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 128 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 128 Carrolup Native Settlement...................................................................................................................................... 129 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 129 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 130 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 131 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 131 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 131 Cherbourg (Barambah).............................................................................................................................................. 131 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 131 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 133 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 133 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 133 Palm Island.................................................................................................................................................................. 134 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 134 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 134 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 135 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 135 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 135 From Segregation to Assimilation..................................................................................................... 136 Moore River ................................................................................................................................................................ 136 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 136 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 137 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 137 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 137 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 138 Cootamundra .............................................................................................................................................................. 138 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 138 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 138 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 139 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 139 Kahlin Compound ..................................................................................................................................................... 139 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 139 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 140 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 140 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 141 Assimilation .......................................................................................................................................141 Sister Kate’s ................................................................................................................................................................. 141 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 141 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 142 Religion................................................................................................................................................................... 142 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 142 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 142 Kinchela Boys’ Home................................................................................................................................................ 143 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 143 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 143 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 143 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 143 Lake Tyers ................................................................................................................................................................... 144 Control.................................................................................................................................................................... 144 Race ......................................................................................................................................................................... 144 Education ............................................................................................................................................................... 145 Economics ............................................................................................................................................................. 145 References......................................................................................................................................... 178

v

List of Tables Table 1: Chronological Structures.................................................................................................................. 6 Table 2: Sub-themes – Segregation and Assimilation – Structure ............................................................ 6 Table 3: Evocative Narrative Structures ....................................................................................................... 7 Table 4: Narrative Triggers............................................................................................................................ 64 Table 5: Revised Structure for Narratives in 'From Segregation to Assimilation'................................ 71 Table 6: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Tasmania ...................................................................... 92 Table 7: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Victoria ......................................................................... 92 Table 8: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: New South Wales ....................................................... 93 Table 9: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Queensland .................................................................. 93 Table 10:Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: South Australia........................................................... 94 Table 11: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Northern Territory ................................................... 95 Table 12: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Western Australia ..................................................... 96 Table 13: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Tasmania................................................................... 97 Table 14: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Victoria ..................................................................... 98 Table 15: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: New South Wales & ACT ..................................... 98 Table 16: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Queensland .............................................................. 99 Table 17:Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: South Australia ......................................................... 99 Table 18:Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Northern Territory................................................. 100 Table 19: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Western Australia.................................................. 101

List of Figures Figure 1: Extract from 1937 Commonwealth-State Conference ............................................................ 38 Figure 2: Wybalenna, the Aboriginal settlement, Flinders Island 1847................................................ 104 Figure 3: Residence of the Aborigines, Flinders Island .......................................................................... 105 Figure 4: Shepherd's hut, Wybellinna (Water colour by John Skinner Prout) 1845 .......................... 106 Figure 5: Poonindie Mission Station, Port Lincoln, South Australia 1853.......................................... 107 Figure 6: Entrance to Poonindie Mission ................................................................................................. 108 Figure 7: Twenty children and a pastor, Poonindie Native Mission School. n.d. .............................. 109 Figure 8: Portrait of Nannultera, a young Poonindie cricketer, 1854 .................................................. 110 Figure 9: Native mission station, South Australia, ca. 1875................................................................... 111 Figure 10: Aboriginal farmers at Parker's Protectorate, Mt. Franklin ca. 1858................................... 113 Figure 11: Aboriginals' farm near Mount Franklin ca. 1858 .................................................................. 114 Figure 12: Gardens at Hermannsburg Mission, 1900 ............................................................................. 115 Figure 13: Hermannsburg Mission Church, 1932 ...................................................................................116 Figure 14: Hermannsburg Native School, 1920....................................................................................... 116 Figure 15: School Children at Hermannsburg Mission 1955................................................................. 117 Figure 16: Hermannburg Mission Milkmaids 1920/21 .......................................................................... 117 Figure 17: Hermannsburg Mission Stockman and his horse ca. 1900 ................................................. 118 Figure 18: Portrait of Albert Namatjira at Hermannsburg Mission, 1946/47 .................................... 118 Figure 19: Aboriginal people in the Mission Yard, Drysdale River Benedictine Mission, 1919 ...... 120 Figure 20: School at Moola Bulla Station 1952........................................................................................ 122 Figure 21: School at Moola Bulla Station 1952........................................................................................ 122 Figure 22: Aboriginal Children branding cattle at Moola Bulla, ca.1910 ............................................. 123 Figure 23: Dairy herd and milkers at Coranderrk, 1900 ......................................................................... 124 Figure 24: Cummergunja 1884 (From Photograph Album of Nicholas Caire).................................. 127 Figure 25: Aborigines Welfare Board, tour of south & western NSW 1963 ...................................... 128 Figure 26: Cummeragunja Government Mission: Aboriginal women and girlsknitting socks, jumpers and balaclavas for the war effort................................................................................................. 129 Figure 27: Aboriginal Children at Carrolup, ca. 1940 ............................................................................. 130 Figure 28: Womens Quarters at Barambah Settlement, 1911 ............................................................... 132 Figure 29: Boys Quarters at Barambah, 1911........................................................................................... 133

vi

Figure 30: Local Church on Palm Island, ca. 1932.................................................................................. 135 Figure 31: Tourists arriving at the Palm Island Settlement ca. 1940 .................................................... 136 Figure 32: Staff and children at Moore River Native Settlment ca. 1930 ............................................ 137 Figure 33: Dormitory at Cootamundra, n.d.............................................................................................. 138 Figure 34: Children at the Kahlin Compound, ca. 1930......................................................................... 140 Figure 35: Fundraising fete for Sister Kate's, 1945.................................................................................. 142 Figure 36: Aboriginal boys on a tractor at Kinchela, ca. 1959............................................................... 144 Figure 37: State School at Lake Tyers ca. 1938........................................................................................ 145

vii

Preface There is language in this report which is highly offensive to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Terms such as ‘half-caste’, ‘quadroon’, ‘full blood’ and other descriptors that distinguish Aboriginal people on the basis of genetics rather than culture, are all unacceptable today. The terms are used in this report in their historic context to illustrate the discrimination endured by Aboriginal people, and show how poorly settlers and administrators have understood Aboriginal people and culture. No offense is intended to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and wherever possible alternative expressions are used. The images used in this report are approved for use in research. If they are to be reproduced in a publication, the holding institution will need to be approached for copyright permission and reproduction fees. The report would not have been possible without the generous support of the project officers, Linda Baulch and David Collett. Linda made available her previous extensive research on known and listed missions and reserves in Australia. This has been an invaluable resource in identifying sites of significance. I would like to thank both Linda and David for their patience and free discussion.

1. Introduction The theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ highlights the continuous process of colonial intervention in Aboriginal people’s lives from the earliest colonial settlements to the present day. The systematic application of segregation and assimilation policies led to increased levels of control over Aboriginal people through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The formal policies were abandoned in the later part of the twentieth century, but the legacies and scars of these practices remain central in Aboriginal stories and circumstances. This highly significant theme encompasses the most painful episodes in Aboriginal history, and extends into every jurisdiction in Australia. The significance and scope of the theme are daunting. The title of the theme suggests a linear progression from one policy to another. Segregation policy and practice certainly provided a foundation for the emergence of assimilation which marked a significant shift in official position. However, the practices and experiences of people under these policies are more intertwined than might be assumed. The specific policies may have had different stated aims, but the underlying philosophies and practices, especially as they translate into experiences of Aboriginal people, share some broad similarities. Under both segregationist and assimilationist policies, Aboriginal people were isolated from wider society, and in both eras Aboriginal peoples’ lives were highly regulated and controlled. Both had the aim of permanently removing Aboriginal people and culture from Australian society. The move from one policy to another was shaped by a number of evolving practices rather than a simple linear progression. Segregation and assimilation policies are based on profound misunderstandings of Aboriginal culture and society. There is a sense throughout that Aboriginality can be ameliorated, changed or eradicated. This began with very early colonial ideas of recognising Aboriginal people as equal, though inferior, British citizens who could be ‘civilised’ by becoming Christian, literate agriculturalists. Aboriginal people demonstrated an ability to quickly acquire new language, cultural skills and literacy. But they did not readily replace their own beliefs, kinship, and land systems with these new ones. They took advantage of new opportunities, but rejected many British ways of life in favour of continuing their own cultural practices or their own version of new cultural practices. The idea that Aboriginal ways of life could be replaced with European practices persisted and became an especially strong trope in official responses to a growing population of people of mixed descent. Under assimilationist policies skin colour rather than culture emerged as a key measure of the potential to integrate Aboriginal people into the wider community. Nevertheless it was assumed that this physical integration would be accompanied by an adoption of European ways of life and an abandonment of Aboriginal association and practices. Official definitions of Aboriginality fluctuated throughout history even if public perception remained the same. Such redefinitions were often motivated by economics and a desire to reduce expenditure on Aboriginal matters. For instance, Aboriginal people of mixed descent were deliberately excluded from definitions of Aboriginality when reserves became expensive to maintain. In almost all instances these policies and the associated practices failed. This was due, in no small part, to the nature of the underlying Aboriginal-settler relations. Some of the earliest segregationist measures failed because Aboriginal people were drawn to earn money or trade goods in the settlements rather than remaining with the strictures, hard work and 1

limited provisions of mission life. In the earliest colonies, Aboriginal people were attracted to settlements and were tolerated as a novelty. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people also formed sexual relationships, but these were seldom sanctioned. In other colonial settings extreme violence was almost immediate as in the case of Moreton Bay where kidnapping of women and children and theft of Aboriginal belongings accompanied rapid colonial expansion. Aboriginal reprisals – most commonly direct retaliation for loss of land and resources, cultural transgressions and acts of brutality on the part of settlers – contributed to escalating violence outside the settlements. Colonists, particularly in remote areas, came to fear Aboriginal people and this provided the basis of a broader intolerance. Further hostility towards Aboriginal people stemmed from perceptions of public expenditure. The fragility of early colonial economies and the scarcity of supplies made colonist resentful of money spent on reserves and missions, and rations distributed to Aboriginal people. Rather than recognising this as a poor compensation for the loss of their former livelihoods, settlers saw this as unearned upkeep. Similarly reserves were not recognised as the pitiful remnants of once extensive Aboriginal lands, but were jealously regarded as an allocation of fertile and desirable agricultural land to Aboriginal people at the expense of colonists. There was a further apprehension that these provisions were ‘given’ to a people who could or would not work, a misapprehension that persists to the present day. This belies the extensive exploitation of Aboriginal labour on reserves and missions throughout times of segregation and assimilation. Missions, reserves and education were all oriented towards making Aboriginal people ‘useful’. Under the guise of providing education, many Aboriginal children were taken from their families and institutionalised. The ‘education’ that they received was inevitably religious instruction, while training provided skills for menial tasks. All was undertaken under strict routines. The tasks were also gendered with girls learning to wash, clean and sew and boys learning agricultural skills, with the intention of placing them in domestic service or sending them out to work as agricultural labourers. Aboriginal people were thus used to produce many goods and resources and provided crucial services in early colonies, but rather than being paid in wages, they were provided with rations. Aboriginal employment outside of these systems was restricted by a number of official systems, but even more significantly a general mistrust and antipathy in wider society. Consequently Aboriginal people were denied the right to work, marry or be educated alongside nonAboriginal people. Occasionally an external event or circumstance would change this relationship. During the 1850s Victorian goldrush and World War II labour shortages ensured that Aboriginal people could command higher wages. On the whole, however, Aboriginal labour was exploited and when labour shortages lessened Aboriginal people were the first to lose their jobs. The value of Aboriginal labour is attested by the protests of pastoralists objecting to the removal of people from stations under policies of segregation. This was particularly the case on pastoral stations of the Northern Territory. While it may appear from the intention and title of the policies that under one Aboriginal people were separated from wider society and under the other they were integrated and accepted into the community, this was clearly not the case. During segregation era, many Aboriginal people managed to negotiate a place in wider society. This was particularly the case for people of mixed descent, some of whom chose to live as non-Aboriginal people rather than be subjected to the intrusions and controls imposed by discriminatory legislation and administration. These individuals assimilated into the general public and effectively disappeared from view. Likewise, under the policies of assimilation children

2

were effectively institutionalised and removed from both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal society where they entered a kind of social and cultural void. Aboriginal peoples’ connection with kin and country were severely disrupted under the auspices of both systems. The deliberate efforts by administration sought to separate people from country, deliberately establishing reserves outside traditional boundaries of the occupants and splitting family groups. And even those escaping these official sanctions – Aboriginal people who chose to ‘disappear’ into mainstream society – suffered the loss of family, culture and country. Despite the highly regulated nature of Aboriginal peoples’ lives, the informality of many practices meant that records were not always kept. For example, the removal and adoption of Aboriginal children was often orchestrated by nongovernment organisations and through private arrangements. This made it very difficult to track where children came from or where they went. This was compounded when children were moved multiple times. Aboriginal people were themselves restricted in their movements, and authorities acted to control and restrict where and when Aboriginal people could live, work and travel. Children were adopted interstate at a time when such movements were denied to adults and restricted by permit systems, further severing family connections. The movement of Aboriginal people from one locality to another is a characteristic of life on reserves and missions from the earliest times. There are instances where Aboriginal people resisted imposed relocations. The people of Framlingham provide an excellent example of this kind of resistance, initially determining where they would settle, refusing to be moved to another reserve and remaining on the mission after its closure. Fringe camps are themselves an artefact of resistance. When Aboriginal people were excluded from reserves, missions or towns they established their own camps on the outskirts to ensure that they remained connected to family and place. Despite the overlap between the practices and outcomes of the two policies, they were nevertheless distinct in intention. The policy of segregating Aboriginal people on reserves was a very early strategy deployed to protect Aboriginal people from the vices of European society. For example, in Victoria mission controlled reserves were established at the time of European settlement and continued until the 1880s. The policy of ‘protection’ was aimed at Aboriginal people of full-descent. There was an increasing view through the nineteenth century that Aboriginal people – defined in this way – were a doomed people who would eventually cease to exist. Aboriginal people of full descent were to be quarantined from society. The policy failed to recognise a growing population of mixed-descent Aboriginal people throughout Australia who developed new and continued existing Aboriginal traditions. To a large extent the assimilation policy was a response to, and targeted specifically at, this group. This was a much more aggressive strategy to destroy Aboriginal culture and society. A number of assimilationist practices and policies were adopted long before a formal policy of assimilation was proposed by the Commonwealth or adopted by the states and territories in the middle of the twentieth century. The formalisation of the policy however, aimed to disappear the Aboriginal peoples, not simply by waiting for the processes of gradual extinguishment that is seen in segregationist policies, but the active and deliberate cultural and biological amelioration of Aboriginality.

3

Approach The Heritage Division of the Department of Environment, Water and Heritage (DEWAH) commissioned this project to assist in understanding how the theme, ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’, can be represented through heritage sites. More particularly, the Department wished to establish a context for the identification and assessment of places of national significance. The project brief stipulated that the study comprise three stages: 1. production of a narrative that describes the history of administration of Indigenous people in Australia though the policies and practices of segregation and assimilation between 1800 and 1970. 2. research and discuss the agreed stories relating to the broader theme, with a focus on important places that are part of each story. 3. identify the places that best demonstrate aspects of the story and provide an analysis of why each place was selected…. through a process of comparative analysis. The approach suggested by the brief and implemented for this study, marks a subtle but important distinction from many heritage assessments. The common practice in significance assessment is to commence with known heritage sites or site types and to compare them in relation to one another. This more conventional approach depends of previously established information and associated assumptions about the types of sites that may be relevant to a topic. It also prejudges the significance of particular sites and the theme becomes a secondary consideration. In particular assessments of significance tend to focus on sites with visually accessible physical attributes.1 The approach taken in this study first identifies the narratives which make up the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. It attempts a more objective approach, or failing objectivity at least attempts to create a transparency in the decision making. By first focusing on narratives rather than sites, the approach makes it possible for heritage sites with less obvious or less known qualities to be recognised as significant. Rather than preselecting a number of recognised heritage sites, the project explores the stories associated with the theme. Through association with the key stories particular localities and sites emerge as significant. The focus on narratives also offers an alternative approach to decisions about significance. By shifting the focus of assessment to the dynamic story, heritage managers can refocus their decisions about significance. The narrative approach also promises a more engaging interpretation of significant sites, which in turn reaches a more diverse audience.

See Denis Byrne, Helen Brayshaw, and Tracy Ireland, Social Significance: A Discussion Paper (Sydney: Research Unit, Cultural Heritage Division, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001), Chris Johnston, What Is Social Significance? A Discussion Paper, Technical Publication Series No. 3 (Canberra: Australian Heritage Commission, 1992), Celmara Pocock, "Sense Matters: Aesthetic Values of the Great Barrier Reef," International Journal of Heritage Studies 8, no. 4 (2002), Celmara Pocock, "Identifying Social Values in Archival Sources: Change, Continuity and Invention in Tourist Experiences of the Great Barrier Reef," in The Changing Coast, ed. Veloso Gomes, Taveira Pinto, and Luciana das Neves (Porto: Eurocoast/EUCC, 2002). 1

4

The project was undertaken through a Literature Review of published sources. This initially focused on unravelling the complexity of jurisdictions, events, laws, policies and chronologies that constitute the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ through the development of a timeline (Attachment 1). The literature was further analysed to identify evocative aspects of the histories, to ensure that the stories chosen to illustrate the theme would be engaging and thought-provoking. Together these elements were cross-referenced to produce a narrative framework. Chronologies The biggest challenge of identifying narratives relevant to the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ is the scale and fragmented nature of this history. There are multiple and changing jurisdictions and responsibilities for these policies and practices across Australia. Furthermore, there is a high degree of variation in the level and type of research that has been conducted on related topics for different regions of Australia, and contradictions and disagreements about the timing of events and practices. This makes it potentially difficult to identify national themes or commonalities. This task would be near impossible if it weren’t for a number of recent publications that document and interpret the fragmented historical sources relevant to the theme. There is some variation in the focus on these studies and the level of information available for each state, territory or region in Australia. For instance there are recent comprehensive histories for Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales, Tasmania and Western Australia, but more dated or less comprehensive studies for South Australia, and the Northern Territory.2 There are a number of websites that also contribute to this task. However, as with many web based sources, these have to be cross-checked for reliability. Despite some limitations these secondary sources are available to chronicle the events, legislation, and policies of each jurisdiction. This makes it possible to begin to develop a national picture. These are presented as summary histories in Section 2 and a timeline at Attachment 1.

Narrative Construction The thematic study has a primary goal of finding patterns that reflect common experiences and stories of Aboriginal people under the policies and practices of segregation and Some recent comprehensive histories include Richard Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800 (Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005), Anna Doukakis, The Aboriginal People, Parliament And "Protection" In New South Wales, 1856-1916 (Annandale, N.S.W.: The Federation Press, 2006), Anna Haebich, For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 1900-1940, 2nd ed. (Nedlands, W.A.: University of Western Australia Press for the Charles and Joy Staples South West Region Publications Fund, 1992), Anna Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000 (Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2000), Anna Haebich, Spinning the Dream: Assimilation in Australia 1950-1970 (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Press, 2008), Gordon Reid, 'That Unhappy Race': Queensland and the Aboriginal Problem 1838-1901 (Kew, Vic.: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2006), Henry Reynolds, Fate of a Free People (Ringwood, Vic.: Penguin Books Australia, 1995), Henry Reynolds, Nowhere People (Camberwell, Vic.: Penguin, 2005), Lyndall Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 2nd ed. (St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin, 1996). 2

5

assimilation. The first stage of the project therefore set out to identify the narratives that illustrate the theme. This aimed to identify central or standard narratives, but also to engage audiences in new ways. The narrative approach could be described as historical rather than cultural materialist. However, traditional histories, like traditional heritage themes, can suffer from conventions and structures that fail to be engaging. The construction of narratives was therefore considered a key part of the study. Traditional narrative structures are most commonly dictated by chronologies. This traditional structure is appealing because it is familiar, relatively simple and sequentially builds on previously presented knowledge. For these reasons too, it fails to offer a new approach and can therefore be established, known, and even boring (Table 1). But chronological structure is also difficult to use in this project because the theme is neither linear nor neatly sequential. Furthermore, chronologies which follow known timeframes privilege recorded histories and marginalise undocumented highly important Aboriginal experiences. An alternative familiar structure is to sub-divide the existing theme into its sub-components, creating two sub-themes, namely Segregation and Assimilation (Table 2). The advantage of this is that it becomes more manageable to describe and present the range of events, policies and practices. However, this division also undermines the interrelated nature of the two policies and fails to demonstrate the shared narratives that are central to the overall theme. It fails to reduce the complexity of jurisdiction, era and spatial patterns. Table 1: Chronological Structures Advantages

Disadvantages

Familiar to users Shows origin of ideas Easy to understand Ensures all key practices are included

Boring /too familiar Can be complex to follow No challenge Assumes a simple linear development Lengthy Gives precedent to non-Aboriginal history

Table 2: Sub-themes – Segregation and Assimilation – Structure Advantages

Disadvantages

Demonstrates complexity of the themes (Segregation and Assimilation) Familiar – assumptions about what the terms mean Can be chronological or non-chronological

Separates the 2 policies Familiarity brings assumptions about what is comprised by the terms mean Fails to recognise common experiences under both policies.

For this reason, the project looked to more evocative and provocative thematic structures. While these can be challenging to heritage practitioners who are unfamiliar with them, they engage a diversity of audiences in a personal and provocative way. They are also highly flexible and capable of adapting to, and reflecting a diversity of views, time spans and locations (Table 3). The Eternity exhibition at the National Museum of Australia represents

6

a standard social history of Australia according to ten overarching emotive themes.3 The exhibition has proved enormously successful in engaging a diversity of audiences and challenging assumptions about the past. The themes have been expanded further in a heritage tourism context to improve people’s engagement and appreciation of heritage attractions.4 And evocative themes are currently being trialled in the ‘Living Memory Project’ being conducted by the University of Queensland and the University of Tasmania. Rather than using themes to organise an existing suite of histories or stories, the Living Memory Project proposes to use the terms as ‘narrative triggers’ to invoke more engaging storytelling. The idea is that the same event or sequence of events might be told through different emotive or evocative lenses to produce different stories about the same event or place. Unlike the heritage tourism framework5 which includes a large number of evocative themes, the narrative triggers have refocused on the ten themes initially proposed for the Eternity exhibition.6 One of the principle reasons for this decision is that terms developed for a specific site run the risk of re-establishing existing assumptions and modes of conceiving the site. Similarly, the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ is associated with a number of myths and assumptions about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and Australian colonisation. A fresh approach can help to avoid such stereotypes. Table 3: Evocative Narrative Structures Advantages Engages personally and provocatively. Has scope to include a diversity of views, eras, policies, locations, etc.

Disadvantages Unfamiliar for users, especially heritage practitioners Can overlook key events.

The method for the study thus deliberately commenced with an analysis of experiences and narratives rather than more conventional history and heritage studies. It was important, however, to ensure that key elements of the histories were not overlooked. The complexity of the histories and the particularities of regional variation, made it necessary to establish a chronology. In the first instance this was developed as a timeline (Attachment 1), and additional summary histories are provided in Section 2 to contextualise the key events, laws, policies and individuals who impacted on Aboriginal lives throughout this period. The first reading of the literature was used to produce a suite of narratives that illustrated the theme. A draft framework was presented to the Department of Environment, Water and Heritage for discussion, and a final narrative structure was agreed before the next stage of the project was undertaken.

Marion K. Stell, Eternity: Stories from the Emotional Heart of Australia (Canberra: National Museum of Australia, 2001). 4 Marion K. Stell, Celmara Pocock, and Roy Ballantyne, Essential Australia: Towards a Thematic Framework for the Interpretation of Cultural Heritage Sites in Tourism (Griffith University: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, 2008). 5 Ibid. 6 The ten eternity themes are Chance, Devotion, Fear, Hope, Joy, Loneliness, Mystery, Passion, Separation and Thrill. Stell, Eternity: Stories from the Emotional Heart of Australia. 3

7

Identification of sites and locations The second stage of the project set about identifying sites and locations where the agreed stories were centred. This phase of the study was greatly assisted by a Department report on related site types listed in heritage registers in Australia.7 The list of sites and locations was cross-referenced to the narrative framework to identify places capable of illustrating aspects of the broader narratives. The analysis of place-based narratives aimed to balance themes and narratives common throughout Australia with those that illustrate particular or unique aspects of policy and practice. The final stage of the project outlines the places that are best able to demonstrate core narratives and critical aspects of the story. Building on the comparison of sites it investigates the capacity of particular sites to demonstrate multiple aspects of the story, unique aspect(s) of the story, stories shared across space and time, regional and cultural diversity, various administrative and policy frameworks, and chronological change and continuity. This material is presented in Section 6. It comprises descriptions, histories and narratives of heritage sites that are best able to illustrate the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’.

Linda Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia," in Draft study for the Australian Heritage Commission (Canberra: 2004).

7

8

2. The Histories The histories that inform the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ are the histories of European intervention in Aboriginal peoples’ lives since invasion. As such the theme reflects or parallels all Aboriginal histories from the late eighteenth century to the late twentieth century. This comprises a complex history of different peoples, jurisdictions, events and responses. This section provides a brief history of the events and chronologies relating to colonial and state administration of Aboriginal people. The extensive, varied and fluid administration of Aboriginal people throughout Australia in the nineteenth and twentieth century makes a complex matrix for the study. There were specific laws and policies within each colony or state, and considerable regional and local variation in their implementation and adaptation. While there are records of official policies and laws, the way in which these were put into practice was not always consistent. There was a high degree of flexibility in how laws and policies were implemented. Many laws concerning Aboriginal people were deliberately broad with a capacity and authority to develop and alter any policies to suit administrative needs. This allowed a number of practices to be developed without attracting the scrutiny and discussion that usually accompanied the drafting of legislation. The responses of Aboriginal people to these laws and policies, like many aspects of early Aboriginal history, are poorly documented. This is particularly the case for the nineteenth century. The generation of oral histories in the later part of the twentieth century have revealed many more personal testimonies from Aboriginal people, and there are particularly strong voices from those affected by policies of assimilation. This is the case especially for the events associated with the removal of children and the testimony of Aboriginal people as part of the national inquiry into the stolen generation.8 There is no neat chronology of events relating to the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. Each jurisdiction developed its own models and practices, and while many ideas were shared across administrations, the implementation of particular practices was not uniform and occurred at different times in different regions. As a starting point, however, this section provides a brief outline of the key events, laws, policies and practices that were implemented in each of the colonies and states. Attachment 1 provides a timeline or chronology of these events so that it is possible to cross-reference developments in time and space.

Segregation Segregation of Aboriginal people from settler society was often undertaken in the name of protection. It was often inferred that Aboriginal people, as an inferior and vulnerable

National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," (Sydney, N.S.W.: Commonwealth of Australia, 1997).

8

9

group, required protection from the less desirable aspects of settler society such as prostitution and alcohol. However, the practice of segregating Aboriginal people onto small parcels of land simultaneously served to protect settlers who might otherwise have encountered hostile Aboriginal people defending their land. So while the rationale for segregation was the protection of Aboriginal people, it in fact served to smooth the way for the dispossession of Aboriginal land by affording protection to colonial expansion.

Van Dieman’s Land (Tasmania) The establishment of a penal settlement in Van Diemen’s Land in 1803 triggered a violent and protracted conflict between the Aboriginal owners and the newly arrived settlers. The Tasmanian Aborigines waged a war against the invaders and created a high level of fear in the colony. This lasted for more than 30 years, but it was the period known as the ‘Black War’ – a time of severe conflict in the 1820s and 1830s – that led to an attempt to physically exterminate and remove Aboriginal people from the island. The particular set of events shaped the history of Aboriginal people in Van Diemen’s Land and Aboriginalsettler relations in the other Australian colonies.9 Colonel George Arthur was Governor of the penal settlement from 1824 to 1836 and during his administration he sought both military and conciliatory solutions to the conflict with Aborigines. In 1828 he proposed the establishment of an Aboriginal reserve on the then remote north-east coast, and declared a state of martial law and approved ‘roving parties’ to scour the bush for Aboriginal people. Two years later he authorised the infamous ‘Back Line’; a large scale, quasi-military operation that sought to remove Aboriginal people from the ‘settled districts’. Arthur simultaneously attempted to negotiate a settlement to the Black War in 1830 when he appointed George Augustus Robinson to work with small groups of Aboriginal people to bring in Aboriginal people who remained in the remote west and northwest of the island. Robinson first arrived at the ration station on Bruny Island in 1829 where he attempted to establish an Aboriginal settlement with the approval of Arthur. The settlement soon failed when a number of Aboriginal people became sick and died, and other Aborigines refused to stay on. Robinson consequently formulated the idea of using the Bruny Island Aboriginal people to negotiate with Aborigines from other areas and help him to bring them in. From 1830 to 1834 Robinson made six expeditions. He was assisted by twenty-seven Aboriginal people who provided environmental and cultural expertise to assist in traversing difficult terrain and negotiating with survivors.10 Martial law was eventually revoked in 1832, by which time the Black War had claimed the lives of many settlers and Aboriginal people. But for Aboriginal people their losses were compounded by disease and starvation. It is estimated that only 400 Aborigines survived

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, Reynolds, Fate of a Free People, Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 10 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 73, Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 110-12. 9

10

and they had little option but to negotiate with Robinson. He, in turn, entered into a form of treaty with the survivors. Robinson agreed that in return for moving to a settlement, Aboriginal people would be provided with food, clothing and shelter. Most significantly he assured Aboriginal people that their cultural traditions would be respected and that they could regularly visit their homelands. In 1833 more than two-hundred survivors of the Black War were relocated to Wybalenna on Flinders Island off the northeast coast of Tasmania. The scheme was guided by Robinson’s ‘General Plan’ from 1829, and aimed to remodel and restructure Tasmanian Aboriginal people to make them more like Europeans through the principles of ‘civilisation’ and Christianity. The general idea was to create a small village where Aboriginal people would live together as Christian peasants. The village would include a mission house; separate huts for single and married people on fenced allotments; a school that also served as a church; and a number of gardens. Aboriginal people would simultaneously be trained in ‘habits of industry’ through building their own huts and gardens and cooking food in a European way. They would also learn Christianity through worship and be educated in schools in the English language.11 Robinson abandoned the settlement to take up an appointment as Protector in the Victorian colony in 1838. In the years that followed there were a number of poor appointments and conditions on the settlement deteriorated. Aboriginal mortality was high and births were few. When Wybalenna closed in 1847 only forty-six Aboriginal people survived on the settlement. The adults were all moved to Oyster Cove on the Tasmanian mainland. The site, previously a female penitentiary, was chosen for its relative proximity to Hobart which made it more economical to service. Governor Denison ordered the immediate removal of all children to the Orphan School in Hobart or into ‘supervised’ employment. The idea was that Aboriginal children would be trained to be part of colonial society rather than remain part of a segregated Aboriginal society. For the remainder of the Aboriginal people, Denison envisaged that they would eventually die and the institution would be closed. He referred to the adult population as elderly when in fact the adults were only between 21 and 48 years of age. These ideas contributed directly to the theory of the ‘Dying Race’ that was becoming popular about Tasmanian Aborigines, and justified minimal expenditure on the Oyster Cove establishment.12 This led to the myth that Truganini was the ‘last Tasmania Aboriginal’; an idea that has had devastating impacts for the surviving Aboriginal people. In parallel with the events at Wybalenna and Oyster Cove, there was a growing population of Aboriginal children on the Bass Strait islands who were the descendents of sealers and Aboriginal women. The authorities disregarded their Aboriginal identity and simply referred to this group as ‘islanders’. However, this was an important cultural group who developed hybrid culture and lifestyle derived from both Aboriginal and European traditions. They continued to hunt and gather for traditional foods, trade goods and use Aboriginal health remedies. Their religious beliefs incorporated both Aboriginal and Christian traditions; they participated in legal marriage and baptism. They gardened and farmed and built boats. This was a healthy and growing population. However, their seminomadic lifestyle brought them into physical conflict with agriculturalists and pastoralists. There was further opposition from the government which wanted them to be settled agriculturalists. At the same time, however the government refused to provide services to

11 12

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 73, Reynolds, Fate of a Free People. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 122-23.

11

the islanders and left them in a state of extreme poverty and thus open to criticism for their standard of living, including their care of children.13 Ultimately the expansion of white settlement on the island forced the Aboriginal people from the hunting grounds and mutton-bird rookeries that were central to their livelihood. They were forced to find new ways to survive. In 1881 a 6,000 acre reserve was established for mutton-birding on Cape Barren Island. From this time, the government and the church intervened further to ‘civilise’ and control the Tasmanian Aborigines. Families were corralled in a small village on the reserve where they were to become settled farmers even though they were primarily hunters and sailors. The islanders had little alternative as land became less and less accessible. By 1896 more than 100 people were living in the Cape Barren Island settlement which included a post office, school and church. The teacher at the school and the police were government representatives on the island and were responsible for strict control and enforced change. In at least one incident the teacher directly threatened a group of Aboriginal people. After his resignation the islanders were determined to gain control over their lives and formed an association and newspaper. Both the government and church actively opposed these initiatives and they failed to thrive. Further restrictions were placed on mutton birding and other aspects of the islander culture, and by the end of the nineteenth century strong rifts had developed between the church and the community.14 Officials continued to treat the island Aboriginal people ambiguously, failing to recognise them as either Aboriginal or European. The government continued to pressure the community to become more like colonial society and in 1912 the Cape Barren Island Reserve Act 1912 determined that Aboriginal people would forfeit their rights to occupy land if they failed to construct dwellings and cultivate land. However, for the most part, Tasmania portrayed itself as a jurisdiction without an Aboriginal population. This allowed the government to ignore any responsibilities for policy, legislation and expenditure to assist Aboriginal people or to recognise their status as the dispossessed owners of the land. South Australia The colonies of southern Australia were proclaimed in 1834, and the Board of Colonization Commissioners had the power to declare all land as publicly available for purchase by British subjects. Humanitarian groups protested. In April 1835 the Colonial Secretary Charles Grant who later became Lord Glenelg, requested that the rights of Aboriginal people be protected. The Colonial Office wished to limit the purchase of land to those areas which could be shown to be unoccupied. Glenelg further suggested the need for a ‘Protector of Aborigines’ and a scheme for the purchase of Aboriginal land. Despite these early good intentions, the Colonization Commissioners were determined to protect the colonial economy. While they agreed to protect Aborigines from violence and to provide subsistence, shelter, education and Christian teaching, they took steps to ensure that all land was available for sale regardless of Aboriginal ownership and occupation.15 In

Ibid., 126-27, Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 222-24. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 128-29. 15 John Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," in The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, ed. Eric Richards (South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986), 284-85. 13 14

12

contradiction with Lord Glenelg’s wish to protect existing rights of Aboriginal people, the emphasis of the officials was on equality under British law. This together with the creation of native schools and Christian indoctrination was held to have a ‘civilising’ effect that would see Aboriginal people entitled to the same rights as British subjects.16 Summers suggests that race relations were nevertheless reasonable amicable in the early colony. He attributes this to a confluence of factors including the orderly nature of the colony, the absence of convicts and the early depopulation of the region through diseases like smallpox. In these early years Aborigines camped around Adelaide and supplemented their traditional resources with colonial goods. Apart from the provision of blankets and rations, little official intervention took place.17 In 1832 the Governor of Van Diemen’s Land had recommended a model plan for British colonies to the colonial office. This included the removal of Aboriginal people from traditional environments by establishing a treaty to take Aboriginal land in return for the creation of reserves or protectorates. As a consequence, Hindmarsh was instructed to establish a treaty in South Australia but this never eventuated.18 However, South Australia did establish a Protector as one of the first colonial positions. George Augustus Robinson was initially offered the position but later declined the offer. Three interim protectors were appointed to fill the position before Matthew Moorhouse took it up in June 1839.19 By this time it was apparent that Aboriginal-settler relations would not remain harmonious. Increasingly settlers from Melbourne and Sydney disturbed Aboriginal life and the spread of farming and pastoral activity displaced Aboriginal people and deprived them of a livelihood. In April 1839 a shepherd was speared seven miles from Adelaide on the Torrens. The Governor ordered all food and supplies be withheld from Aboriginal people until the offender was given up. But later that month three other shepherds were speared and public concern intensified. The Protector was criticised for failing to control the Aborigines. Conflict in the colony began to rise. Two critical events – the massacre of twenty-six shipwreck survivors in 1830 and an attack on an overland party near Rufus River in 1841 triggered a series of reprisals. In the first incident two Aboriginal men were hanged despite a judge ruling that they could not be tried. A police party was initially sent to investigate the Rufus River incident – just inside the New South Wales Border – but when Governor Grey recalled the party a private expedition of fourteen colonists decided to settle the situation themselves. One settler was wounded and five Aborigines killed.20 Violence continued to escalate in the region and eventually Governor Grey dispatched the Police Commissioner and the Protector of Aborigines to seek a lawful solution. Grey urged restraint and Moorhouse was instructed to establish friendly relations with Aboriginal people. But when the party encountered a group of 300 Aborigines a violent exchange ended in the killing of at least five Aborigines and the wounding of another ten. A further conflict led to more than thirty Aborigines being killed. Moorhouse claimed to have acted in self-defence. Not all agreed, and a local newspaper reported that:

Ibid., 287. Ibid. 18 Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 176-77. 19 Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 288. 20 Ibid., 291-92. 16 17

13

It is very plain that Mr. Moorhouse cannot act as Protector, for it was under his protection they were shot down by dozens, and by his own showing, before they had thrown a spear or committed a single offensive act in his presence. Register, 18 September 184121 Moorhouse, nevertheless recognised in his report to Grey that the hostilities had been provoked by the treatment of Aboriginal women by settlers.22 These were the first notable conflicts between settlers and Aborigines in South Australia, but the occurrences increased as the settlement expanded beyond Adelaide. Over the next ten years a number of attacks on settler property occurred intermittently in the Eyre Peninsula region and around Port Lincoln. While no large scale operations were mounted against Aborigines, settlers and police operated their own punitive expeditions and led to the missionary Schurmann’s complaints about the rising atrocities. Violence on the southeast frontier lasted from 1843 to 1848 and the instances of poisoning and other killings of Aboriginal people were underreported.23 After the Rufus River incident, the Governor developed a plan to pacify Aboriginal people of the Murray district through a system of rations. A ration depot and government station was established at Moorundie in 1841. Flour was provided in exchange for ending attacks on settlers. Aboriginal people were also offered additional earnings in return for labour. The scheme was thought to be successful when there were no further attacks on Europeans and in 1844 the district was described as ‘peaceful and orderly’. A similar, but less successful arrangement was attempted at Port Lincoln. The number of ration stations increased from fourteen in 1860 to sixty-one in 1867, and forty-eight of these still existed at the turn of the century. They functioned to draw Aboriginal people away from disputed land. They also created a level of dependence that allowed authorities to exercise control over Aboriginal people through the distribution or deprivation of food. These depots later became an essential element in the administration of segregation and protection policies.24 While the frontier regions continued to be violent, the Aboriginal people living in Adelaide suffered increased degradation and were forced to beg and live off charity. A newspaper, the Southern Australian, suggested that the Aboriginal people were entitled to ‘civilization, food, and protection’ and appealed to the Protector and other officials to meet these aims.25 The initial plan had been that through education, Christianity and British justice, Aborigines would be civilised and take up a rightful place in settler society. As in other parts of Australia, these objectives rested on an assumption that Aboriginal people would recognise the benefits of such a change and would willingly cooperate. And it relied on settler society welcoming and accepting Aboriginal people. They failed to recognise the lack

Ibid., 293. Ibid., 293-94. 23 Ibid., 294-95. 24 Ibid., 300-01, Government of South Australia. "Aborigines and Europeans." In Atlas South Australia. (Place Published: Government of South Australia, 2000-2008), http://www.atlas.sa.gov.au/go/home. 25 Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 295. 21 22

14

of interest from Aboriginal people and settler unwillingness to accept Aboriginal people as political, social or economic equals.26 Earlier, in 1838, an Aboriginal reserve known as the Native Location was established on the northern side of the Torrens. Two Lutheran missionaries, C.G. Teichelmann and C.W. Schurmann, arrived at the mission to teach religion and secular studies in the local Aboriginal language. They studied the Kaurna language and in 1839 gained the approval of the Protector to teach in the language when Schurmann was appointed teacher at the school for Aboriginal children at the Native Location. The two missionaries published a grammar and vocabulary of the Kaurna in 1840. However, settlers were critical of the approach and saw the school as a waste of time. The Protector had concerns about the attendance rates and the lack of parental cooperation. Moorhouse wished to induce attendance through the distribution of food and clothing but was undermined by settlers who paid Aboriginal people with food in return for tasks. The school was generally thought to be unsuccessful in ‘domesticating’ Aboriginal children, and while they had learnt to read and write, they had not taking up trades. The problem according to the Protector Moorhouse was the influence of parents. In 1840 he suggested that removing children from parental influence result in greater success. He also suggested that marrying Aboriginal girls to suitable partners would prevent them from returning to their tribes. Neither suggestion was immediately acted upon. In 1842 children from the Murray area were brought to the school, but the inter-group friction reduced attendance further. In 1843 the school became a boarding school in an effort to limit the influence of parents. Public criticism eventually led to the abandonment of the Dresden Missionary Society philosophy and more practical subjects were introduced in 1844. The School continued to be irregularly attended and in 1852 most of the children were sent to Poonindie, an Anglican mission at Port Lincoln.27 Schools tried to reshape Aborigines to make them more acceptable to the Europeans, but they had no influence over settler attitudes.28 The continued rejection of Aboriginal people by settler society ensured that they were excluded from the economy. Aboriginal people seldom remained in employment and the Protector was disappointed by this pattern. However, Governor Grey recognised that the cause of failure was largely the attitude of settler society who excluded Aboriginal people. Settlers were also criticised for giving Aboriginal people ‘handouts’ and payments for tasks, and exchanging food, tobacco and alcohol for women. But Aboriginal people were primarily employed in temporary seasonal work and Aboriginal labour was generally in higher demand on the frontier. Pastoralists relied on Aboriginal knowledge of the bush to track stock. However as immigration increased Aboriginal workers were displaced by white labour and in settled districts very few managed to find regular work. The Victorian Goldrush of the 1850s created a shortterm surfeit of labour and Aboriginal people were employed in greater numbers during this time. This was encouraged or forced by the reduction in food rations as a deliberate means of encouraging Aboriginal people to take jobs left vacant by the gold rush. However, the white people returned to displace Aboriginal people from employment by the end of the

Ibid., 295-96. Ibid., 296-99. 28 Ibid., 298. 26 27

15

1850s and despite low wages and good reports on their work, few found work away from frontier pastoral districts.29 The Protector Matthew Moorhouse became disillusioned with early attempts to use education and Christianity as a means of assimilating Aboriginal people into settler society. He saw that the impacts of settlement had been disastrous for Aboriginal people with many killed by conflict or disease. By 1856 he estimated that the Aboriginal population had declined from 650 to 180 in the Adelaide area. Mortality was much greater in other areas. Moorhouse became convinced that not only should Aboriginal children be removed from their parents but that all Aborigines should be segregated from settler society to protect them from the undesirably influences. However, Governor Grey was committed to civilising Aboriginal people through ‘persistent contact and interaction’ with the settlers. His principle objective was to create and maintain a demand for Aboriginal labour and to ensure that the law would both protect Aboriginal people in relation to settler society and remove them from their own laws and customs.30 However, equal laws did not apply to Aboriginal and settler people. In 1837 the colony placed a prohibition on supplying Aboriginal people with alcohol and in 1844 the first piece of legislation directly aimed at Aboriginal people was enacted. Ordinance No. 12 made provision for the Protector to become the legal guardian of all Aboriginal children of mixed descent and other Aboriginal children regarded as ‘unprotected’. It also provided a system of indentured labour through an apprenticeship system. This law was a forerunner for later social legislation and deprived Aborigines of autonomy and legal rights. This remained the only piece of legislation for Aboriginal people until the end of the nineteenth century.31 The Protector, missionaries, police and other officials were able to direct, control and regulate Aboriginal people even without formal legal authority. Thus those with greatest power over Aboriginal people and responsibility for providing protection were frequently those who disregarded their rights. Aboriginal people were dependent on ration stations, missions and the Protector in a society that excluded them. In 1850 Archdeacon Hale proposed the establishment of a Native Training Institution (Poonindie). The purpose of the Institution was to separate Aboriginal children who had been brought up in the Adelaide school from both the settler population and the ‘wild portion of the blacks’. They were to be instructed in Christianity and trained to work in industry and adopt a settled way of life. This scheme marked a shift away from the earlier policies of integration. It had the support of the Protector and the Anglican Church and was eventually approved by the Governor. The initial concept was to ensure complete isolation. A plan for an island location was abandoned due to a lack of water and the settlement was established nine miles north of Port Lincoln. Children were initially brought from the Adelaide School as well as married couples from Adelaide. Local Aboriginal people were excluded from attending. The Institution initially had financial problems but Hale was satisfied with the progress in agricultural activities and adherence to the strict work routine. Almost half the population died in the six years from 1856 and only three children were born in the same period. The institution also struggled to maintain complete segregation. As the settlement expanded the isolation diminished and Port Lincoln Aborigines were taken in. The farm flourished and by 1870 was entirely self-sufficient with wheat and wool from the property

Ibid., 299-300. Ibid., 302. 31 Ibid., 303-04. 29 30

16

attracting high prices. The enterprise was not only out of debt but able to fund missionary activities in other parts of the colony. Despite the successes, some observers noted that the Aboriginal people appeared ‘a little joyless’.32 Despite, and because of, the success of Poonindie, it attracted criticism from settlers who wanted to have the land resumed and divided for settler blocks. The main source of the grievance was that the mission occupied quality farming land and that the mission should be relocated to less productive land. A number of governments resisted the pressure to close Poonindie but the trustees eventually agreed in 1892, and two years later Poonindie was closed without provision for residents, including those who had always lived there.33 Apart from the Native Training Institute, responsibility for Aboriginal people in South Australia during the second half of the nineteenth century was primarily left to missions. The position of Protector was abolished in 1856. While the position was re-established after the Legislative Council Select Committee Report in 1860, it had little effect. With the exception of ration distribution, missions became the principle agencies to deal with Aborigines. In 1858 the Aborigines Friends Association was established. This protestant missionary group was committed to the ‘moral, spiritual and physical well-being’ of Aboriginal people in South Australia. In 1859 they established the Point McLeay Mission on Lake Alexandrina. Eight years later German missions were established at Kopperamanna and Killalpaninna in the desert east of Lake Eyre, and in 1868 Point Pearce Mission was set up on Yorke Peninsula. These missions further fuelled segregationist practices. Older Aboriginal people proved particularly resilient to Christian indoctrination and children were removed from their influence by being housed in dormitories. Many aspects of Aboriginal culture and society were deliberately destroyed. Aboriginal people were institutionalised and their lives managed. The missionaries were barely successful in spite of these extreme measures. They were also unsuccessful in ensuring the well-being of Aboriginal people with high mortality rates common on missions. For many Aboriginal people, however, the missions remained a sanctuary from the uncertainty of living on the margins of settler society.34 The other missions continued to operate and the number of missions expanded under the Protestant missionary societies in the twentieth century. Point Pearce and Point McLeay transferred to government control during World War I. However, they retained the same characteristics as the Christian missions and these provided a model for later Aboriginal institutions. Locations were often on unproductive land in areas with few employment opportunities. Land reserved for Aboriginal people was generally out of the way and in areas initially unattractive to settlers. The missions were an important part of implementing policies of protection and segregation which emerged in the 1840s and continued for more than a century. In the 1961 census 40 percent of the Aboriginal population of South Australia was living in settlements and missions, institutions in which they had few rights and were under the direction of a supervisor. The relationship between white controllers and the Aboriginal inmates was one of subservience and dependence.35

Ibid., 305. Ibid., 306. 34 Ibid., 304-06. 35 Ibid., 306-07, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the 32 33

17

For the most part the policies of segregation and protection were predicated on the observation of the Select Committee that Aboriginal people were doomed to extinction and that ‘all evidence goes to prove that they have lost much, and gained little or nothing by their contact with Europeans’.36 By the end of the beginning of the twentieth century Aboriginal people were by far the poorest group in South Australia.37 There was a growing concern that Aboriginal people required greater protection than that offered by the missions. In 1911 The Aborigines Act 1911 was passed. This legislation made provision for the protection and control of Aboriginal and ‘half-caste’ peoples in South Australia. It created a system of reserves on which supervisory institutions were to be established. The reserves were intended to segregate Aboriginal people from wider society in the interests of ‘protection’. It was thought that Aboriginal people could be supervised and tutored. The act gave wide-ranging powers to the Chief Protector and a newly created Aborigines Department. Under the act, Aboriginal people’s movements could be directed. They could be asked to remain on, or move to, a reserve or institution or from their camps. Particular towns and municipalities could be declared prohibited areas and Aborigines could be confined in separate lock hospitals.The act made the Protector the legal guardian of every Aboriginal and ‘half-caste’ child until the age of 21 years, regardless of whether that child had living relatives. The Protector was further empowered to manage the property of Aboriginal people. It became an offence for non-Aboriginal people to enter reserves without permission. Although designed to protect Aboriginal people from external exploitation, the rules also served to protect administrators from external scrutiny.38 It was not only the Protector who gained extraordinary powers under the act. Superintendents of Reserves were given discretionary powers to impose severe restrictions on Aborigines. The legislation rested on a belief that Aboriginal people were inferior and incapable and in need of protection and supervision. However, the act made no provision for the economic protection of Aboriginal people, and even fostered the exploitation by employers in as much as it made no provisions for minimum conditions or wages.39 The legal provisions had little impact in remote areas where the Protector had limited access and it was difficult to enforce any laws to protect Aboriginal people from exploitation.40 This was particularly the case in the northern colonies which South Australia had controlled since 1863. The Northern Territory was established as a separate territory in 1911 when it was transferred to Commonwealth control. However, South Australia continued to administer Aboriginal affairs. Public debate continued on the question of Aboriginal welfare. The missions were suffering significant financial difficulties. These factors placed increasing pressure on the government to take greater responsibility and in

Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.", Andrew Hall, A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children, We Took the Children: A Contribution to Reconciliation (Commissioned by Family and Community Services, South Australia, 1997). 36 Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 308. 37 John Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century," in The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, ed. Eric Richards (South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986). 38 Ibid., 488-89. 39 Ibid., 489. 40 Ibid., 490-91.

18

1913 a Royal Commission was appointed to investigate the control, organisation and management of mission stations. The Chief Protector made a number of criticisms of the missions, citing complaints from Aboriginal people. He suggested that the missions had created a dependency which left many Aboriginal people unemployed and untrained. He further questioned whether they showed adequate concern for Aboriginal people in their care, especially the aged and infirm. Significantly the Commission found that the number of people who came within the scope of the Aborigines Act had in fact increased, despite the anticipated decline in the Aboriginal population. This was due to the rapid growth of mixed descent Aboriginal people and the Commission concluded that Aboriginal people no longer required protection. Rather, it suggested that protection should be replaced by assistance and training for Aboriginal people to become useful members of the community.41 Evidence given to the Commission suggested that education and training had been frustrated by the distraction of Aboriginal groups. In particular it was thought that ‘half-castes’ ‘have all the black fellows’ habits’ when living with Aboriginal people. Hence the Commission recommended the separation of ‘half-caste’ people as an important transition from charity to self-support and from protection to assimilation and suggested that children be removed from their parents to vocational training institutions. Although few of the recommendations were implemented, this marked a turning point in Aboriginal affairs in South Australia and foreshadowed major changes in policy direction.42 Victoria The colonisation of Victoria commenced in 1834 with an expansion of agricultural lands. Settlers from nearby colonies including Van Diemen’s Land moved into the region in search of fertile land. The following year, possibly influenced by Governor Arthur’s three part plan, John Batman signed a 'treaty' with Aboriginal people of Port Phillip Bay area. The treaty granted him ownership of 250,000 hectares of land in exchange for an offer of protection. While both Batman and the Kulin people agreed to the treaty, it was rejected by the British government which regarded the lands as their own.43 The colony of Port Phillip was proclaimed in 1837 and in the same year a Native Police Corps was established. There was a general push to separate Aboriginal people from settler society. A protectorate was established in Victoria with the appointment of George Augustus Robinson in 1838. He took up the position of Chief Protector of Aborigines in Melbourne the following year. He was supported by four assistant protectors and together they moved through Victoria seeking to establish reserves for Aboriginal people.44 Protectorate Stations were established at Michellstown, Goulbuurn River, Geelong and Arthur’s Seat though Robinson requested that the latter be moved further from the

Hall, A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children, Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century.". 42 Hall, A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children. 43 Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 177, Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 10-11. 44 Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800. 41

19

settlement of Melbourne. The Michellstown Protectorate Station was also relocated – this time to Murchison. In 1840 further Protectorate Stations were established, including the the Loddon River Station at Mount Franklin. This was 41,073 acres of prime land and immediately 130 Jaara people moved there as residents and trainee farmers. In the same year Governor La Trobe ordered that no Aboriginal people could visit the township of Melbourne for any reason, and as a result the Bunurong people were settled at Narre Narre Warren near Dandenong. These reserves essentially established a segregationist policy from the inception of the colony. The reserves further aimed to retrain Aboriginal people as agriculturalists. Most of the reserves were run by missionaries and included schooling for Aboriginal children aimed at converting them to Christianity and a European way of life.45 Schooling was a critical element of social engineering. The Narre Narre Warren Protectorate included a small schoolroom by 1841. Part of their education was to separate the Aboriginal children from their parents. However, with little food provided at the station, Aboriginal children and their parents moved to the camp at Merri Creek. The School closed in 1843. The teacher from Narre Narre Warren moved to a Baptist Sunday School at Richmond and gradually increased the attendance by Aboriginal children with the inducement of bread. The Baptists then moved to a building close to the Merri Creek Aboriginal camp and with the support of the government opened a school for Aboriginal children in 1845. Here there was a concerted effort to educate children in the industries and domesticity of European ways.46 While the Protectorates were established to change the culture of Aboriginal people, the frontier operated to clear the land of Aboriginal people through violence. The Native Police Corp was a critical element. Their activities were largely brutal and led to the death of many Aboriginal people. Aboriginal people joined the Native Police Corp for a number of reasons, not least of which was the social standing associated with being an officer. It also provided a political allegiance with the invaders that Aboriginal people tried to use to their own advantage. Nevertheless their activities assisted to clear the land for settler expansion. The Native Police Corp disbanded in 1853 after the resignation of a number of white officers and a dwindling number of Aboriginal members.47 It also seems plausible that by this stage the frontier in Victoria was largely ‘subdued’. By 1849 the Aboriginal Protectorate had also come to an end, and from that time there was little or no official policies relating to Aboriginal people in Victoria. William Thomas became the Guardian of Aborigines and was instructed to manage rations stations at Warandyte and Mordialloc ‘to keep the blacks out of Melbourne’.48 Concern about the welfare of Aboriginal people during this period was raised by Christian groups, but this was not acted on by church groups. In the late 1850s, however Thomas McCobie, a secular humanitarian, agitated for the Victorian Legislative Council to act. In 1858 he was successful in having a select committee established to investigate needs and circumstance of Aboriginal people. The Committee heard extensive evidence and concluded that the Aboriginal population had suffered enormous losses. The report tabled in 1859 recognised that this was in part due to colonial occupation, but more particularly blamed Aboriginal people’s consumption of alcohol. It was strongly influence by William Thomas and

Ibid., 40-41. Ibid., 47-9. 47 Ibid., 43-46. 48 Select Committee 1859 cited in Broome Ibid., 120. 45 46

20

recommended the establishment of a system of protective reserves. These would be used for agricultural purposes and established at a considerable distance from alcohol provisions. The reserve system that subsequently emerged was also the result of the Kulin people continuing to lobby William Thomas about their desire for land.49 Parliament acted on the Parliamentary Committee and in 1860 another committee moved to establish a reserve and rationing system. A Central Board was established to look after Aboriginal interests in the colony through a reserve and rationing system. The Board and local reserve managers and honorary correspondents took responsibility for managing the reserves, including two larger ones at Framlingham and Coranderrk. This initiated a new level of intervention and control over Aboriginal people’s lives.50 Significantly and largely informed by Thomas’s relationship with the Kulin, it was initially recognised that Aboriginal people should participate in deciding the location of the reserves. The Kulin had already selected Coranderrk as a preferred site, and the Gunai people chose camping sites at Lake Wellington and Lake Tyers. By 1863 there were seven reserves (also known as stations and missions) and another twenty three small areas for camping and ration depots. Broomes suggests this was the most comprehensive reserve system in Australia. Most were run by various Christian denominations, with only Coranderrk and Lake Condah being government controlled.51 The Parliament passed the Aborigines Protection Act 1869 and established the Aborigines Protection Board in the same year. Several powers under this act enabled the separation of Aboriginal children from their families and the children were housed in dormitories on the reserves at Lake Hindmarsh, Coranderrk, Ramahyuck, Lake Tyers and Lake Condah. A highly significant amendment to the law was made in 1886. The legislation retained its powers to control Aboriginal employment, residence and children, but it introduced a significant change to the definition of Aboriginality. The Aborigines Protection Law Amendment Act 1886 was the first piece of legislation in Australia to define different treatment for Aboriginal people of full and mixed descent. In an effort to reduce expenditure on Aboriginal reserves and schools the government redefined who could be on the reserves. In keeping with commonly held ideas at the time, the government believed that Aboriginal people were vulnerable and doomed to extinction. The long term and desirable implication of this was that government would eventually be absolved of any further financial responsibility for Aboriginal welfare. However, the so-called ‘half-caste’ population continued to grow. In a move to eliminate further responsibility for the Aboriginal population, the government decided that these people should be removed from reserves and integrated into wider society. The new laws therefore made provision for the forced removal of all ‘part-Aboriginal’ people under the age of 34 years from the reserves. This decision ensured that younger educated people were removed from the reserves and segregated from the rest of the Aboriginal community. This radically disrupted the already fragile relationships with kin and country. Children of mixed descent were targeted and forced into apprenticeships and work, most commonly as farm labourers and domestic servants. Orphans could be transferred to industrial schools. The result was a decline in the number of reserves in Victoria with many people forced to move to Lake Tyers if they

Ibid. Ibid. 51 Ibid. 49 50

21

wished to receive assistance from the Board. This ensured that the Board could drastically limit expenditure on Aboriginal affairs.52 The 1886 act effectively sought to negate the government’s responsibilities to indigenous people and to eliminate Aboriginal identity in Victoria. The effects were devastating with almost half the residents of stations and missions forced out. The forty families including 160 children were abandoned to a society that did not accept them. They were left without community structure or kinship networks, and the stations had only trained them for seasonal agricultural labour. The desperation of the situation was worsened by the severity of the 1890s Depression. Fringe camps became established near the stations as people tried to stay close to family and maintain links with country and known employers.53 The Aboriginal Board eventually recognised that the system had failed but attributed the failure to the inability of Aboriginal people to adapt. In 1910 the provisions of the act were extended to include ‘half-caste’ people but the Board would only support families who agreed to move to Lake Tyers. The children who were apprenticed or sent to institutions never returned to the stations or the families. And parents were denied rations if they objected or protested. An 1899 amendment to the regulations allowed the Board to transfer all ‘half-caste’ children from the stations to industrial schools: boys were sent to farm schools and girls to domestic service training. The intention to eventually eliminate the Aboriginal community was still apparent.54 Between 1884 and 1905 the number of Aboriginal people on the reserves dropped from 594 to 252 as a result of high mortality rates, the expulsion of ‘half-castes’ and the prohibition of marriage between Aboriginal people of full and mixed descent. As the stations and reserves were closed, the land was returned to the Crown and became available for subdivision. The Aboriginal people who remained on the reserves were to be congregated at the remote Lake Tyers site. This institution became the focus of government attention, and after 1924 it was the only reserve that continued to be staffed. The people who lived at Lake Tyers were strictly regulated and controlled.55

New South Wales The arrival of the First Fleet at Botany Bay in 1788 and marked the beginning of European settlement and a long history of conflict between Aboriginal people and colonists. The very earliest contact between Aboriginal people and the settlers included episodes of violence, but also a genuine interest in learning about two different cultures.56 Nevertheless the new arrivals failed to recognise or respect the Aboriginal peoples’ relationship or rights to land. The process of creating the settlement necessarily displaced Aboriginal people creating

Ibid, Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 166. 54 Ibid., 166-67. 55 Ibid., 167. 56 See, for example, Inga Clendinnen, "Dancing with Strangers: Europeans and Australians at First Contact," Cambridge University Press, Maria Nugent, Botany Bay: Where Histories Meet (Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005). 52 53

22

conflict between Aboriginal groups and precipitating acts of retaliation against the settlers. By 1799 there were significant conflicts around the Hawkesbury and Parramatta, and marked the beginning of a six year period of ‘Black Wars’. Following the abolition of slavery, the British Government called for the fair and equal treatment of indigenous peoples in its colonies. It became necessary for the government to take some responsibility. This became equated with a process of ‘civilising’ Aboriginal people through a process of education and conversion to Christianity. In 1814 the colonial government of New South Wales, under Governor Macquarie, established the first Aboriginal school, the ‘Native Institution’ at Parramatta. The school was unsuccessful and closed in 1820. And in the 1830s and 1840s there was an increasing push for Aboriginal people to farm land according to British traditions. The Vagrancy Act of 1835 prohibited whites from living with Aboriginal people at a time when Aborigines were still free to move about. This provision and the 1838 prohibition on the sale of alcohol to Aboriginal people, had the intention of protecting Aboriginal people from European vices. The trial and subsequent hanging of seven men for the murder of twenty-eight Aboriginal women, men and children at Myall Creek in 1838 was seen as an example of the equal treatment of Aboriginal people as British citizens. However, as Doukakis points out, this was an isolated occurrence and few such atrocities were ever brought before the courts.57 Doukakis identifies the significant shifts that accompanied the move to responsible government in NSW in 1855. Prior to this, the treatment of Aboriginal people was shaped by instructions from the British Government. In many ways these policies were driven by humanitarian, if somewhat misplaced, ideals. However the new Parliament of New South Wales was dominated by pastoralists in the early years.58 It was these same people who most feared and despised Aboriginal people and saw them as a threat to the acquisition and control of land. The push for the segregation of Aboriginal people gained momentum and was increasingly viewed as a means to protect both settlers and Aborigines. An initial attempt to establish a Native Police Force was made in 1837 but this only operated for two years. However, in 1855 an official Native Police Force was established. This comprised Aboriginal troopers who were primarily drawn from areas outside of those under patrol, and supervising white police officers. The Native Police are renowned for their brutality and have been attributed with the massacre of large groups of Aboriginal people. Significantly, the Native Police remained within the northern territories that became known as Queensland when it was separated from New South Wales in 1859.59 The northern districts remained a frontier state in which Aboriginal people defended their lands with aggression and force. But for the most part the NSW parliament was not overly concerned with Aboriginal matters and in the mid 1800s Aboriginal people depended on charity, or more commonly exchanged their labour for rations. There was no official policy on Aboriginal matters. Away from the frontier zone, however, many Aboriginal people lived alongside settlers, including in Sydney, and the majority of Aboriginal people were still independent. These people were able to maintain a degree of mobility and identity with access to traditional lands and resources. Few Aborigines were controlled by missionaries

Doukakis, The Aboriginal People, Parliament And "Protection" In New South Wales, 1856-1916, 4. Ibid., 2. 59 Ibid., 3-4. 57 58

23

or government, and their labour was highly valued on pastoral stations and in many instances their use of the land co-existed with the settler adaptations. Aboriginal camps grew up in most towns and stations, including several in Sydney itself.60 As the frontier was broken, the state began to look at Aboriginal people as a concern for bureaucracy. In the 1860s a humanitarian movement began to influence policy particularly in relation to the interaction between settlers and Aborigines. Most settlers did not regard Aboriginal people as equals, but the humanitarian interests were concerned to ensure that they would be Christianised and ‘civilised’. For some the idea of segregation complemented this view and was regarded as an intermediate step to allow Aboriginal people to achieve these new standards.61 When the Selection Acts came into effect in 1861, the nature of settler occupation changed dramatically. Pastoralists who had previously leased large areas of land were compelled to purchase freehold land. The effects were dramatic with many pastoralists stocking their smaller properties more heavily. At the same time there was an increase in small-scale farming with many smaller properties being fenced and cleared. The consequence for Aboriginal people was a much reduced demand for their labour and much less access to lands. This intensified during the 1870s and 1880s. Aboriginal reserves were also threatened. Intervention was increasingly viewed as necessary. In 1861 there were initial suggestions in the Legislative Assembly that Aboriginal people required official protection, while others called for segregation. And it became increasingly difficult for Parliament to ignore the issue.62 George Thornton a friend of the premier Henry Parkes was appointed as Protector of Aborigines in 1881. His policy was to provide minimal aid, with an emphasis on areas outside the major settlements. This served to address growing public view that Aboriginal people should be removed from sight. It was also cheap for the government, but nevertheless attracted criticism from the Aborigines Protection Association and some members of Parliament. Thornton realised however that the Aboriginal population, especially when including people of mixed descent, was substantial. The ‘problem’ was therefore greater than anticipated and in 1883 the Aborigines Protection Board was established. This was a small administrative body with limited government support and no legislation or policy to guide it. Initially the Board administered a system of reserves, distributed rations, and provided financial support to the Aborigines Protection Association. It tended to be a reactionary organisation that responded to pressures from government, churches and charitable groups, as well as from settlers who wished to acquire reserve lands.63 The Aborigines Protection Board made an unsuccessful attempt to gain a legislative base in the 1880s. Aboriginal-settler relations declined during the 1890s depression as unemployment among Aboriginal people skyrocketed. The Board created more reserves in response to both Aboriginal and settler demands. Local Boards were established to control particular districts, provide funds and supervision. The practices became increasingly

Ibid., 5. Ibid., 6. 62 Ibid., 7-8. 63 Ibid., 8-10. 60 61

24

segregationist as the Board began to integrate people of mixed descent into the wider society. This impacted most on the younger members of the groups. As a consequence families broke up and station communities were left without physical strength. The desired impact was to disperse Aboriginal communities and disband the camps. A dormitory for girls was established on Warangesda Station in 1893 ahead of any legislative changes to this effect. By the turn of the century the Aborigines Protection Association had become ineffective due to a lack of funds and pressure from the Board. The stations formerly managed by the association were now transferred to the control of the Board. And in 1912 the former Cootamundra hospital building was created as a home for Aboriginal girls.64 The Board gradually gained control over Aboriginal people. In 1909 the Board was granted the legislative base it wanted, and took responsibility for the administration of the powerful new Aborigines Protection Act. This made provision for wide ranging powers over the lives of Aboriginal people, including the power to remove children from families. Although it is regarded as a policy of segregation, the act served to break up Aboriginal communities. It included provisions for the removal of children and revocation of reserves. Aboriginal people who lived on the stations or received rations fell under the power of the Board. It took no responsibility for Aboriginal people who were not legally under their control. The Board pushed for further control, particularly in loco parentis control over all Aboriginal people, but particularly children. In 1915 it gained the power to control reserves and stations; move Aboriginal people out of town; appoint managers, committees and guardians; prevent the sale of liquor; remove children without the requirement of a magistrate; and to prevent association between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people and prohibiting non-Aboriginal people from entering reserves. On the basis of appearance, people of mixed descent were not permitted to live on the reserves and were expected to find their own way and merge into the wider population.65

Queensland Queensland was settled as a penal outpost of New South Wales; first at Redcliffe in 1824 before moving to Moreton Bay in 1825. Initially there was little conflict with local Aboriginal people, but as more free settlers moved into the northern region in search of new land and there was a rapid escalation of violence. This included the 1842 poisoning of Aborigines at Kilcoy Station and violent attacks on Aboriginal camps at Breakfast Creek in 1860. Despite condemnation of the treatment of Aboriginal people, the government took little responsibility, leaving the issue of protection to the missionaries.66 A formal policy of segregation would not appear until the end of the nineteenth century in Queensland, but a number of precedents appeared before then. The governments of the 1860s were dominated by squatters and consequently government sympathies were clearly with the settlers. They accepted no responsibility for the devastating effects that dispossession had on Aboriginal people, and were disinclined to act to protect them.

Ibid., 9-12. Ibid., 12-13. 66 Reid, 'That Unhappy Race': Queensland and the Aboriginal Problem 1838-1901, 229. 64 65

25

Despite this, the extremely violent nature of Aboriginal-settler relations in Queensland, including the brutal tactics of the Native Police, was the subject of several inquiries. There were several notable critics of the treatment of Aboriginal people in Queensland during the nineteenth century. They included Frederick Walker and Gideon Lang, whose proposals for a working relationship with Aboriginal people were rejected by the government. In 1865 Gideon Lang published The Aborigines of Australia which advocated a system of land sharing with Aboriginal people. He also proposed the appointment of a Chief Protector with the same powers as the Chief of Police.67 Significantly, Lang’s proposal did not advocate the segregation of Aboriginal people on reserves but recognised the benefits of people remaining on country. Similarly, Duncan McNab later advocated a system of individual homesteads for Aboriginal people rather than reserves. His scheme was based on Aboriginal people becoming agriculturalists and Christian. While these ideas were all rejected, the government led by squatter A.H. Palmer established an Aboriginal reserve near Mackay with the intention of civilising Aboriginal people through labour. The squatters and early sugar-planters saw the benefit of a controlled Aboriginal workforce.68 By 1884 most of the desirable land had been assumed by the settlers and native police activity was primarily confined to Cape York. Missionaries renewed their work and moved into north Queensland in the 1890s. At this time miners and others in north Queensland sought government support in providing Aboriginal people with rations. There was a general acceptance of the need to support Aboriginal people until they would inevitably ‘die out’. About 150 ration stations were established throughout Queensland by 1897. However in contrast with the expectation that Aboriginal people would simply die out, it became apparent that the Aboriginal population was increasing.69 It was Archibald Meston, reporting on the condition of Aboriginal reserves and missions in 1896, who recommended that Aboriginal people be segregated on reserves away from settler society. This was partly in response to his observation that many Aboriginal children were being kidnapped by settlers. His recommendations, unlike the many earlier recommendations, were adopted by government and continued to influence Queensland policies until the 1960s. The government passed the Aboriginal Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897. Under this legislation the Chief Protector of Aborigines could remove Aboriginal people to reserves and remove children from their families. It also provided for the removal of mixed-descent children to orphanages. The act was significant for its influence over segregationist legislation in Western Australia (1905), South Australia (1910) and the Northern Territory (1911). It provided for a rigid model of segregation of Aborigines to provide physical protection and to stem the decline in numbers. Aboriginal people were forcibly removed from the wider community and confined indefinitely on segregated reserves. Reid suggests that this system, together with the 1901 amendments became the model for dealing with Aboriginal populations elsewhere in Australia in the twentieth century. He suggests too that the adoption of the Meston model in Queensland was not simply a response to the frontier as has been suggested by other authors, but rather came through a

Ibid., 56-65. Ibid., 230. 69 Ibid., 46-55. 67 68

26

sense of shame at the condition of Aboriginal people and the social problem they posed.70 Though Ryan has seen this model as more directly coming from Robinson’s failures, Reid suggests the element of ‘preservation’ was new. Nevertheless, Meston’ preservation agenda was oriented towards his own strong support for Aboriginal traditional culture. He was much less tolerant and understanding of new and hybrid cultures that had evolved in response to colonialism. In 1914 John William Bleakley was appointed Chief Protector of Aborigines. His prior experience as shipping master and inspector of pearl-shell and bêche-de-mer fisheries in the Torres Strait made him a valuable witness to the 1908 Royal Commission. And he subsequently served as Deputy Chief Protector from 1911. He was a strong supporter of segregation and saw missions and government settlements as a key way to achieve this. In this regard he was similar to his contemporaries. However, he was one of the earliest to question whether it was inevitable that Aboriginal people would ‘die out’. He also expressed dismay at Aboriginal living conditions and advocated greater expenditure on the missions and settlements. Under his administration more was spent on Aboriginal Affairs in Queensland than anywhere else in Australia. Under a controlled wage scheme wages were higher for Aboriginal people than elsewhere and even though inadequate, housing was better than in other states. He also supported and championed a number of Aboriginal sportspeople.71 Nevertheless Bleakley was rigidly parochial and paternalistic and strongly advocated segregation. He also regarded ‘half-caste’ people as a particular problem and produced a pamphlet The Half-Caste Aborigines of North and Central Australia: Suggestions Towards Solving the Problem and showed a preoccupation with ideas of ‘breed’, ‘blood’ and ‘race purity’.72 By 1934 a third of Queensland’s indigenous population was confined to missions and settlements. Conditions were very poor. Malnutrition, inadequate clothing and housing, and disease all contributed to a high death rate. At Cherbourg there were no beds or cots in the children’s dormitories. Further north conditions were even worse and comparable to prisons. Children in missions and government dormitories were isolated from their families and sent to work when very young. Young women were particularly vulnerable despite the appointment of a Protectoress to supervise young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in Brisbane in 1899. When Archbishop Donaldson visited Cherbourg in 1915 he found that more than ninety per cent of the girls who were sent into service returned pregnant to non-Aboriginal men. Those Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who lived off missions and settlements, survived in camps with basic rations earned in return for labour on surrounding farms. Their wages were generally much lower than those of non-Aboriginal workers. The poverty of these camps made children who lived there vulnerable to removal under the order of the Chief Protector. 73

Ibid. Raymond Evans, "'Bleakley, John William (1879 - 1957)'," in Australian Dictionary of Biography, Online Edition (Canberra: Australian National University, 2006). 72 Ibid, Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 527-28. 73 National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 70 71

27

Bleakley helped to draft the Aboriginals Preservation and Protection Act 1939 which replaced the 1897 law. The legislation replaced the position of Chief Protector with a Director of Native Affairs, a role that Bleakley continued to hold. The Director’s principle focus was the management of a network of segregated community institutions – comprised of nine missions and five government settlements. These housed more than forty percent of the Queensland Aboriginal population. Under the new legislation the Director also assumed legal guardianship of all Indigenous children under 21 years.74 Missions and stations in Queensland expanded further and operated for longer than in any other state. With the largest Aboriginal population it spent the most significant amount on Aboriginal affairs. This was facilitated by the government policy of making compulsory deductions from Aboriginal wages. The funds were placed in government trust accounts and used to expand and maintain of the protectorate system.75 Torres Strait The relationship between indigenous people and missionaries took a particular form in the Torres Strait Islands. Here the missionaries were instrumental in negotiating more peaceful and less exploitative relationships between Islanders and fishing and shipping merchants. The London Missionary Society established its first missions on Darnley and Duan Islands in 1871 and expanded to the other islands in later years. Government policy in the region was aimed at restricting the movement of Islanders to ensure a readily available workforce for the fishing industries.

Northern Territory Early attempts to colonise the north coast of Australia were challenged by environmental conditions and remoteness from other settlements. Despite the early declaration of British ownership of the region in 1824, isolation, poor living conditions and widespread disease in the early settlements of Fort Dundas, Fort Wellington and Port Essington led to their abandonment after only a few years. It was the South Australian government that subsequently took control of the northern regions when it supported an expedition by John Stuart in 1862. In 1863 the northern regions were granted to the South Australian Government. The administration and regulation of Aboriginal matters subsequently fell under the South Australian regime. However, the remoteness of the region meant that the northern regions were largely left to manage themselves. Despite some initial difficulties, a successful settlement was eventually established at Port Darwin in 1869. Exploration over the following years revealed a resource rich territory and by the 1880s much of the land was controlled by mining interests and pastoralists. The displacement of Aboriginal people from their lands forced them into agricultural and mining labour. Aboriginal people who were not employed in these industries established their own camps on the outskirts of the colonial settlements. In a region with vast tracts of land and few settlers the pastoralists were highly dependent on Aboriginal labour.

74 75

Ibid, Evans, "'Bleakley, John William (1879 - 1957)'." Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 527-8.

28

However, the lack of any governing influence left Aboriginal workers vulnerable. The isolation from government administration meant that Aboriginal people were poorly paid and subjected to many cruelties and abuse. While police played a role in managing the violence of the frontier, Aboriginal people rarely received justice. The remote and harsh conditions also deterred the establishment of missions, and it was not until 1877 that Hermannsburg was established by the Lutherans. Without this alternative, Aboriginal people were further exposed to the exploitation and abuse.76 Thus the pattern for the early Aboriginal-settler relations in the northern regions was shaped by frontier conditions and the remote administration of the South Australian government. It was reports from the northern regions that resulted in the South Australian inquiries into Aboriginal conditions. In 1899 Inspector Foelsche and Mounted Constable Thorpe, the police in charge of the northern regions gave evidence to the Select Committee of the South Australian Legislative Council. They were particularly concerned about the brutality of pastoralists in the northern regions. In their evidence they raised concerns about the exploitation of labour, the sexual exploitation of Aboriginal women and the treatment of children. They were further concerned about the increasing number of children of mixed descent. Their suggestion was that these children be raised on mission stations and ‘civilised’.77 The atrocious condition of Aboriginal people in the South Australian colonies stirred the Governor, Lord Tennyson, to send a secret dispatch to the British Home Secretary in 1902. In his correspondence he argued that the Aboriginal affairs should be considered a federal issue.78 However, the South Australian government remained responsible for administration of the Northern Territory until January 1911. In spite of pressure from humanitarian interests it made no legislative provision for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. It was only in 1910, in preparation for Commonwealth administration of the Territory, that the South Australian Parliament passed the Northern Territory Aboriginals Act. The act marked an official shift from a policy of dispersal to one of protection by way of authoritarian control. The act was characterised by heavily paternalistic 'protection' provisions similar to those in Queensland and Western Australian legislation. The role of the Commonwealth further distanced the administration from the circumstances and conditions of the Northern Territory. The need for protection in the Northern Territory was felt to be particularly acute. Public concern about violence and conflict with Aboriginal people in the northern regions resulted in several inquiries. A major form of violence and abuse on the frontier was the sexual exploitation of Aboriginal women by white pastoralists. The low numbers of nonAboriginal women meant that Aboriginal women and girls were sought out by European, Asian and other non-Aboriginal men living and working in the Territory. One of the consequences was a large number of children of mixed descent. By early in the twentieth century there were concerns about the mixed descent Aboriginal population, and the practice of separating ‘half-caste’ people on reserves and compounds was regarded as a solution. The Northern Territory Aboriginals Act provided a legal means through which to

Ibid, Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century.". Summers, "Colonial Race Relations." 78 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 190-97, Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century." 76 77

29

achieve this. While influenced by legislation in Queensland and Western Australia, the act was strongly influenced by local concerns. ‘Full blood’ Aboriginal people were disregarded by the legislation, remaining under the control of pastoralists and missions, or completely ignored on some of the large reserves that survived to the 1950s. The situation came about because of the extremely powerful pastoral lobby which was entirely dependent on Aboriginal labour and strongly resistant to any intervention that would reduce their profits. The legislation and administration in the Northern Territory therefore became focused on Aboriginal people of mixed descent. In particular it was concerned to control of the size and composition of the ‘mixed race’ population. It therefore imposed severe restrictions over Aboriginal women. The Aboriginal Ordinance of 1918 further increased the powers of the Protector who assumed guardianship of all unmarried Aboriginal women regardless of their age. It further created a secure labour force by removing ‘half-caste’ Aboriginal children from their families and training them in agricultural and domestic duties. In the towns, Aboriginal people were confined to compounds. These were to be self-supporting agricultural enterprises. The first, Kuhlin, was established in 1913 on the outskirts of Darwin. Outside the towns, Aboriginal people lived on stations under the control of a superintendent and were similarly trained in agriculture. The administration was determined to stream lighter skinned children into the white community by removing them to non-Aboriginal children’s institutions, and even out of the north. The South Australian government continued to play a role in this regard, placing children in foster homes and employment in the south. Children with darker skins were sent to special Aboriginal children’s institutions in the Territory. These included the Darwin Half-Caste Home at the Kahlin compound, the second was the Bungalow established at Alice Springs in 1914. These institutions made no attempt to give children a genuine education or to provide them with good opportunities in society. Rather they were trained to become a servile class of workers.79 Conditions in the homes were abysmal and attracted public condemnation. The Chief Protector from Queensland, Bleakley, had become well-known for his Aboriginal welfare agenda and in 1928 he was invited to investigate the 'status and condition of aboriginals, including ‘half-castes’ in central and northern Australia. The report he presented in early 1929 was deeply critical of Aboriginal-settler relations in the Territory. He found the conditions in the children’s homes appalling and recommended their immediate closure. Significantly he did not recommend that ‘half-caste’ children be separated from ‘full-blood’ people as he recognised that they were a part of the Aboriginal community. However, he did recommend that illegitimate ‘half-caste’ children be removed to mission dormitories to be trained to work in industries, and that light skinned children be placed to institutions in South Australia where they could be absorbed into wider society. The reforms he recommended were considered by the Commonwealth conferences of 1929 and 1930. However, a change in government, the economic bite of the Depression and the extremely powerful pastoral lobby meant little action eventuated.80

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 192-3. Evans, "'Bleakley, John William (1879 - 1957)'." credits the Bleakley report with the creation of the Arnhem Land Reserve in 1931. Evans, "'Bleakley, John William (1879 - 1957)'.", Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 194.

79

80

30

Western Australia Aboriginal people were legislated against for the first time in the 1840s and thereafter the number of laws discriminating against Aboriginal people grew rapidly. Early restrictions included controls over Aboriginal presence in towns and access to alcohol. Legislation was introduced in the 1870s to provide for the ‘protection’ of Aboriginal people in employment. At the same time Aborigines were subject to a separate judicial process that increased their rate of imprisonment. In 1886 the Aborigines Protection Act was passed. This introduced a range of controls over Aboriginal employment. Its general thrust was one of protection and to make provision for the plight of a ‘doomed race’. Rather than taking steps to reduce the decline in the Aboriginal population, the legislation was aimed at making the decline as ‘comfortable’ as possible. The act established the Aborigines Protection Board which was responsible for distributing limited rations and medical supplies to destitute Aborigines. In the 1890s the powerful pastoral lobby successfully petitioned the Western Australian Parliament to introduce harsh laws to ‘pacify’ Aborigines in the north and strictly control those employed in the pastoral industry.81 By the beginning of the twentieth century more than half the Aboriginal population of the southwest of Western Australia was of mixed racial descent. There had been a long history of sexual relations between Aboriginal women and whalers. White settlers notoriously exploited Aboriginal women, but the government also encouraged marriages between male settlers and Aboriginal women during the 1940s, a time when there were very few settler women in the young colony. And several other groups including visiting Maori, West Indian, and African American whalers, Chinese gold miners and Afghan camel drivers also entered into relationships with Aboriginal women. As the colony grew in size the imbalance of male and female settlers began to even out. And with this came a growing intolerance of miscegenation. Despite this several white men continued to live with Aboriginal wives in the far south, and other covert sexual relations continued. Nineteenth century attitudes were confused about people of mixed descent, believing that they were neither Aboriginal nor European. But in recognising the children as ‘half-British’ they felt it important to ensure that they did not replicate the ways of their Aboriginal mothers. Instead the children should be raised in missions and take a servile place in wider society. Colonists were less tolerant of adults of mixed descent.82 Aboriginal people of mixed descent were nevertheless regarded as Aboriginal in many respects, particularly in relation to discriminatory laws. In 1874 with a growing number of ‘half-castes’ in the colony, the state amended an ordinance from 1849 which allowed Aboriginal people to be tried before a bench of local justices to include Aboriginal people of mixed descent. And under the 1886 Aborigines Protection Act, ‘half-castes’ living with ‘Aboriginal natives’ were classified as natives. In 1893 the Western Australian Constitution Act was amended to exclude all Aborigines, including people of mixed descent. The only exception was to those people who owned freehold land, but this was a very small number

Haebich, For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 19001940, 47-48. 82 Ibid., 49-50. 81

31

in the 1890s.83 The inclusion of Aboriginal people of mixed descent in discriminatory legislation continued into the twentieth century and Aboriginal people in Western Australia were categorised into three groups under state legislation. These were: • ‘Aboriginal natives’ • ‘half-castes’ who associated with ‘Aboriginal natives • other people of Aboriginal descent who lived according to European traditions, and who were exempted from provision of the legislation. Aboriginal-settler relations were so abysmal in Western Australia that when it was granted responsible government in 1889 Britain refused to transfer control over Aboriginal matters. The British Government further stipulated a percentage expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. However, as the wealth of the colony grew this was seen as too generous and the Premier John Forrest personally campaigned for local control. In April 1898 after a decade of wrangling with the British government, the Western Australian government assumed responsibility for administration of state Aboriginal affairs. The introduction of the Aborigines Act 1897 repealed the financial provisions and transferred control to the Western Australian Government. It further established the Aborigines Department to distribute rations, blankets and clothing and medical care to destitute Aborigines. And was responsible for the management of Aboriginal reserves, the provision of education and maintenance for Aboriginal children; and to protect Aborigines from injustice and fraud, and exercise general supervision over all matters affecting Aborigines in the state. These functions were executed at a local level through a system of honorary protectors who were appointed by the Governor. Local protectors were further required to supervise Aboriginal people in their employment. The department was poorly resourced and of low priority with a small staff of three. The resultant expenditure was significantly less than it had been in the 1890s under the British requirements.84 Forrest continued to play an active role in the administration to avoid criticism from the British Government. He appointed a personal friend Henry Charles Prinsep to the position of Chief Protector of Aborigines. Forrest himself had had experience with Aboriginal people and had shown respect and kindness to individuals. And he was inclined to recognise their prior ownership of land and to maintain a sympathetic position in relation to Aboriginal people. But Forrest was a consummate politician willing to sacrifice his principles for personal gain. During the 1890s he submitted to pressure from the powerful lobby to introduce harsh laws to control Aboriginal people in the pastoral industry. And as a man of his time, Forrest was paternalistic and imperialistic. In 1883 he told the Legislative Council that Aboriginal people were ‘like children’. He had little respect for Aboriginal traditions and his views were often founded on ideas of ‘evolutionary inferiority’. His contributions to the Aborigines Protection Act were influential in the adoption of protectionist ideals and a policy of ‘smoothing the dying pillow’. He maintained a non-interventionist approach through the Department and in 1900 advised Prinsep that there was little that could be done for Aboriginal people. Rather than dealing with complex issues, his focused remained on minimising and reducing expenditure on Aboriginal affairs to support his argument that former expenditure had been extravagant. He implemented several harsh

83 84

Ibid., 50-51. Ibid., 51-53.

32

measures including the halving of rations to force Aboriginal people and settlers to support themselves more effectively. For Aboriginal people this meant turning to bush foods. But many of the Aboriginal people on rations were elderly and infirm and incapable of hunting, and traditional lands had been subsumed into new uses and were scarcely available. The effects of this policy saw a large number of Aboriginal people suffering from malnutrition and suffering from associated diseases throughout the state.85 Despite being a poor administrator and directly controlled by Forrest, in his later years as Chief Protector, Prinsep challenged Forrest about the condition of Aboriginal people. He was concerned about the levels of venereal disease, prostitution and alcohol abuse and wished to separate Aboriginal people from settler society that had introduced these vices. He was particularly concerned about the number of children of mixed descent in the camps. He advocated a government role in removing these children to missions to be trained as workers and labourers.86 When Forrest gazetted a 500 acre reserve for Aborigines at Cannington, an outer suburb of Perth, Prinsep announced that he would develop it into a home for Aborigines. This was to be modelled as a smaller version of the New Norcia Mission and agricultural settlements in Victoria.87 The Welshpool Reserve was something of a success but in 1903 Prinsep declared that it would become a ration depot for metropolitan Aborigines and a camping ground for elderly Aboriginal people from the south. The decision was largely economic as the state found it costly to provide for the elderly Aboriginal population in the absence of Commonwealth support. The temporary camps and constant movement of Aboriginal people was becoming a source of annoyance for settlers in town, and the provision of rations was used to try and ensure a more sedentary population. The Aboriginal people who had established properties on the reserve objected strongly about the ration depot and the appointment of a white superintendent. By the time Daisy Bates set up camp at Welshpool Reserve in 1905 there remained only a few elderly and homeless people in the camp. And while it was indistinguishable from other camps in the metropolitan area, Bates recorded a number of traditional practices and beliefs among the residents.88 Prinsep also failed to work effectively with the missions. The New Norcia Bendictine Mission and Anglican Swan Native and Half Caste Home operated under the Industrial Schools Act 1874 and were outside the control of his Department. Prinsep was denied entry to these missions and had no power to send children to them.89 However, his family connections with the Bussel family who ran the Ellensbrook Farm Home gave him considerable influence at this institution. Unlike many others of the time, Prinsep was not content to blame the declining numbers of Aboriginal people on a process of natural selection. He wanted to implement specific action to protect Aboriginal people. In this regard, he was heavily influenced by the introduction of the Queensland Aboriginals Protection and Restriction on the Sale of Opium Act in 1897. In 1900 he finally convinced Forrest to draft new legislation. The Bill was entitled ‘an Act for the Further Protection of the Aboriginal Race of Western Australia’. The Bill was

Ibid., 53-55. Ibid., 56-8. 87 Ibid., 62. 88 Ibid., 64-5. 89 Ibid., 67. 85 86

33

not passed, but it was significant in its intent. It provided for the protection of Aboriginal people through isolation. This included provisions to prohibit Aboriginal people from town sites and municipalities, and created reserves where Aboriginal people could be sent and held indefinitely. It further outlawed cohabitation and sexual contact between Aboriginal women and non-Aboriginal men. And it also extended the definition of Aboriginal people to match that of the 1886 Aborigines Act as a means of extending controls over alcohol to ‘half-caste’ members of society. Forrest was outraged by the oppressive nature of the Bill and it was not passed. However, in 1902 legislation controlling alcohol was amended to extend a prohibition to ‘half-caste’ people living with Aborigines. It was not until reports of cruelty to Aboriginal workers in the pastoral industry that legislation was finally introduced to amend the 1886 and 1897 acts. The resultant Aborigines Act 1905 was strongly influenced by the earlier 1900 Bill.90 Prinsep had primarily focused on Aboriginal people in the south, but serious allegations about the mistreatment and poor employment conditions of Aboriginal people in the pastoral industry led to a heated parliamentary debate. The parliamentary interest was partly driven by a drive to secure greater political power, but there were some who were genuinely shocked at reports about the slave-like practices of forcing very young children to work, exchaning meagre rations for hard labour and imposing harsh physical punishments. The earlier legislation actually fostered such exploitation through provisions that allowed abl people to be imprisoned if they left employment without permission. The trade unions were instrumental in the attack on the pastoral industry, though its motives were to ensure work for white employees, rather thanany concern for Aborginal workers. The debate simmered for a few years, especially after federation. However, the call for an inquiry were not immediately acted on. It was only further criticism in the British Press that led to a Royal Commission into the condition of Aborigines in Western Australia. In 1904 the Chief Protector of Queensland, Dr E.W. Roth, was appointed to lead this inquiry. Before Roth had handed down his findings a Bill was introduced into parliament. This was heavily influenced by the Queensland legislation and included many of the same provisions of the 1900 Bill. Despite being draconian and removing a number of protective clauses such as minimum wages, without Forest the Bill did not attract the same criticism as the earlier Bill. Rather the Bill was approved of by both those wishing to protect Aboriginal people and those who wanted them out of the way. When Roth’s report was tabled, it presented a conservative and measured suite of recommendations, heavily influenced by his experience with the Queensland legislation. In the following year the Aborigines Act 1905 was proclaimed. The Aborigines Act of 1905 saw unprecedented intervention in Aboriginal people’s lives. The definition of Aboriginal people was expanded to make more people subject to the act. It provided for the establishment of reserves and powers to remove people to reserves, and to prohibit Aboriginal people from towns. Aboriginal people required official consent to be married, giving the state control over the future of Aboriginal families. The act gave custody of all mixed descent children to the Chief Protector. Aboriginal Missions and Homes were transferred from the Industrial Schools Act to the Department. The act further provided for a system of permits to govern Aboriginal employment, prohibited the sale of alcohol and limited Aboriginal access to firearms. The act also linked welfare with missions,

90

Ibid., 59-61.

34

and limited Aboriginal people’s access to mainstream welfare such as aged pensions and child support. The 1905 Act brought the establishment of a full government department, the Aborigines Department. This received increased funding but remained a small administrative office in Perth. Prinsep was replaced by Charles F. Gale as Chief Protector in 1908. He had less interest in the south and focused his attention in the north. The act continued to be implemented at a local level by police. This gave police very strong powers over Aboriginal people and frequently led to abuses of power. Many of the regulations intended to protect Aboriginal people could be ignored when it suited authorities, and used against Aboriginal people in other circumstances. For instance, settlers were seldom prosecuted for employing Aboriginal people without a permit, but could use permits to prevent Aboriginal employees from leaving employment even where conditions were unacceptable. With the centralisation of ration distribution through police, Aboriginal people were forced to move into town camps. For some this meant giving up access to hunting grounds where they had negotiated these arrangements with settlers. Under the act the state could assume control over Aboriginal people’s property.91 In essence, every aspect of Aboriginal people’s lives could be controlled by the state. A number of segregation practices were introduced with the implementation of the act. In the north of the state lock hospitals were established on Dorre and Bernier Islands to isolate Aboriginal people suffering from venereal diseases from the rest of the community. Conditions were horrendous and were termed ‘isles of the dead’ by Daisy Bates. In a separate, but related move to segregate Aboriginal people, Moola Bulla was established as an Aboriginal cattle station in the Kimberley. Despite being promoted as a self-supporting enterprise to provide Aboriginal people with a livelihood and to protect settlers’ cattle, Moola Bulla operated more like a feeding depot and place of detention. In the south the government established small isolated camps for Aboriginal people and camps near towns were relocated. Segregation was also more firmly applied to children. Gale was critical of Prinsep’s focus on missions that trained Aboriginal children to a certain age and then left them to find their own way in the community. He, and the Minister Connolly, felt these children did not cope without the support of the mission and tended to return to their communities. They also recognised that white society did not readily accept these individuals and they were left at the margins of society where they could suffer danger and abuse. The proposed solution was for the establishment of a number of farm settlements were established. These were to be modelled on the New Norcia mission with a commitment to segregate Aboriginal people entirely, even though New Norcia had begun to move away from its settlement model. The Anglicans took up the proposal in 1911 with the introduction of cottage industry training at the Swan Native and Half-Caste Home and the Australian Aborigines Mission put forward a similar proposal for the Dulhi Gunya Orphanage in Perth.92 Official moves to segregate Aboriginal people were supported and compounded by the hostility of settlers. In rural areas there was a higher proportion of Aboriginal people, there were many calls by non-Aboriginal people to remove Aboriginal people and Aboriginal camps from towns in the southwest. There was also a protracted stand off between the

91 92

Ibid., 110-23.. Ibid., 100-10..

35

Aborigines Department and the Education Department in relation to the education of Aboriginal children. White parents objected to Aboriginal children attending government schools alongside their children. A proposed solution was to provide separate schools for Aboriginal children, but the government was determined to minimise expenditure on Aboriginal affairs and would not commit extra funds. The vast majority of Aboriginal children were denied an education. By 1915 the Minister Underwood moved to dismiss Prinsep and replace him with Auber Octavious Neville. This ushered in a new era in Aboriginal affairs in Western Australia. Neville had no previous experience of Aboriginal people but was an experienced administrator. He committed to implementing every aspect of the 1905 Act. His reform of the Department saw the introduction of systematic record keeping. This allowed him to track and reduce expenditure. He further introduced a system of files for Aboriginal individuals leading to an unprecedented level of control and interference in their lives. Neville was also deeply committed to the native settlement scheme, and shared Gale’s dislike of missions. During his long administration he closed down almost all the missions and by 1919 only New Norcia was operational. Children from the other institutions were sent into service or transferred to one of the settlements. Neville focused all of his attention and expenditure on the settlements, and even though missions continued to operate through these, he was of the view that practical or vocational training was more beneficial than Christianity. The settlements provided for enforced segregation of Aboriginal people on properties where they would learn skills that would enable them to gain employment in broader society. Neville established a settlement at Carrolup in the south, and another at Moore River (Mogumber). These acted as centralised ration depots, and served to keep unemployed Aboriginal people out of towns. The settlements were also used to reduce departmental expenditure. Aboriginal people on the settlements were expected to contribute directly through farming and sewing clothes. And in 1918 Neville closed the Aboriginal school at Beverley thereby ensuring that the settlements were the only place where Aboriginal children could receive any form of education.93 Aboriginal people were reluctant to move to the settlements and in many instances refused to go. Their reasons were several. Living conditions on the settlements were no better and sometimes worse than in the camps. During the war years Aboriginal people could find good employment and were well remunerated for farm labour, whereas their work on the settlements was only recompensed in rations. They also preferred to remain in areas where they knew local farmers and could negotiate their own employment, rather than moving to the settlements in unknown regions. Aboriginal parents were reluctant to send their children to the missions because they had become aware that they seldom returned, and that while in the institutions children were taught to reject their parents and despise Aboriginal ways of life. Despite Aboriginal people’s rejection of the settlements, it became more and more difficult to avoid them. Neville passed a number of amendments to the 1905 Act which gave greater powers to authorities to remove Aboriginal people to the settlements and to retain them there. After the war Aboriginal people also found it increasingly difficult to find work as they were displaced by returning soldiers. White settlers continued to lobby the government for the removal of Aboriginal people from town camps. This was heightened during the Spanish Flu of 1919, when despite the success of Neville in protecting most Aboriginal people from the disease, white attitudes towards

93

Ibid., 153-68.

36

Aboriginal people saw town Aborigines blamed for the spread of the disease. Aboriginal people began to be forced onto the settlements under the new provisions of the act, and by 1920 about a quarter of the southwest Aboriginal population was living on the settlements.94

Assimilation Under segregation it is possible to identify a number of policies and practices that were oriented towards the dispersal of Aboriginal people into broader settler society. This was especially the case for Aboriginal people of mixed descent. These practices included the separation of Aboriginal children from their parents, training Aboriginal people to live like Europeans, conversion to Christianity and transforming them into agricultural labourers and domestic servants. To this extent the segregation era included many assimilationist practices.95 However it was not until the twentieth century that a formal policy of assimilation was adopted by the states and territories of Australia. There continues to be significant debate about what constitutes the essential and definitive elements of the assimilation doctrine and practices, and discussion about when assimilation in Australia commenced and when (or whether) it ended. Nevertheless it can be agreed that assimilation was a much more systematic approach.96 By the end of the nineteenth century Aboriginal people in most of the settled regions had been reduced to small, depressed populations. For the emerging Australian nation with futuristic aspirations of progress, there was no place for Aboriginal people who were regarded as out of place and time. Racial theories underpinned the view that Aboriginal people were incapable of adapting to new ways of life. There were further fears that Aboriginal people posed an internal threat to the White Australia policy. Consequently officials preferred Aboriginal people to remain out of sight, confined to remote camps. Children of mixed descent were targeted for absorption into the wider society, exploited in menial labour or incarcerated in segregated institutions. Many of the practices established in the colonial period and the earlier experiences of dealing with Aboriginal people were used to shape policies and practices well into the twentieth century. 97 By the end of the Second World War, however, there was a heightened global awareness about the plight of minority groups and a worldwide interest in human rights developed. In Australia and other settler states, this new ‘anti-racist’ political movement called for the recognition of Aboriginal people as citizens of the nation with equal rights. The rise in nonBritish migration after the war further challenged the idea of a ‘British’ culture and Australia was confronted by a need to redefine itself as a nation.98 This provided the context for a new era of Aboriginal affairs policies.

Ibid., 153-75. ———, Spinning the Dream: Assimilation in Australia 1950-1970, 72-4. 96 ———, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 454-55. 97 Ibid., 131-32. 98 Bain Munro Attwood, Telling the Truth About Aboriginal History (Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005), 20-21. 94 95

37

In 1937 a conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities met in Canberra to discuss the future of Aboriginal affairs in Australia. The meeting was attended by representatives from every state except Tasmania. It passed a number of resolutions including a statement that all efforts should be directed to the absorption of Aboriginal people of mixed descent into the wider community Figure 1. The conference further recommended the development of uniform legislation wherever possible. It resolved that Aboriginal children of mixed descent should be educated to the same standard as white children and their subsequent employment should be governed by the same conditions, so that they could take their place in white society ‘on an equal footing with the whites’.99

Figure 1: Extract from 1937 Commonwealth-State Conference

The conference singled out people of mixed descent for assimilation, and made separate resolutions for people described as ‘full blood’. It suggested that the children of detribalised ‘full bloods’ be educated to the same standard as white children and placed in lucrative employment that would not bring them into economic or social conflict with whites. The conference recommended that the ‘semi-civilised’ be supervised in employment and social and medical services, and that small reserves be set aside for those who were unemployed. And finally it recommended that ‘full bloods’ who were ‘uncivilised’ should be allowed to live in their ‘natural’ state on inviolable reserves, with each jurisdiction responsible for decision about whether to allow access to missionaries.100 The conference further recommended a number of economic measures. It suggested that effective assimilation would require much greater expenditure on training and education. It called on the Commonwealth to provide funding for Aboriginal affairs, a cost which was born fully by the states because Aboriginal people were not entitled to Commonwealth pensions. It further suggested that these pensions be made available to Aboriginal people of mixed descent. At the same time, however, they called for provisions to enforce Aboriginal people’s return to their home states, and called for government control of Aboriginal missions. 101 From this meeting and resolutions, each of the states developed its own response to adopting formal assimilation policies. These were largely driven by the idea of biological assimilation – the abandonment of race-based policies to create a place for Aboriginal people within wider Australian society. The programs were significantly different from those of segregation in that they targeted families and not only children. And in contrast

Commonwealth of Australia, "Aboriginal Welfare. Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities. Held at Canberra, 21st to 23rd April, 1937.," in National Library of Australia (Canberra: Commonwealth Government Printer, 1937). 100 Ibid. 101 Ibid. 99

38

with the role of Aboriginal people as a subservient labour class under segregation, the goal for assimilation was to integrate Aborigines into middle-class Australia. By 1965 the National Welfare Council responded to criticism that the assimilation policy amounted to cultural genocide in that it deliberately sought the destruction of Aboriginal culture. It therefore shifted the emphasis to the attainment of similar standard of living, with the same rights and privileges shared between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians.102 Tasmania Tasmania was the only state in Australia not to adopt a formal policy of assimilation. This was based on the falsehood that there were no longer any Aboriginal Tasmanians. The extreme measures taken to control the Tasmanian Aborigines in the nineteenth century led to a widespread belief that all the Tasmanian Aboriginal population had been exterminated. The presence of an expanding mixed descent population on the islands was ignored by officials and others. Aboriginal people were described as islanders without reference to their indigenous heritage, and consequently regarded as ‘not Aboriginal’. On this basis Tasmania was not represented at the Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities in 1937. The claim that Tasmanian Aboriginal people were extinct allowed governments to neglect Aboriginal families and as a consequence many Aboriginal children lived in poverty. Despite the official position that no Aboriginal people existed in Tasmania, there continued to be a high degree of intervention in the lives of islanders and other people of Aboriginal descent. In the post-war period, Tasmania adopted a number of assimilationist proposals and advocated that ‘half-caste’ people be fully absorbed into the wider community. A number of inducements were offered, including offering homes and employment if people would agree to leave the islands. The provisions of the Cape Barren Island Act 1945 continued to push for Aboriginal people to become settled agriculturalists. The families on Cape Barren Island in the 1940s were described as impoverished and suffering from poor level of health, education and nutrition. There were also large rifts between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal families. 103 Tasmania had not initially adopted a formal assimilation policy because it had denied there was an Aboriginal population. However, by the 1950s the Commonwealth government began to urge the Tasmanian government to join with them in adopting a policy of assimilation. Aboriginal families suffered enormous consequentces. The Cape Barren reserve was closed in 1951 and many families were relocated to Launceston where they were housed in substandard accommodation. They faced hostility and racism from the white community. The disadvantage that the islanders faced made their children vulnerable to judgements of ‘neglect’ and official intervention. Tasmania was represented at a national meeting of Native Welfare for the first time in 1961. Additional pressures to leave the islands came from the education system. In 1967 the Education Department threatened to close the Cape Barren Island school and scholarships and other incentives were offered to encourage Aboriginal people to send their children to secondary schools and vocational training on the Tasmanian mainland. Although it continued to deny the Aboriginality of

102 103

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 456. Ibid., 494-96.

39

the islanders, the state was keen to access Commonwealth funding for Aboriginal housing and health during the 1970s.104 During the 1960s and 1970s, however, Aboriginal protesters including Pastor Doug Nicholls and Bob Maza began to advocate for Aboriginal rights. And in 1969 a large scale project to identify people of Aboriginal descent in Tasmania was initiated. A subsequent meeting in 1971 attended by more than two hundred Tasmanian Aborigines called for the Tasmanian government to abandon its attempts to ‘dilute and breed out our people and our cultural heritage’.105

Victoria Like Tasmania, the government of Victoria failed to acknowledge that it had an Aboriginal population. Following the introduction of an amended act in 1886, Aboriginal people of mixed descent were excluded from government assistance and protection. Thus at the time of the first Commonwealth-State Native Welfare Conference in 1937, Victoria held the position that it did not have an Aboriginal ‘problem’. Unlike Tasmania, however, the Board Chairman agreed to attend the meeting as an observer. The decision to deny the existence of the Aboriginal population deliberately ignored the dire conditions in which these people lived. It also ignored the reality that Aboriginal people were discriminated against on the basis of their Aboriginality – marginalised by legislation and attitudes of wider society. The poverty in which Aboriginal Victorians lived meant that many of their children were judged to be ‘neglected’ and removed from their families into care. A Board of Inquiry into the Aborigines Act 1928 was established in 1957. Its findings suggested that few Aboriginal people were living as ‘responsible citizens’, and that most Aborigines were living in squalor. It found that children did not attend school regularly and considered them to be undernourished and neglected. The report suggested that this was a consequence of social circumstances rather than innate racial characteristics, and expressed the view that Aboriginal people could learn to live according to the standards of wider society. Consistent with this position, the report recommended the adoption of an assimilation policy and the establishment of an Aborigines Welfare Board. It further recommended the dispersal of Aboriginal people living at Lake Tyers, the only remaining Aboriginal institution in Victoria. In implementing the recommendations of the McLean report, the Aborigines Act 1957 was established to repeal earlier legislative restrictions and establish the Aborigines Welfare Board. The efforts to assimilate Aboriginal people through a welfare system met with resistance from the Aboriginal community. They preferred to maintain their own social networks, particularly those that had been enhanced through their participation in the mainstream workforce. As Aboriginal people moved to the cities to take up these opportunities, they came into closer proximity with one another. This established new social networks and

Ibid. Ibid., 497, Kaye Price, "A View of Tasmanian Aboriginal Housing, Launceston and Hobart, 1970–79," in Settlement: A History of Australian Indigenous Housing, ed. Peter Read (Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, 2000), 160. 104 105

40

cooperative political activism, and increased a sense of belonging and community. Aboriginal resistance was encountered elsewhere too. The efforts to close Lake Tyers in the early 1960s were strongly contested by residents. Even though the Board insisted that residents move on, it was forced to compromise and maintain the land as a permanent Aboriginal reserve.106 The provisions of the 1957 Act removed the special powers of the Board over Aboriginal children. Nevertheless the Board was still able to recommend the removal of children to police. And judgements about living standards were frequently used to make a case of neglect. Consequently the rate of child removals in Victoria escalated. As a cheap alternative to institutional care, the government increasingly turned to adoption and foster care. Unsupervised private agencies continued to facilitate Aboriginal adoptions and many Aboriginal children were lost to their families on a permanent basis. Many Aboriginal children grew up not knowing of their cultural origins.107 New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory Following the First Commonwealth-State Native Welfare Conference in 1937, New South Wales adopted a formal policy of assimilation in 1940. This gained legal standing through the Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Acts of 1940 and 1943. The legislation replaced the Aboriginal Protection Board with an Aboriginal Welfare Board which commenced a program of assimilation to: … inculcate the habit of self-help, to keep Aborigines occupied, to deal with youth, to apprentice outstanding talent, to select suitable families for removal from stations into the white community, to find employment for people away from the reserves, and to encourage local white people to become interested in Aboriginal matters.108 By the late 1940s almost half of all Aboriginal people in New South Wales were living on government stations and supervised reserves. While the remaining population continued to live independently, they were all governed by the act. The new Aboriginal Welfare Board had reduced powers in relation to the removal of children and there were more avenues of appeal for parents. Nevertheless, children could be removed on the grounds of ‘neglect’. Given that ‘neglect’ was defined by destitution and poverty – characteristic of many Aboriginal people’s living conditions – Aboriginal children were removed on a regular basis. A number of other controls remained on Aboriginal people’s lives including limited access to children’s courts, control over employment, and prevention of contact between parents and children held in homes or institutions. 109 After World War II, assimilation was more aggressively pursued. Responsibility for the twenty-six Aboriginal schools on managed stations was transferred to the Education

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 500-01. Ibid. 108 Ibid., 502. 109 Ibid, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 106 107

41

Department. Children who did not live on reserves were encouraged to attend state schools even though school principals retained the right to refuse Aboriginal children admission until 1972. The Board focused its attention on the ‘managed stations’. These institutions provided services like housing and education that Aboriginal people had no access to in local towns. Under the move to assimilation, the stations were given the task of ‘reeducating’ Aboriginal people in preparation for assimilation into wider society. The idea was that families would gradually be transferred to conventional housing in town under the surveillance of the Welfare Board. The station managers could also remove children from their parents. Aboriginal residents understandably resented the interference and vocalised their concerns.110 Those Aboriginal people who were already living in towns were more disposed towards the assimilation agenda and were able to take advantage of a range of housing options that were previously unavailable to them. However, overpopulated houses and Aboriginal family structures attracted criticism from non-Aboriginal people. Aboriginal families were frequently evicted, and labelled as undesirable tenants. Without approved housing parents were again vulnerable to having their children taken away from them. Housing was, however, only one part of how people were judged to be assimilated and a draconian system of inspection was imposed to assess households income, expenditure, hygiene and ‘morality’. These interventions contributed further to the rates of child removal, and by the 1950s had reached record numbers. The increased number of children in care placed enormous pressures on government institutions.111 The accommodation of an increasingly large number of Aboriginal children placed great financial pressure on the system. The Board lobbied for additional facilities to care for Aboriginal children. This was unsuccessful and in 1953 it proposed foster care as an alternative and more economical option for the care of Aboriginal children. Authorities focused more on fostering and adoption arrangements in the 1940s and 1950s. Skin colour emerged as an important element in the placement of children, with lighter-skinned children being assigned to non-Aboriginal parents. Non-Aboriginal people were regarded as the ideal foster parents as they could provide an environment that would assimilate young children into white ways. As few non-Aboriginal people were inclined to care for Aboriginal children, the government initiated a high-profile advertising campaign to attract more white foster families. The public response was strong, and the vast majority of children were sent to non-Aboriginal foster homes. Within a few years there were more children in foster care than there were in total at the Kinchela and Cootmundra homes. Children were often treated kindly in foster homes, but all were pressured to adopt European ways. They endured mistreatment and misunderstanding arising from negative assumptions and stereotypes about Aboriginal people. Many white families had little understanding of the complexity and sensitivity of their role as foster parents of Aboriginal children and these relationships often ended in failure and further loss for the children. Children seldom made it home, and more often found themselves in new foster care or in one of the Aboriginal children’s homes. Others became permanently dislocated. For

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 111 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 505-06. 110

42

example, Aboriginal children from the ACT were placed with families from New South Wales, creating a social and physical dislocation from family and country. The dislocation could result in Aboriginal children being permanently adopted.112 Heartbroken Aboriginal parents begged for their children to be returned, but were routinely refused. Despite the failures of many foster homes, authorities continued to believe that Aboriginal children were better off separated from their own parents. The emphasis was on taking very young children and providing a ‘better standard of living’. The Board was also keen to ensure that children were removed from their family environment by placing them in residential education facilities. Most legislative restrictions were lifted in New South Wales by 1963. The Board retained the power to expel Aboriginal people from reserves. The Native Welfare Council decided to further integrate Aboriginal education and housing in 1965, and closed the remaining twelve segregated schools. This forced Aboriginal families to move to town because failure to attend school could result in removal from families. The Board instructed that no further houses be built on the reserves. A Joint Committee Report in the same year endorsed these recommendations and reaffirmed a commitment to assimilation by calling for reserves to be ‘cleared’. At the time forty-seven percent of the Aboriginal population were still residents of stations and reserves. Managers were instructed to relocate residents to town and to inspect homes, collect rent and enforce school attendance and employment. From 1968 this more aggressive assimilation was implemented. Discriminatory legislation was removed and the Welfare Board was dissolved in 1969. In this same year Cootamundra and Kinchela Homes were closed on the basis that they ‘tended to perpetuate segregation’ and children were transferred to state homes. Responsibility for Aboriginal children in the ACT was transferred to the Department of the Interior in 1968, and children were placed in local residential care. The effect of these changes was to create intervention by a much broader range of mainstream authorities and a reduction in Aboriginal land in the form of reserves.113 Queensland and Torres Strait Emerging from the protectionist era in the post War period, assimilation was regarded as a more progressive policy. It was adopted by all Australian states and territories except Tasmania and Victoria which claimed to have no Aboriginal population. Queensland on the other hand, had a large Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population and a complex range of legislation. Here a system of protection continued to operate for many several Ibid., 506-10, Peter Read, "The Stolen Generations the Removal of Aboriginal Children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969," New South Wales Department of Aboriginal Affairs,, http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/publications/StolenGenerations.pdf, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 113 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 510-11, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.", Read, "The Stolen Generations the Removal of Aboriginal Children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969." 112

43

decades. This was a direct consequence of the financial profits generated from quarantined Aboriginal workers’ wages. It was with some reluctance that the Queensland government began to contemplate genuine reform through repeal of the legislation, and to use institutions to train and disperse Aboriginal families.114 The Queensland Government suggested that Aboriginal people living off reserves and missions were being assimilated into the community through education and employment. The Department saw the settlements as ‘refuges’ for those who were unable to maintain a particular standard of living. However, many families continued to live in destitute circumstances and all were under the constant surveillance of the government. Conditions in the settlements and missions were shocking. Rates of illness and mortality were high, and the insanitary conditions brought by overcrowding and food shortages brought protests from Aboriginal residents. It was not until the late 1950s that a clear commitment to an assimilation policy was established. This policy was based on the principles of ‘a strong educational foundation and suitable housing’ to ensure that Aboriginal children would become assimilated into white society and ‘useful’ citizens. In 1963 the policy had become formalised; education would comprise academic, industrial, health and hygiene education, constructing a sense of pride among Aboriginal people, and creating a greater sense of cooperation among the white population. After a condemnation of existing legislation by the Queensland Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, and a call for freedom of citizenship, assimilation was legislated through the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Affairs Act 1965.115 The act repealed many of the oppressive administrative controls including guardianship of children and prohibition on alcohol. However it retained the power to remove Aboriginal people to reserves and superintendents gained increased control and discipline over residents of reserves. The act created the concept of ‘assisted person’, requiring every Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander living on a reserve or mission to carry a ‘certificate of entitlement’ if they wished to remain there. Cost effective assimilation was further implemented through a proposal to send fair skinned children to white adoption or foster parents. In the year the act was passed three hundred children remained separated from their families in dormitories at Aurukun, Doomadgee, Cherbourg, Woorabinda and Palm Island. Assimilation through institutions remained the focus of change in Queensland. Families outside the institutions were inadequately supported and the resulting poverty created further justification by the government to remove children from their parents. As in the earlier segregationist era, the Torres Strait presented a number of different issues and particular government response. The marine industries of the region collapsed in the 1960s leaving many islanders unemployed. As a result many people moved to the Australian mainland. Like Aboriginal people on the mainland, however, assimilation brought increased intervention in Torres Strait Islanders’ lives.

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 528, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 115 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 528,30, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 114

44

In 1967 the government established a program of monitoring Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s social habits and hygiene. The program employed ‘liaison officers’ to undertake the tasks of inspecting homes of indigenous people, enforcing school attendance and negotiating between police and Indigenous families. Indigenous people came under increasing control and by 1959 every indigenous person in Queensland was under state surveillance.116 The Aborigines Act 1971 repealed most of the discriminatory laws applying to Aboriginal people, notably the power to remove and detain Aborigines on reserves was revoked. The government nevertheless continued to have significant control over reserve lands which comprised more than two percent of the state.117

South Australia The Royal Commission of 1913 had recommended more direct control by the government and in 1915 Point Pearce became a government Station and Point McLeay followed the following year.118 Nevertheless the missions continued to play an important role and there was even a resurgence of missionary activity in the 1920s and 1930s. Six new missions were established by the United Aborigines Missions in the remote part of the state. Their activities were aligned with protectionist policies of segregating Aboriginal people from wider society. In some instances this provided physical protection, but the cultural destruction that accompanied missionary activities was often deliberate and extreme.119 By the 1930s, however, there was increasing pressure for the government to adopt assimilation as its primary policy. At the first Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities in 1937 which proposed an assimilationist agenda, the South Australian representatives were strongly in support of such a national policy.120 Despite their enthusiasm, the South Australian government did not implement legislation to this effect. Rather the Aborigines Act 1934-39 further diminished Aboriginal rights and was more paternalistic and restrictive than the 1911 Act. The legislation established the Aborigines Department and the Aborigines Protection Board which replaced the Chief Protector. The definition of ‘Aborigines’ was expanded to include anyone of Aboriginal descent and thus brought more rather than fewer Aboriginal people under control of the state. Further controls were placed on relationships and marriages between Aboriginal and nonAboriginal people. The 1939 amendment introduced a system of exemptions in which authorities could deem an Aboriginal person to be non-Aboriginal based on judgements of their ‘character and standard of intelligence and development’. The system was highly divisive, conferring rights on some Aboriginal people that were denied to others. The system was largely criticised by Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 117 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. 118 Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century.". 119 Ibid.. 120 Ibid., 492-93.. 116

45

Aborigines who referred to the exemption certificates as ‘dog licences’. The exemptions also provided new means to intervene and control Aboriginal lives. As had been seen previously too, these kinds of official measures to adopt Aboriginal people into wider society met with continued opposition in practice. All Aboriginal people, whether fair skinned or not, faced discrimination in every facet of everyday lives, and were segregated or excluded in recreation, social activities, schools and church. When the definition of an Aboriginal person expanded in 1934, the few individuals who had gained a level of acceptance and autonomy became subjected to the law. This further restricted their participation in society.121 The government policy of assimilation continued to be strengthened through the 1930s and 1940s, and in 1951 South Australia formally adopted the ‘assimilation package’. This was given impetus by the labour shortages created by World War II and Aboriginal workers were employed in increased numbers within the non-Aboriginal community (even though many were displaced at the end of the war). There was a steady increase in the number of Aboriginal people leaving reserves to live in cities, and the government began to relocate Aboriginal residents at Point Pearce and Point McLeay to Adelaide and country towns. At the 1961 Conference of State and Commonwealth Ministers of Aboriginal Affairs there was agreement that the policy of assimilation would ensure that Aboriginal people would eventually gain the same lifestyle as other Australians, including adoption of language, beliefs, customs and loyalties.122 During the 1950s and 1960s Aboriginal children continued to be taken from their parents and raised in mission homes and dormitories. The Board further established the Campbell House Farm School near Meningie between 1955 and 1963 to train older Aboriginal bys in agricultural and pastoral skills. Children with fairer skins were sent to government and private homes for non-Aboriginal children. Hence skin colour determined where and how children would be educated and brought up. These ideas were furthered in a policy of fostering Aboriginal children with white families. As with their New South Wales counterparts, the South Australian government launched a public appeal to find more nonAboriginal families to foster and adopt Aboriginal children.123 In 1962 the restrictive segregationist Aborigines Act 1934-1939 was finally repealed.124 The Liberal Country League government introduced an Aboriginal Affairs Bill, which it claimed would remove all restrictions on Aboriginal people. However, the Australian Labor Party under the leadership of Bill Dunstan, introduced a number of amendments. Summers notes that the parliamentary discussions were unusually cooperative.125 The amendments that were adopted included a reduction of control over Aboriginal property and the confinement of people on reserves. The amendments further ensured that Aboriginal reserves could only be abolished by a parliamentary act. A number of amendments were however, rejected. These included a proposal to remove the distinction between Aboriginal people of full and mixed descent; and a provision to ensure Aboriginal membership of the

Ibid. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 533, Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century." 123 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 537-8. 124 Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century," 495. 125 Ibid., 495-96. 121 122

46

Aboriginal Affairs Board. A number of restrictions on Aboriginal people remained in place, notably in relation to the education and training of Aboriginal people and their children, health inspections and control of reserves. Aboriginal reserves continued to operate as closed institutions in which the Superintendent had far-reaching powers.126 Nevertheless the 1962 act was intended to implement the national assimilation policy in South Australia, and offered a ‘New Deal’ for Aborigines. It aimed to: abolish all restrictions and restraints on Aborigines … to [render] special assistance to Aborigines … and to promote their assimilation into the community.127 South Australia, like the Northern Territory, proposed a model of using institutions in remote areas to train Aboriginal people in housekeeping and farming. A staged training program was planned to ensure that the missions would gradually be depopulated and ultimately people would be assimilated.128 The assimilationist policy assumed that all people could be included in a homogenous culture and society. However, the requirement for Aboriginal people to abandon their beliefs, kinship networks and identity would mean that Aboriginal people would ‘disappear’ into the dominant society. There was a growing realisation that this was problematic and not dissimilar to earlier attempts to make Aboriginal people ‘disappear’. From 1962 until 1965 the term ‘integration’ was introduced to suggest that Aboriginal people could be included into wider society but still choose to maintain features of their own culture, and heralded a new phase in Aboriginal history that moved towards self-determination.129

Northern Territory Aboriginal Affairs in the Northern Territory moved to Commonwealth control in 1911, and was shaped by the distant administration of Canberra. Between 1951 and 1963 Paul Hasluck (later Sir Paul Hasluck) was the Commonwealth Minister for Territories with responsibility for Aboriginal Affairs. He was a strong advocate of assimilation and during the 1950s he established the framework for an official assimilation policy. He was instrumental in persuading state governments to this view, and in 1951 convened a meeting of Commonwealth and State Ministers of Aboriginal Affairs in Canberra. He believed that all Aboriginal people – whether of mixed descent or not – would eventually live as nonAboriginal people. Hasluck intended to use assimilation in the Northern Territory as the model for all governments in Australia. The Welfare Ordinance of 1953 provided the legislative base for assimilation through a program of family welfare. It reversed earlier legislation by advancing the idea of full citizenship for all. Although the discrimination against ‘half-caste’

Ibid. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 534. 128 Ibid., 534-35. 129 Summers, "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century," 496-97. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 535. 126 127

47

Aboriginal people was removed from the Aboriginals Ordinance, in practice the policy was implemented according to ‘individual needs’. This referred to the diversity of Aborigines in the Northern Territory who were considered to range from ‘nearly assimilated’ to ‘most primitive’. Those who were found to need ‘special care and assistance’ would be declared ‘wards’ and controlled under special protective laws. Wardships could be revoked one these individuals demonstrated their ability to live an independent assimilated life. While determinations was theoretically to be determined by lifestyle, it was ‘full-blood’ Aborigines who were gazetted, and assimilation came to be applied through the lens of race. Only six Aboriginal men of full descent avoided being declared wards, one of whom was Albet Namatjira.130 All wards – in other words, all Aboriginal people of full descent – were to discard their traditional ways. This was orchestrated by removing people to government settlements and missions. The aim was to improve physical health and hygiene, educate children, train adults to work and live in a model of European domestic life. The proposal was strongly reminiscent of settlements established in the earliest colonial period. The government was, however, aware that family was important and so while younger Aboriginal people were targeted for assimilation, they were not to be separated from their families. Training and employment conditions were established and the Welfare Branch could impose penalties for employers who did not conform. In reality this had little real benefit for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. The major employers of Aboriginal labour prior to 1963 were the missions and Welfare Branch, but these agencies were not obliged to comply with the new standards. There were few inspections of pastoral stations so that compliance was poorly monitored. Nevertheless, the new regime dramatically increased expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. Significant funding was allocated for the expansion of institutions to provide tutelage to Aboriginal people under the guidance of the Welfare Branch. The use of police as protectors had ceased in 1950, and the Welfare Branch employed a system of patrol officers to implement its strategies. Haebich suggests that their training rendered them more sympathetic than their predecessors.131 While earlier policies in the Northern Territory focused on Aboriginal people of mixed descent, under assimilation these same individuals were to be treated ‘equally’ under within non-Aboriginal systems of welfare and education. However, Aboriginal people continued to suffer enormous government intervention through administrative surveillance. And at the same time, the new definitions of Aboriginality denied many people access to funding and programs specifically intended to redress Aboriginal disadvantage. By the early 1960s arguments against assimilation were growing stronger and the Commonwealth began to move towards a policy of integration. The Social Welfare Ordinance of 1964 was intended to remove any remaining restrictions on Aboriginal people exercising full citizenship rights. It nevertheless maintained a number of the former practices, including power to remove and detain ‘wards’, to exclude non-Aboriginal people from reserves, and to train Aboriginal children in mission homes. Despite legislative and policy improvements, the continuity of administration and practice, and rapid industrial growth over successive decades ensured that Aboriginal people continued to suffer discrimination and pressures to relinquish their lands.132

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 460-62. Ibid., 463. 132 Ibid., 463-65. 130 131

48

Western Australia The Chief Protector of Aborigines in Western Australia, Mr A.O. Neville, was a strong advocate of biological assimilation with a zealous commitment to the classification of Aboriginal people based on the idea of racial purity and ‘Aboriginal blood’.133 He played a pivotal role in the Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities in 1937, and persuaded the meeting to adopt the definition of Aborigines set out in the Western Australian Native Administration Act 1905-1936. All Aboriginal people in Western Australia were subjected to a range of legislative and administrative controls. Like Queensland, Western Australia had a large Aboriginal population estimated at some 21,000. By 1947 twenty percent of these people were under the direct control of the Department of Native Affairs. There was a high proportion of children and governments were concerned about creating economically viable family units. Successive changes in state government saw an increased commitment to change. By 1954 this commitment extended to the reform the legislation that was damned as ‘unwarranted interference with personal liberty unparalleled in the legislative treatment of any other people of the Commonwealth or Pacific territories’.134 The first significant changes were legislated in the Native Welfare Act 1954 and the associated Department of Native Welfare. However, it wasn’t until the Native Welfare Act 1963 that additional significant discriminatory powers were removed. These included controls over movement of Aboriginal people, guardianship of their children, control over earning and property. And in 1972 all remaining discriminatory powers were removed. Despite these shifts, conservative Western Australia was slow to change, and continued to take a paternalistic approach to Aboriginal affairs. The sheer scale of Western Australia and its large population shaped the way assimilation was adopted and implemented throughout the state. The initial focus of assimilation was the southwest Nyungars, primarily those of mixed racial descent. Outside the southwest the process of assimilation was much slower to take hold. This was largely because pastoralists did not like the changes, and white residents of country towns were determined to keep Aboriginal people out. Enduring ideas of the ‘dying race’ created a general scepticism about the ability of Aboriginal people to adapt and change. And the administration was simply too remote from many regions to manage the process effectively. White administrators also worked under a false apprehension that Nyungars would be more easily assimilated than the Aboriginal people of the north who had begun a campaign of walk offs in return for equal wages in the 1960s and 1970s. But Nyungar society and culture had endured despite a number of economic and political constraints. They successfully maintained Nyungar beliefs, skills, family structures and values. At the same time, Nyungars were very adept at controlling where they worked, and were able to negotiate with local employers while

133 Commonwealth of Australia, "Aboriginal Welfare. Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities. Held at Canberra, 21st to 23rd April, 1937.," 21. 134 Commissioner Middleton cited in Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 18002000, 512.

49

maintaining a degree of ‘social invisibility’. This allowed them to avoid official intervention in family life and prior to the 1950s some families managed to remain outside government control.135 Despite the strong resistance of Nyungars changes were introduced when the Department of Native Welfare commenced a campaign of assimilation. This occurred at the same time that Nyungars were being marginalised in rural areas and moving to the city. The system that was aimed towards Aboriginal independence and responsibility was characterised by rigid control. Field staff were instructed to: maintain close and regular contact with natives in their homes, at work, in schools, etc., and to assist or advise them in any problem of general, social, economic or family welfare that might arise.136 In implementing its assimilation policy the Western Australian government rejected the settlement model. Its experiences had already shown that these were unsuccessful. However, the settlements were recycled under assimilation when they were adapted to become children’s homes. Adult residents of the settlements had to find their own way in wider society, while in remote areas of the state large missions were to become the base for long-term communities. There were similarities between the segregationist settlements and the assimilation model. Most notably was the enforcement of child education. Little was done to create real work situations, but the Department opened four agricultural training schools for youth. And in 1948 after years of official exclusion, schooling became compulsory for Aboriginal children. However, children who lived more than three miles from a school or transport system were exempted from this requirement. This neglected the education needs of Aboriginal children on pastoral stations. It was also consistent with government efforts to focus on Aboriginal people living in or close to town – largely those of mixed descent. While school attendance was compulsory for children, it was also predicated on parents providing a conventional home environment. This became the basis for another wave of child removals as authorities persuaded parents to send their children to mission schools. Parents were often promised that the children would return for holidays, but home inspections were used to ensure that they did not.137 In 1951 the Department officially rejected the practice of forcible removals of children except in cases of immediate danger or delinquency, in which case mainstream authorities were to deal with the cases. The Department of Native Welfare commenced a transition to the Department of Child Welfare in 1954, but continued to exert powers of guardianship and even set up its own foster care and adoption services. Despite the official position, children continued to be removed on the promise of a ‘better education’ and opportunity and parents were subjected to enormous pressures to send their children to mission schools.138

Ibid., 513-14. Cited in Ibid., 514. 137 Ibid., 514-15. 138 Ibid., 517. 135 136

50

Just thee years after Neville’s retirement, Commissioner Middleton announced that missions were vital for the welfare of Aboriginal people. This reversed twenty-five years of Neville’s efforts to marginalise these institutions. The number of missions expanded over the next twenty years from sixteen existing missions to more than thirty children’s mission homes and mission communities. Two examples were the Moore River Native Settlement which became a children’s mission, Mogumber Methodist Mission in 1951 and Carrolup which became Marribank Farm School for boys in 1952. Thus missions became the principle agents for education and assimilation.139 Some changes were instituted at the missions. Notably the practice of locking children in dormitories overnight was abandoned. Schools had to be staffed by qualified teachers and a standard Education Department curriculum applied. The New Norcia mission, however, obstinately refused to comply. From the late 1950s the Department began to establish a network of town based children’s hostels in more remote areas. By 1961 there were six remote hostels. The hostels were a compromise for pastoralists who were unwilling to provide schooling for their Aboriginal workers’ children, but did not want workers to follow their children to the missions. 140 As in previous eras, initial education in the hostels was oriented towards farm labouring and domestic duties.141 And even though the hostels were established on the premise that Aboriginal children would remain close to kin and country, few found it possible to return home during holidays and persistent problems with Aboriginal housing on pastoral stations became grounds for children to be declared wards of the state. During the 1950s and 1960s Aboriginal families were moved from their makeshift homes on reserves and camping grounds into suburban houses. Some families refused to leave reserves and the authorities responded through extreme measures including bulldozing camps. However, the program faced a housing shortage and by 1970 there were more than a thousand homes urgently required. In many southern towns Aboriginal people continued to live in humpies on reserves. And white town residents remained opposed to Aboriginal people living in town. These social barriers were targeted for political action by Aboriginal organisations. The Coolbaroo League in particular, challenged such racist views in its newspaper, and through organised protests and social dances.142

Ibid., 514, 19. Gogo and Christmas Creek in the Kimberley were exceptions. 141 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 522-3. 142 A more detailed account of the Coolbaroo League can be found in Lauren Marsh and Anna Haebich, "Living the Dream," in Spinning the Dream: Assimilation in Australia 1950-1970, ed. Anna Haebich (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Press, 2008). It is also the subject of a documentary film by Stephen Kinnane et al., The Coolbaroo Club (Australia: Coolbaroo Club Productions in association with Annamax Media, 1996), videorecording. 139 140

51

3. Narratives The analysis of the histories initially aimed to identify narratives encompassed in the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. In particular it aimed to find the stories that held greatest emotional content that could connect diverse audiences to the experiences of Aboriginal people. It was hoped that this would form the basis of deeper and more personal understandings of how official policies and practices have had an enduring and profoundly personal effect on the lives of Aboriginal people. This section attempts to separate out the established narratives, and move towards an understanding of more evocative narratives by considering the same events or histories from the perspectives of experience and effect.

Narratives of Intent The histories presented in the Section 2 provide the basis for identifying established or ‘official’ narratives. These are the formal histories of the policies as they evolved in terms of context and intent. Although it is recognised that there is overlap between the two policies, they are separated into the two sub-themes of segregation and assimilation to provide a broad chronological structure. The narratives also attempt to reflect the outcomes for Aboriginal people and are deliberately selected for their complexity and their ability to encompass the contradictions and divergent views. Segregation Policy Protection Early rationale for segregation of Aboriginal people from the settler population is framed around narratives of protection. Aboriginal people were seen as vulnerable to the vices of European settler society, especially excessive alcohol consumption and the sexual exploitation of Aboriginal women. Segregation in this context was aimed at removing Aboriginal people from European society in an effort to protect their health and wellbeing. In rare, but significant instances, missionaries also endeavoured to protect Aboriginal languages and culture. Unfortunately this narrative was undermined by the inadequacy of resources allocated to reserves and missions. Rations and other provisions were often inadequate to maintain Aboriginal communities and rather than protecting Aboriginal people, they contributed to poverty and ill health. In other instances such as in the Northern Territory, station reserves placed Aboriginal people at the mercy of pastoralists who were often extremely brutal, and kidnapped women and children for sexual and economic exploitation. In addition there were a number of less noble agendas associated with the narrative of protection. Segregation of Aboriginal people onto specific tracts of land smoothed the way for non-Aboriginal occupation of land. Reserves and missions were deliberately located outside traditional boundaries of the residents in an attempt to further disrupt traditional ties to country. With Aboriginal people confined to small fragments of land, the alteration

52

and acquisition of land as colonial settlements could occur with minimal risk of encountering hostility or reprisals from the prior landowners. In effect a policy of ‘protection’ for Aboriginal people afforded greater protection for colonial expansion and individual settlers.143 A related narrative of segregation is therefore the story of land ‘acquisition’ by settler. The reprisals from which settlers sought protection are narratives of resistance in which Aboriginal people asserted their rights to the land. The practices associated with segregation ensured a less dangerous settlement of Australia than occurred in many other parts of the world. This underpins the long-standing myth of peaceful settlement of the Australian continent, and the later myths of Britishness and the White Australia Policy. Conversion Aboriginal people placed on reserves under segregation policies were subjected to a program of cultural retraining. The British Government initially saw Aboriginal people as equal, if inferior, citizens in need of ‘civilising’. The process of civilising Aboriginal people had three basic elements: • • •

Conversion to Christianity Transformation from hunter-gatherers to settled farmers, e.g. in early and lat segregation policies protectorates were established with the aim of converting Aboriginal people to a settled agricultural life. Basic schooling in English and literacy

Aboriginal people responded to these objectives in various ways, from outright rejection through to fascination and curiosity in performing some of the tasks and adopting skills and goods to their advantage. They adapted and developed new traditions to meet the needs of their radically altered social conditions. But Aboriginal people also actively resisted attempts at conversion and maintained their own beliefs, customs and practices despite a range of sanctions and practices to destroy these. Labour Underlying the civilising agenda, was a need for labour in the emergent colonies, and there was a strong push under segregation to make Aboriginal people ‘useful’. Hence the project of civilising people aimed to give Aboriginal people skills needed by the colonies. Apprenticeships for Aboriginal children were structured around trades and agriculture. Training Aboriginal boys and men to become agriculturalists not only converted Aboriginal people from a perceived lesser way of life, but provided a skilled agricultural workforce. Despite the global push to end slavery, the practice was manifestly exploitative because: • •

Payment in goods and food (rations) rather than wages144 Young children were forced to work

An example of this clear advantage was the temporary but telling renaming of the Protector of Natives as the Guardian of Natives and Protector of Settlers by Lt. Fitzgerald in Western Australia in 1848. 144 Under assimilation Aboriginal people were also forced to work without pay under a scheme of wages quarantine. 143

53

•

Schooling was oriented towards trades and labour rather than any real education.

Many of these measures served to produce Aboriginal people as an inferior class of subservient workers. The economic advantages of this was seen in the resistance of pastoralists to any reform, and the reluctance of Queensland to close government stations. ‘A Dying Race’ A core element of the Segregation policy was the separation of Aboriginal people of ‘pure’ descent from those of mixed decent. The effectiveness of the policy rested on the widely held belief that Aboriginal people were doomed to extinction. Heavily influenced by Darwinian thinking, the premise was that Aboriginal people were a weaker people who would eventually be displaced by the European population. Governments simply held a belief that the ‘Aboriginal problem’ would solve itself.145 This allowed governments to believe that there would be no long term financial responsibility for Aboriginal affairs. The reality was that there was an increase in Aboriginal people throughout Australia, especially a growing number of people of mixed descent. This threatened to undermine many of the principles on which the colonies were founded. Failure Early protective and educational endeavours under segregation all failed. The reasons for failure were varied and particular to specific circumstances. However, some of the common problems included the poor funding of missions and reserves and the continuing influence of Aboriginal cultural practices and family. Aboriginal people seldom stayed long on the reserves instead preferring to move into town or to return to their own way of life. Missions were commonly under-resourced and offered inadequate rations. Aboriginal people were therefore more attracted to town where they could be paid in wages and enjoy greater liberties and pleasures. At the same time, Aboriginal people continued to associate with one another and residents of the reserves would inevitably return to their own group. While officials used the reserves to separate Aboriginal people of mixed descent from their relatives, these measures failed and people constantly returned to their families. This was such a common problem that many missions were established in isolated locations, and local Aboriginal people were excluded so that residents were all from distant regions.146 Failure in these circumstances is often attributed to Aboriginal people. However, the failure was in the inadequacy and inflexibility of the non-Aboriginal system. Aboriginal people demonstrated an ability to acquire new skills, language and cultural behaviours. Rather than being unable to develop the necessary skills, language and religion, Aboriginal people chose to maintain their own beliefs and customs. The failure was in the administration failing to recognise the strength and complexity of Aboriginal society.

This strongly held view had implications for later policy making. For instance government refusal to acknowledge the Aboriginal populations of Tasmania and Victoria’s refusal to participate in Commonwealth/State Conferences on Aboriginal affairs in 1948 and 1951. 146 Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 40. 145

54

Assimilation

Assimilation Practices Many assimilationist practices evolved long before Assimilation was adopted as a formal policy. Under segregation Aboriginal people were instructed in core elements of nineteenth century British culture. The process aimed to transform Aboriginal people into Englishspeaking Christian agriculturalists. Children were also separated from adults in an attempt to further disrupt cultural practices of Aboriginal society. This contributed to an early form of cultural assimilation. There were several instances where Aboriginal people chose to ‘assimilate’. This is seen in the very earliest exchanges where individuals who recognised the growing power of the new arrivals and feared for the fate of their own people chose to form alliances with the colonists. These individuals learnt to speak English, and to conform to many new social and cultural etiquettes. There were others too who took up life as agriculturalists, establishing their own properties alongside non-Aboriginal settlers. And there have been many instances where people of mixed descent have chosen to live as non-Aboriginal people, disguising their origins in an effort to evade government interference imposed on Aboriginal people. Assimilation Policy While assimilationist practices evolved from the earliest period of colonisation, the formal adoption of Assimilation as a policy across Australia marked a significant change. Assimilation was no longer about the relatively passive drift of Aboriginal people into the wider community but an active process of socio-cultural interference by governments. Aboriginal people were subjected to constant surveillance to ensure that they subscribed to, and maintained, a range non-Aboriginal behaviours. Assimilation policies operated on the belief that there was nothing of value in Aboriginal culture or society, and the intention was to eradicate all Aboriginal culture and society. It was informed and supported by anthropologists of the time, who were of the belief that Aboriginal people of mixed descent were not truly Aboriginal and could be integrated into wider society. Despite a national agreement to pursue assimilation, the formal adoption of the policy was implemented at different times within different jurisdictions. Disruption At the core of stories under assimilation policy is the systematic dismantling of Aboriginal social groups. Child separation had been a practice since the first colonial encounters and was thought to be an essential step in converting Aboriginal children (and hence Aboriginal people) to European ways. Under assimilation policies these practices were accelerated and systematic disruption of social ties became a critical component of policy implementation. There was a rapid escalation of child removals in 1950s and 1960s to facilitate assimilation. The idea was to remove children from their Aboriginal families and thereafter raise them as non-Aboriginal people. Children were systematically removed from parents and siblings were separated from one another. They were frequently adopted or fostered by nonAboriginal families, often without revealing a child’s Aboriginal heritage. Significant

55

numbers of children were removed and placed in institutional care under assimilation policy. In these institutions children were further separated from each other, prohibited from speaking their own language and communicating with the outside world. Colour Some of the most notorious practices under assimilation were undertaken in the belief that Aboriginality was merely a matter of skin colour. This reflects an early idea of biological assimilation. It was also strongly linked to economics. In a move to limit public expenditure, Aboriginal people of mixed descent in Victoria and New South Wales were prohibited from living on reserves. Hence skin colour was used to decide whether an individual was Aboriginal or not. The idea that Aboriginality was merely a matter of colour had consequences for how individuals would be treated. It was thought that Aboriginal people could be made to ‘disappear’ into non-Aboriginal society, and lighter skinned individuals were targeted. Mr Neville in WA was a particularly strong advocate of a degrading and inhumane practice in which children were categorised on the basis of skin tone. This superficial assessment led children into separate institutions and educational facilities, regardless of their connections to family members. Coercion The formal policies of assimilation are frequently characterised by stories of coercion. There are a number of deeply moving narratives of the traumatic circumstances in which many parents and children were physically wrenched apart. In other instances Aboriginal parents were threatened if they would not consent to their children being taken. These threats had to be extreme to persuade parents to part with their children. Parents were threatened with physical punishment, prison sentences, expulsion from stations and denial of rations. Deception Children were separated from their parents under various deceptions. Often they were assured that the arrangements were temporary. On the pretext of taking children to hospital, holiday camp or for schooling, authorities permanently removed children from their parents and extended families. Many never returned to their families. In other instances Aboriginal people who were illiterate were made to sign documents of which they had no understanding, thus consenting to arrangements of which they had no knowledge. And families were kept separated by authorities who withheld information from children and parents. By withholding letters and other attempts to communicate between institutions and outside communities, authorities were able to sever bonds, often lying to children and parents about the physical or emotional well-being of their loved ones. ‘And they were wondering why we didn’t write. That was one way they stopped us keeping contact with our families. Then they had the hide to turn around and say, ‘they don’t love you. They don’t care about you.’

56

Former resident of Cootamundra Girls Home147 Non-Aboriginal women who adopted Aboriginal children were also deceived by the state. Many adopted children in the belief that they were abandoned or orphaned even though the state was often aware that the parents were alive and the child was not abandoned. Non-Aboriginal people were sometimes further deceived about these children’s origins. It was not uncommon cases for Aboriginal children to be placed with non-Aboriginal families who had no knowledge of the child’s cultural origin. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women were therefore deceived by the state in effecting cultural assimilation.

Failure Like Segregation Policies, many assimilationist practices and policies failed. Administrations consistently failed to recognise the strength of Aboriginal culture and the hostility of broader society towards Aboriginal people. Both undermined the success of assimilation. Despite the efforts of Aboriginal people to conform to new social orders, the emergent colonial societies failed to accept them as equals. A strong narrative is therefore centred on Aboriginal people’s exclusion from mainstream society. Discrimination ensured that Aboriginal people found little or no work, were denied social security and excluded from mainstream education. This directly contradicted the stated intention of ‘assimilation’. In many circumstances, Aboriginal people continued to affiliate with each other despite any number of interventions to split and destroy Aboriginal society. Cultural practices, family affiliation and social connection were maintained despite the efforts to disperse people. Fringe camps are testimony to people’s persistence in remaining in proximity to family or country despite being excluded from towns or reserves. Individuals also went to extraordinary lengths to avoid having their children taken from them. Many left missions and reserves to avoid authorities, and there are many stories of children being hidden, buried and disguised. There are also stories of escape and many parents and children never relinquished the hope of being reunited. And in an unpredicted way, assimilation also gave rise to a new sense of Aboriginality. Aboriginal people from different social and cultural groups found a common identity in the shared experiences under assimilation. The institutionalisation of Aboriginal children in particular is linked to the emergence of a pan-Aboriginal awareness and identity in Australia. This emergence of a new and strong Aboriginal culture ran contrary to the aims of assimilation.

Narratives of Effect Effects can reflect both intended and unintended consequences of government policy and practice. The effects of policies under segregation and assimilation have continuing

147

Cited in Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 343.

57

implications for how non-Aboriginal people perceive Aboriginal people and their role in society today. Adaptation By and large the policies of segregation and assimilation failed in their intention. In contrast with the efforts of governments, many Aboriginal people successfully adapted to, and created, new ways of being that complemented the arrival of British colonisers. Aboriginal people maintained their own cultures and traditions, but also showed a strong aptitude for selecting aspects of the new culture that were advantageous. Some chose to integrate with colonial society. This was not easy and many encountered a society unwilling to accept them as equals. Nevertheless some at least separated from Aboriginal society. This did not always mean renouncing their Aboriginality. For instance, in the nineteenth century Aboriginal groups in the southwest of Western Australia created new hybrid ways of life working on pastoral stations and supplementing their food with hunting and foraging on stations and the land between stations. Some even successfully owned land, and with their mission training formed an elite group of educated landowners, recognised as different to other Aboriginal people by the colonisers. The systematic institutionalisation of Aboriginal people fostered the emergence of a new Aboriginal identity based on the shared experiences, rather than on familial affiliations of language and country. This emergence of a pan-Aboriginal identity was accompanied by more visible and coordinated political activism among Aboriginal people. Disadvantage Many of the controls placed over Aboriginal people ensured that they would remain subject to each successive policy wave, and be subjected to administrative intervention. This created a cycle of disadvantage that continues to the present. Much of the disadvantage stems from the loss of land, and the subsequent resumption of successful Aboriginal stations and farms. Other examples of cyclical disadvantage include: • The very conditions of exclusion that led to Aboriginal poverty were used to argue for removal of Aboriginal children from their families • Aboriginal girls sent out from institutions to work as domestics often became pregnant and their children were taken into care. • Aboriginal children could be labelled uncontrollable for non-attendance at school but could also be excluded from school on basis of ‘home condition’ or ‘substantial opposition’ from non-Aboriginal people. • Institutional life gave Aboriginal people few life skills for the outside world. This gave them no capacity to manage their own affairs (see below). • Waves of legislation changed the status of Aboriginal people, imposing restrictions and removing rights. Gender Processes of segregation and assimilation are strongly gendered. Women are centrally placed in the philosophy underlying child removals. The nurturing role of women in society was seen as the source of cultural behaviours. A strong narrative was centred on the belief that Aboriginal children should be removed from their Aboriginal mothers if they were to

58

successfully assimilate. And through the nurture of non-Aboriginal women these same children would readily acquire the patterns and skills of non-Aboriginal society. As a consequence of this reasoning, many more girl children were removed than boys, and the training and experiences of Aboriginal boys and girls was very different. Girls and boys were given strongly gendered work responsibilities, with girls responsible for many domestic duties, while boys took on labouring tasks associated with pastoral and agricultural work. These roles had further implications for how closely Aboriginal women and men were monitored, with Aboriginal men often enjoying greater freedoms in the tasks they undertook. Institutionalisation A common misconception about Aboriginal people is that they have been unable to adapt to a European way of life. The examples above unequivocally disprove this assumption. Early records suggest that Aboriginal people were more than able to understand and even manipulate European systems. The impacts of segregation and assimilation policies and practices however, stripped Aboriginal people of many skills and denied them access to others. Although it might be argued that the practices implemented under segregation and assimilation policies aimed to equip Aboriginal people for life in a colonial society, in fact many had the direct opposite effect. The exploitation of labour which saw Aboriginal people paid only in food and goods, left many people without an understanding of basic economic systems. As a consequence at the end of mission times, many were left without the life-skills to manage their own affairs. Home Another story of assimilation is the way in which sites of incarceration became home to Aboriginal residents. While reserves and homes were highly controlled and rigidly managed, for many these were the only homes they knew. Sometimes the individuals were simply dependent on the institutions and were incapable of establishing an alternative home base. In other instances, however reserves were hard fought for. After successive waves of dispossession Aboriginal people recognised the value of the reserves and missions as the last pieces of land ‘owned’ by Aboriginal people. They would not easily relinquish them. And for others the collective experiences of being in institutions gave rise to a new sense of belonging. Groups of Aboriginal people begin to identify collectively, not through kin but through a shared experiences in institutions. Children brought up together became each other’s family and developed a sense of Aboriginal identity. Protest Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal voices are present in the historical record suggest a high degree of protest over treatment of Aboriginal people. Some of this concern led to the policies of protectionism and later assimilation. In the earliest period concerns about the removal of children from their parents provoked concern from missionaries and others. Protest by non-Aboriginal people during the assimilationist period also focused on issues of segregation. For instance the Freedom Rides in New South Wales were concerned about

59

the discrimination faced by Aboriginal people and their exclusion from mainstream facilities. Aboriginal people also voiced their own protests. They often acquired skills of their oppressors and used these against them, learning to write letters, produce newspapers and orchestrate industrial action.

Narratives of Experience There are numerous compelling and heart-wrenching accounts of the impacts of segregation and assimilation policies on Aboriginal peoples’ lives and well-being. It is these personal accounts that have the greatest capacity to engage audiences and awaken a sense of responsibility and compassion from the broader community. This is seen clearly in the community response to the stories contained in the National Inquiry into the Stolen Generation.148 Despite a lack of response from the Commonwealth Government at the time, the Australian public was moved to participate in their own public apologies in the form of Sorry Day marches across the country. The project therefore aims to identify these stories of personal experience for the whole theme. Historical records are notoriously biased towards colonial voices and this bias is difficult to overcome in the earliest period of this study. Nevertheless, a few fragmentary sources give some insight into Aboriginal views. Even in the primary records, these are secondary representations of Aboriginal experience. Recent historiography has however, given particular attention to reflecting on and representing these wherever possible. Administration and Control Perhaps the most overwhelming experience of all for Aboriginal people under the theme ‘from Segregation to Assimilation’ is the high level of administrative intervention in their lives. Missionaries, protectors, ‘The Board’ and ‘The Department’, have all subjected Aboriginal people to a level of intervention in their personal lives that exceeds anyone else in Australia. The establishment of reserves and missions provided a means to confine, and constantly monitor how Aboriginal people lived and how they could be controlled. Many reserves that were initially run by religious groups were taken over by the states in an effort to more effectively control Aboriginal people. A series of legislative measures have been implemented for every jurisdiction and many, such as the Victorian Aborigines Protection Act 1869, made provision for the creation of regulations thus limiting the amount of debate and public scrutiny about many policies and practices.

Carmel Bird, ed., The Stolen Children: Their Stories: Including Extracts from the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (Milsons Point, N.S.W.: Random House Australia, 1998), National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.".

148

60

These legislations were accompanied by the appointment of various officials; from individual protectors to government boards and departments. The first Board was in Victoria established in 1860 and similar bodies went on to be established for every jurisdiction. These administrative instruments went through multiple iterations in response to changing policy changes. They all had enormous powers in relation to Aboriginal people and were directly responsible for implementing laws and policies. This included monitoring Aboriginal people’s movement, confining or removing people on reserves, taking children from their families, issuing rations and payments, imposing curfews and a raft of other daily monitoring and interference. These organisations became despised and feared by Aboriginal people. Hardship The policies of segregation and assimilation have imposed enormous hardship on Aboriginal people. The early loss of land led to poverty, poor health and dire living conditions for Aboriginal people. Hunger as a consequence is a strong theme in early Aboriginal-settler relations Aboriginal people forced off their land were quickly without the resources to support themselves and their family. The emerging colonies were also limited in their ability to produce European foods and government support was limited. Missions were supposed to provide for Aboriginal people. As in children’s homes, however, the discipline, regimentation, hard work, and limited food and clothing made these places of great suffering. People were forced to live life according to a strict and inflexible routine of instruction and labour. Children were required to ‘scrub, launder and cook’.149 Provisions in food and clothing were scant so that people were often hungry and humiliated. And there are many narratives of cruelty and exploitation. Aboriginal people – children and adults - who failed to comply with the many rules and constraints were subjected to a range of punishments including forced relocation to reserves or punishment areas, beatings, incarceration on stations or in rooms or closets. Others would simply disappear. Verbal abuse of Aboriginal people was common and people were denigrated as lazy, dirty and unintelligent. Loss I am afraid that [my wife] will cimmit sueside if the boy is not back soon for she is good for nothing only cry day and night… I have as much love for my dear wife and churldines as you have for yours … so if you have any feeling atole please send the boy back as quick as you can it did not take long for him to go but it takes a long time for him to come back. Aboriginal father to the Aborigines Department in 1903150 Many stories in Aboriginal histories of segregation and assimilation are centred on ideas of loss. This is often loss of family, culture and connection with country. High mortality rates

National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 52.. 150 Cited in Haebich, For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 1900-1940, 67.. 149

61

among Aboriginal people since colonisation have meant further loss of life and family. Aboriginal people also suffered losses of income and opportunity – being poorly recompensed for labour and being denied access to education and paid employment. There is also a sense of lost time; families who are reunited cannot reclaim the years apart and feel the loss of growing up within family and with knowledge of culture. Many children also suffered repeated losses in the initial removal, the separation from family within institutions, their movement from one family or institution to another. A consequence of these losses is that Aboriginal people experienced high levels of fear in almost all phases of the theme. Their was fear of violence, fear of losing children, fear of losing family and culture, fear of reprisal, fear of starvation, and fear of many unpredictable and unknowable actions by the state. Rejection Aboriginal people experienced rejection at a number of levels. Regardless of their own efforts and achievements to adapt to a new language and culture, they were largely rejected by non-Aboriginal society. This included rejection from mainstream education and health services, and the denial of employment opportunities. Children also suffered the more personal and immediate rejection of non-Aboriginal foster and adoptive families who often chose to return children to institutions when they founding them wanting in some way, or even if the family was simply moving elsewhere. Children who were raised and believed themselves to be non-Aboriginal suffered multiple and simultaneous rejections when they were abruptly recast as Aboriginal people when a term of wardship ended.151 Under assimilation, Aboriginal people were frequently rejected by white society and rejected as tenants and neighbours. Reunion Stories of reunion are an important part of the narratives for ‘Segregation to Assimilation’. Stories of reunion demonstrate a connection and commitment to family and culture despite the best efforts of governments and administration to destroy these. These are occasions that produce a confusion of emotions. Aboriginal children removed from their parents experience joy and relief at finding family, but can also grieve for time lost and lives lived apart. Many people express guilt at believing the lies told to them by the state, or for not trying harder to find children and parents. In some cases the reunion is a disappointment and produces a further sense of loss – for instance when family members have died before reunions can be effected, or when families are not what they have been imagined. Reunion has also extended to the land and there are many instances where Aboriginal people have chosen to move back to reserves and missions. Reunion with land has also

151 The case of Paul is a good example.National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 70, Bird, ed., The Stolen Children: Their Stories: Including Extracts from the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.

62

been used to coerce Aboriginal people into agreements, as in the case of Robinson in Van Diemen’s Land. Inequality Within the theme ‘from Segregation to Assimilation’ are many stories of injustice. One of the central aspects of this is the uequal treatment of Aboriginal people in relation to nonAboriginal society. At the broadest level the legislation, administration and policies applying to Aboriginal people were much greater than for other groups of people. Further disadvantage stemmed from the different way in which Aboriginal people were treated under the law. This was particularly the case in relation to the removal of children. In many instances Aboriginal child removals took place under the same legislative and policy frameworks as they did for non-Aboriginal children. However, the case for neglect or abandonment was more readily applied to Aboriginal children, and parental consent was much more routinely dismissed. Aboriginal children were also treated differently upon removal. For instance, foster parents who failed to meet standards for non-Aboriginal care could still foster Aboriginal children, suggesting careless and wanton neglect of Aboriginal children.152 Similarly apprenticeships for non-Aboriginal children were negotiated by parents and where the agreements failed, children returned to their families. However, Aboriginal children were apprenticed by the Board and if an apprenticeship failed, the child was returned to the board and punished.

Cross Reference to Narrative Triggers The narratives identified above are compelling, but it is important in distilling these further that they remain engaging and thought provoking. As outlined in the introduction, the project therefore aimed to use emotive themes or narrative triggers to represent these narratives. A first and tentative suggestion for such terms in made in Table 4. This cross references each of the identified narratives with themes drawn from the Eternity framework, and another column identifies additional terms that emerge as strong elements in a number of stories. The emotive terms that have been identified attempt to represent both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal perspectives. Consequently these sometimes appear at odds with what is generally regarded as an indigenous experience. However, in accordance with the project brief, this attempted to identify non-Aboriginal motives and experience as well as indigenous perspectives.

152

For example, National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 55.

63

Narratives

Table 4: Narrative Triggers Eternity Themes

Other Themes

Intent

Protection Conversion Labour ‘A Dying Race’ Assimilation Practices Assimilation Policy Disruption Colour Coercion Deception Failure Effect

Separation, Fear, Hope Devotion, Chance , Hope, Mystery, Thrill Fear, Hope Hope , Separation Separation, Hope Fear, Hope Separation, Loneliness Separation, Chance, Loneliness, Hope Fear, Separation, Loneliness Separation, Loneliness Separation, Loneliness, Devotion, Hope, Joy

Deception, Coersion Coersion, Control Drudgery Coersion Deception Shame Guilt, Anger, Sorrow Guilt, Anger, Sorrow, Shame

Adaptation Disadvantage Gender Institutionalisation Home Protest

Hope, Separation, Joy, Mystery Separation, Loneliness, Fear Separation, Loneliness Hope, Fear Joy, Hope, Chance Fear, Hope, Joy, Chance

Anger

Administration and Control Hardship Loss Rejection

Fear, Hope Loneliness, Fear Loneliness, Separation Loneliness, Separation

Frustration, Anger Hunger, Suffering Sorrow, Sorrow,

Reunion

Joy, Hope, Loneliness

Anger, Guilt

Inequality

Separation

Sorrow, Anger

Experience

Hunger, Suffering Drudgery Helplessness, Suffering

Evocative Narratives The narratives of intent, effect and experience can be further distilled into a short-list of evocative topics that further cut across multiple jurisdictions, timeframes and cultural patterns. Being Aboriginal Miago … had amongst the white people none who would be truly friends of his, - they would give him scraps from their table, but the very outcasts of the whites would not have treated him as an equal, - they had no sympathy with him, - he could not have married a white woman, - he had no certain means of subsistence open to him, - he never could have been either a husband or a father, if he had lived apart from his own people; - where, amongst the whites, was he to find one who would

64

have filled for him the place osf his black mother, whom he is much attached to? – what white man would have been his brother? – what white woman his sister? He had two courses left open to him, he could either have renounced all natural ties, and have led a hopeless, joyless life among the whites, - ever a servant, - ever an inferior being; - or he could either have renounced civilization, and return to the friends of hs childhood, and to the habits of his youth. He chose the latter course, and I think that I should have done the same.” Governor Grey, 1841153 Narratives of ‘Being Aboriginal’ lie at the heart of the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. The shared thrust of these policies has been to destroy or eliminate Aboriginal people and culture from Australia. Despite systematic and thorough attempts to do so, many people continued to claim and perform their Aboriginality. Aboriginal culture and society survived and Aboriginal people maintained their cultural and social distinction. Aboriginality been portrayed in diverse ways; as a curiosity, a crime, pitiable, fatal, weak, destructible, a reference point of superiority, a threat and a tragedy. The definition of what or who constituted an Aboriginal person was repeatedly redefined by administrators in an effort to save money and rid themselves of financial and moral responsibilities for Aboriginal affairs. Aboriginal peoples have also redefined themselves in response to these policies; whether in defiance of changed definitions or in an emergence of a new identity based on shared disadvantage and discrimination. A police report to the Victorian Board of Inquiry in 1957 stated that: Possibly Aboriginal people have no desire to be absorbed into the general community and are quite content to live with their own people among the freedom and comfort of their own social standards.154 Being Aboriginal therefore tells many stories: • Being Aboriginal was a commonly cited reason for children being removed and became synonymous with being ‘neglected’. • Adults were seen as entrenched in being Aboriginal, and therefore least able to be ‘civilised’ and a negative influence on children. • People continue to be Aboriginal despite efforts to reclassify them. For example, fringe camps developed in Victoria when people of mixed descent were removed from reserves. Here people maintained contact with their relatives in secret or lived on the edges of towns, maintaining a sense of Aboriginality despite efforts to disperse and merge these individuals within the wider society. • Being Aboriginal is a source of pride for Aboriginal people and is not easily relinquished. • Being Aboriginal is a story of skin colour in which non-Aboriginal administrators use this to make decisions about which children would be removed, where they would go, and how they would be educated. Skin colour is linked to being Aboriginal but fails to recognise that being Aboriginal is cultural rather than biological.

153 154

Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 299.. Cited in Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 499.

65

•

Being Aboriginal is a recent idea in which groups of Aboriginal people begin to identify collectively, not through kin and ties to country, but through shared experiences of separation, discrimination, incarceration, hardship, etc. PanAboriginality becomes a movement for activism.

Separation Another central narrative of the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ are the many stories of separation that are shared across both policies and through all eras. These are stories that tell of the separation of people from country, the separation of Aboriginal people from one other, the separation of people of mixed descent, and the separation of Aboriginal people from wider society. These include numerous stories around: • Separation from land including the early system of reserves and missions established to remove Aboriginal from their own country and to remove them from British settlements. And second waves of dispossession as Aboriginal people were forced to relinquish viable and profitable farms and settlements. • Stories of child separation from the parents and extended families are innumerable, and include: - Child separations in early colonies through the practice of protectors and missionaries taking Aboriginal children to live with them. - Segregated mission education of Aboriginal children - Escalation of removals under policies of assimilation. - Responsible and supporting non-Aboriginal parents of Aboriginal children separated from their families. “They would not let us kiss our father goodbye, I will never forget the sad look on his face”.155 - Temporary separations became permanent. - Stories of evading authorities and hiding children. • Separation of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. Non-Aboriginal people who associated with Aboriginal people were regarded as being of bad character. • Separation of children and parents and families, as well as the separation of siblings from each other. • Constant movement of children without formal arrangements meant that many parents (and authorities) lost track of their whereabouts. • Separation of boys and girls • Children raised in non-Aboriginal families were regularly abandoned at a later time, suffering repeated separation from families • Under assimilation, education facilities continued to be co-located with missions and reserves rather than providing Aboriginal children with education within mainstream schools.

National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 53..

155

66

Mother & Child The relationship between mother and child is a central one in any definition of family. Family is a strong narrative element of Aboriginal society. The nature of Aboriginal kinship systems had implications for how Aboriginal people interacted with settlers in the first instance, and how they responded to, and resisted, the many administrative efforts to destroy these links. It is an oversimplification of child removal practices to regard these as simply the separation of children and parents, because separations effected, and led to the loss of, extensive networks of relatives. Nevertheless, mother-child relationships are among the most immediate and strong bonds. They are greatly mythologised and regarded as sacrosanct across many cultures. Using the narratives around mothering is therefore a very affective means of reaching audiences. There is a very strong core of ideas centred on mothering in stories of segregation and assimilation. Mothers are regarded as integral to the perpetuation of culture. This is framed as both bad (when expressed as continuity of Aboriginal culture, especially when state demands integration or assimilation) and good (when evoked as upholding non-Aboriginal culture, including when mothers are used to instil these values in Aboriginal children through adoption). These ideas underpin many policies of removal of children during both segregation and assimilation. Both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal mothers have been manipulated by the state to implement policies of assimilation.156 Narratives include: • Stories of loss of bond between mothers and children “I was taken off my mum as soon as I was born, so she never even seen me”.157 • Loss of children • Judgements about ‘good’ mothering – usually non-Aboriginal and ‘bad’ mothers, usually represented by Aboriginal women. • Invisibility of non-Aboriginal mothers • Deception of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal mothers: Aboriginal women are coerced or tricked to relinquish their children and Aboriginal children are placed with nonAboriginal women without their knowledge. • Reunions and the strength of the bond which saw Aboriginal women never give up looking for their children; Aboriginal children refusing to call foster mothers ‘mum’; children escaping institutions to find their way home. ‘Battle for the Children’s Minds’ Our chief hope is decidedly in the children; and the complete success as far as regards their education and civilisation would be before us, if it were possible to remove them from the influence of their parents. Protector Matthew Moorhouse, 1840 158

156 D. Cuthbert, "Stolen Children, Invisible Mothers and Unspeakable Stories: The Experiences of Non-Aboriginal Adoptive and Foster Mothers of Aboriginal Children," Social Semiotics 11 (2001). 157 National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 50.

67

Aboriginal Pride Stories of Aboriginal resistance and cultural continuity are important narratives for the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. These stories demonstrate the active role Aboriginal people played in the failure of the policies. Early history of Aboriginal settler interactions suggests that Aboriginal people had a high degree of self-worth. Aboriginal people clearly indicated that settlers owed certain goods and services in exchange for occupation of land and the usurpation of property. There are many instances when Aboriginal people withdrew their cooperation when this ‘compensation’ or payment was inadequate. This is seen in: • Abandonment of missions and schools where rations were inadequate, or where payment in money could be obtained off reserves. • Taking only jobs and training that served their interests and maintained their relations with kin, or country (selection of particular land) • Refusal to move from missions and reserves when closed or moved. • Favouring positions with prestige or which provided new kinds of status (e.g. native police), or goods like guns, uniforms, etc. There is also evidence that Aboriginal people were quick to recognise the hierarchical structure of European society and were keen to place themselves at the top of that scale rather than at the bottom where settlers assumed they would be. This is summed up in the comment ‘we gentlemen, we no work’.159 Despite the constant attacks on Aboriginal culture through the processes of assimilation, Aboriginal people maintain and continue their language and cultural practices. This ranged from outright rejection of all European ways, to the invention of new cultural traditions that blended Aboriginal traditions with those of the colonists. This ranged from everyday subsistence practices to religious and ceremonial adaptation. Belonging • Segregation – integration through civilising • institutionalisation Aboriginal labour The contribution of Aboriginal labour to the development of colonial Australia is an important narrative that is often overlooked. Unemployment is a reality for many Aboriginal people in Australia. This is often confused with notions of Aboriginal people as unemployable which rests of longstanding negative stereotypes about Aboriginal people as lazy, unintelligent or even culturally unsuited to work. The stories about Aboriginal workers

cited in Hall, A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children. 159 Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 63. 158

68

in the theme ‘from segregation to assimilation’ contradict these attitudes. The policies and practices under segregation and assimilation both served to create a cheap workforce for Australia. Hence it may be argued that Australia’s economies were built not on the sheep’s back but on the land and labour of Aborigines. Aboriginal people on reserves and missions and other institutions were removed under the guise of providing children with an education. However, many stories relate how ‘education’ was oriented towards manual skills rather than a genuine education. And in homes, children were made to carry out many domestic chores to the exclusion of completing any formal education. •

• • • •

•

The majority of Aboriginal people were trained to be agricultural labourers and domestic servants. Women and girls provided a domestic workforce, carrying out a range of laundering and cleaning tasks in private situations. From within institutions they also provided sewing and laundering services that generated both direct profit and savings through reduced expenditure. Men were more commonly employed as labourers on large pastoral stations. These tasks were often undertaken in return for rations rather than wages and enabled the opening and maintenance of many pastoral properties in Australia. Others kinds of employment such as postal runs, railways and road works became the domain of Aboriginal workers in some areas. Aboriginal people used these opportunities to develop their own properties and many became agriculturalists. However, Aboriginal people were often forced to relinquish these properties due to settler pressure and threats from administration. Consequently a number of Aboriginal people effectively ‘disappeared’ into the wider community, disguising and denying their Aboriginality, in preference to being subjected to discriminatory legislation and practices. The stolen wages case exemplifies the exploitation of Aboriginal labour in which wages were quarantined and workers only given minimal support in food and other basic goods. The state was able to use the funds to expand its program of institutionalisation.

The relationship between Aboriginal workers and Segregation and Assimilation policies was further affected by a number of world events and concerns, and local conditions. For example: • The emancipation of African slaves resulted in a commitment by the British to make colonialism safer for indigenous people. This translated into Protectionist ideas of the early Australian colonies e.g. the Port Phillip Protectorate and Batman Treaty.160 • The absence of convicts in early Victorian settlements meant there was a greater reliance on Aboriginal labour in pastoral industries than in some other colonies.161 • The Victorian Gold Rush resulted in a rush of settler land claims and an influx of workers who displaced Aboriginal labourers. • The labour shortages during World Wars increased employment opportunities for Aboriginal labourers and they enjoyed better working conditions.

160 161

Ibid., xxii-xxiii. Ibid., xxii.

69

• •

The transition from large pastoral stations to smaller farms in the southwest of Western Australia displaced Aboriginal hunting, and the increased settler population was given preference in employment. A claim for equal wages for Aboriginal pastoral workers saw large numbers of Aboriginal people forced off stations

Colonial Economies Another widely held belief about Aboriginal people in Australia that has origins in the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ is the idea that ‘Aborigines are given too much’. This can be traced to early settler objections to the establishment of reserves and missions, especially from those settlers on surrounding land who wanted to claim those lands for themselves. Similar objections were also made about Aboriginal welfare and steps were taken to limit spending in a number of days. • Many early missions failed because government funding was inadequate. As a consequence Aboriginal people were often hungry, ill and living in poor conditions. • Rather than Aboriginal people disappearing under segregation, the numbers of mixed descent people increased. A concerted effort was made to exclude people from government support by narrowing the definition of Aboriginality. • Administration and practices established to compensate, protect or control Aboriginal people were poorly funded, often leading to the failure of many systems and hardship for Aboriginal people. • Aboriginal people were poorly paid or paid only in rations and provisions, while others had their wages withheld by governments, missionaries and other agents. Dependency The loss of Aboriginal land that deprived Aboriginal people of a livelihood commenced a cycle of dependency in Australia that still struggles to be undone. Without land Aboriginal people have been forced to beg or accept charity from the earliest colonial period. Subsequent waves of missions, reserves, settlements and stations controlled every aspect of Aboriginal people’s lives, rendering them incapable of living in any other social system. This was particularly acute for children raised in institutions.

70

4. A Narrative Framework The identification of narratives had two principle aims; to provide evocative means of engaging people in the stories of From Segregation to Assimilation and to provide a framework for the identification of significant sites. The narratives identified in section 3 provide a collection of evocative stories. However, they lack a clear structure necessary for the systematic assessment and comparison of sites. In discussion with the Department a revised framework for incorporating the proposed narratives was developed. This firstly draws a clear distinction between the official policies of segregation and assimilation, and further identifies five key topics that are common to both policies, namely; race, religion, education, economics and control (discussed below). These provide a clear structure that can facilitate a comparison of sites. However, the terms are dry and official and there was a risk that this emotionally charged theme in Aboriginal history would be reduced to the kind of history that fails to engage audiences. These were therefore cross-referenced back to the evocative narratives (Table 5). The table demonstrates how narratives often transcend the boundaries of the two policies. Nevertheless, the intent of segregation and assimilation policies were clearly distinct. In identifying places to illustrate the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ it is important to represent these distinct phases in Aboriginal history. In this sense the table provides a checklist that will ensure sites from all key phases and elements of the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ are represented. Table 5: Revised Structure for Narratives in 'From Segregation to Assimilation' Segregation

Narratives Control Being Aboriginal Separation Mother and Child Aboriginal Pride Aboriginal labour Colonial economies Race Being Aboriginal Separation Mother and child Aboriginal Pride Religion (Beliefs) Being Aboriginal Separation Mother and child Aboriginal pride Education Separation Mother and child Aboriginal labour

Intent Protection Failure

Experience Administration & Control Loss Inequality

Effect Institutionalisation Adaptation Disadvantage Gender Protest ‘Home’

Protection ‘A Dying Race’

Loss Reunion Rejection Inequality

Institutionalisation Protest

Protection Conversion

Loss

Adaptation

Conversion to British subjects Labour Failure

Loss

Adaptation

71

Economics Aboriginal pride Aboriginal labour Colonial Economies

Protection Labour

Loss Hardship

Protest Disadvantage

Narratives Control Being Aboriginal Separation Mother & Child Aboriginal Pride Aboriginal Labour Colonial Economies Race Being Aboriginal Separation Mother & Child Aboriginal Pride Religion (Beliefs) Being Aboriginal Separation Mother & Child Aboriginal Pride Education Separation Mother & Child Aboriginal Labour Economics Aboriginal Pride Aboriginal Labour Colonial Economies

Intent Assimilation Policy Assimilation Practices Disruption Coercion and Deception Assimilation Failure Assimilation Policy Colour

Experience Administration & Control Inequality Loss Reunion

Effect Institutionalisation Disadvantage Gender Protest Sites of incarceration become home

Loss Reunion Rejection Inequality

Institutionalisation Protest Sites of incarceration become home

Assimilation Policy Religious Assimilation Disruption Assimilation Failure

Administration & Control Loss

Adaptation

Disruption Assimilation failure

Loss Rejection Inequality

Administration & Control Adaptation

Assimilation Practices Cost Savings

Hardship Inequality

Adaptation Institutionalisation Disadvantage Gender Protest

Assimilation

Control The Native Welfare controlled every aspect of your life in those days. It was very hard for Aboriginal people then and I learned very young that I’d have to be determined if I wanted to get anywhere.162 we know the name, family history and living conditions of every Aboriginal in the State. Director of Native Affairs, Queensland 1959163

Joan Winch, "My Mother, My Daughter," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 84. 163 Cited in Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 528. 162

72

At the highest level in the table is the topic and related narratives of Control. It is a common element of both segregation and assimilation in terms of intent, experience and effect. And it is arguably the single strongest narrative of the theme, crossing all policies, eras and jurisdictions. It is also a topic that has strong intersections with the remaining topics of race, religion, education and economics. It is anticipated that all sites identified as significant in the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ would reflect this narrative. The policies and practices of segregation were strongly oriented to the control of Aboriginal people – both in terms of limiting their contact with settler society and controlling the associated behaviours, and in terms of controlling their ability to occupy and defend their lands. As discussed below, control of Aboriginal people in the segregationist era included control over race, religion, education and economics. A principle tenet of segregation was the ‘amelioration’ of Aboriginal people. The aim was to transform Aboriginal people from ‘savagery’ to ‘civilisation’. A series of controls were implemented to achieve this, including defining and moving of Aboriginal people, converting them from their own beliefs to those of Christian doctrine, educating them to acquire European values, and controlling and exploiting their land. The extraordinary level of intervention and control ensured desirable outcomes for settlers in the process of colonialism. The policies and practices of assimilation were also engineered to control every aspect of Aboriginal people’s lives. If segregation practices were oriented more towards people of full descent, then assimilation was targeted entirely towards people of mixed descent. The forcible assimilation of Aboriginal people into white society was orchestrated through an extraordinary range of interventionist powers. Certain privileges or exclusions were given to Aboriginal people based on a determination of their Aboriginality, and identity that was itself defined and redefined by authorities. There continued to be an attempt to Christianise and educate Aboriginal people according to European standards. And through the widespread institutionalisation of Aboriginal people, their labour could be exploited for both government and private profit. When Aboriginal people speak about their experiences it becomes very clear how every facet of their lives was monitored and controlled under policies of segregation and assimilation. These records are particularly strong for the assimilationist era which is at the forefront of Aboriginal living memory and experience. Control extended into the most personal and individual aspects of identity and culture. At the most base level Aboriginal people were denied not only a cultural identity, but a personal one. The widespread use of nicknames as a principle means of identifying Aboriginal people in the nineteenth century not only reflected settlers’ inability to grasp complex naming systems, but served to caricature and dehumanise Aboriginal people.164 The practice of changing people’s first and family names was continued through the period of assimilation. It intended to sever connections with family and dehumanise individuals.

164 Marilyn Wood, "Nineteenth Century Bureaucratic Constructions of Indigenous Identities in New South Wales," in Citizenship and Indigenous Australians : Changing Conceptions and Possibilities, ed. Nicolas Peterson and Will Sanders (Cambridge ; Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 40-1.

73

They changed a lot of our traditional names in those days. Let me tell you there’s an awful lot in those files and it’s really terrible the way they tried to control our lives. 165 The government liked to give Aboriginal people numbers. My mum’s number was 707 and my number was 4487. They gave these numbers to Aboriginal people so they could keep an eye on us. They counted us like they counted horses and sheep and they put our numbers in a record book. I remember when I was at Sister Kate’s the police sergeant coming around on horseback, checking on us to make sure we were still there, and writing our numbers down in his book.166 . The denial of individual identity further excluded Aboriginal people from recognition as fellow human beings and citizens. Citizenship status was either denied or was conferred on Aboriginal people with many conditions attached, primarily the denouncement of Aboriginality. It was during the war years that I got my citizenship papers. I went for them because I knew they’d help me to get good employment. … See, if you had citizenship, your kids could get an education. You could get a food order too: flour, tea, sugar, baking powder, a half a pound of butter, a few potatoes, pumpkin and onions. You could get clothes for your kids for school and woollen blankets as well.167 By then Dad had his citizenship rights, which meant that even though he was a Nyungar he could be classed as a white man. Oh, but there were a lot of problems with citizenship rights. Because Dad was now classed as a whitefella, we had to live a certain distance away from the reserve at Merredin, but it was still officially on the reserve and we were still close to everyone, so it was a bit silly really. If you had your rights, then one of the conditions was that you weren’t supposed to share liquor with someone who didn’t have their rights, even if they were your own relations. … but the thing is, we are a sharing people. … That’s our way.168 Under various jurisdictions and in different eras Aboriginal people’s movements were strictly controlled. Protectionist regimes were introduced in the guise of protecting Aboriginal people from exploitation, but manifested as control over where people could work and which colonies they could travel to and from. Many of the early pieces of legislation under protectionism gave authorities the power to permit movements of Aboriginal people. These practices extended into the assimilationist era when Aboriginal people continued to be severely restricted in their movements.

Cuimara Ben Taylor, "A Nyungar Is Battling," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 97. 166 Ken Colbung, "The Spirit Has More Strength," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 72-3. 167 Lena Crabbe, "Keeping a Family Together," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 34. 168 Taylor, "A Nyungar Is Battling," 100-01. 165

74

… I ended up joining the army in 1951. I had to go out and see Miss Lefroy at Sister Kate’s Home – once you’d been in the Home there was no getting away from it, and I needed her to sign the papers so I could get into the army. She signed the papers and the army took me, but there was a problem because as a state ward I wasn’t allowed to go beyond the borders of Western Australia. They never let Aboriginal people move anywhere in those days without someone in authority being involved.169 There was a curfew for Aboriginal people, you had to be out of town by six pm or the police arrested you and threw you in gaol. …. “Just wear your [army] uniform,’ they told me. ‘You’ll be all right’. So there I was, walking down Barrack Street after six o’clock with these policemen coming towards us. I expected to be pulled up, but to my surprise they just walked straight on without batting an eyelid. I was absolutely amazed. We went into the Hotel Australia and it was the first time I’d been into a pub in my whole life. … I just couldn’t believe it. I felt like I could do anything after that.170 This personal intervention extended into private homes. Aboriginal people were under constant surveillance in the most everyday activities. When I got out I lived with a few different family members because Mum had to work away in the bush to make enough money to get a decent house and furnish it to the Welfare’s standards. All that had to be done before we could all be together again as a proper family.171 And most of all – and throughout the theme of ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ – authorities intervened in the relationship between parents and their children. From the earliest colonial period to the present, Aboriginal children have been removed from their families at an alarming rate. This was a deliberate and orchestrated measure under both segregation and assimilation. In the first instance, the removal of children was aimed at the project of ‘civilising’ Aboriginal people, and under assimilation the practice was intended to prevent Aboriginal children from maintaining family and cultural links. Both were implemented through a combination of coercion, persuasion, threat, deception, promise and force. the manager from Burnt Bridge Mission came to our home with a policeman. I could hear hims saying to Mum, ‘I am taking the two girls and placing them in Cootamundra Home.’ My father was saying, ‘what right have you?’ The manager said he can do what he likes.172

Colbung, "The Spirit Has More Strength," 71. Phil Prosser, "Show Respect," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 140. 171 Tjalaminu Mia, "Boorn - Taproot," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 217. 172 National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 53.. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 504.. 169 170

75

My family never stayed in the south-west because it wasn’t safe for us Nyungars. There were too many people who used to report you to the Native Welfare Department through the local police sergeant. The police had the right in those days to go and pick the kids up, so you always had to be on the move if you wanted to keep your family together. It was a hard life and you were looking over your shoulder all the time.173

Race Nineteenth century ideas of race as a new social ordering underpinned the policies and practices of segregation and assimilation.174 It was the widely held belief in these principles that allowed European settlers to ignore or justify the inhumane and prejudicial treatment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people throughout colonial history. The question of race influenced patterns in where and how policies of segregation and assimilation were implemented. Foremost in the race narrative is the way in which Aboriginality could be defined and redefined to suit administrative and political needs. An early and long-lasting definition of Aboriginality separated and excluded people of mixed descent from those of full-descent. As a consequence there developed separate administrative regimes for people of full and mixed descent. Under segregationist policies Aboriginal people were thought to be an evolutionarily disadvantaged population which would ‘die out’. A rationale for segregating Aboriginal people from the settler population was framed around narratives of protection, particularly the need to protect such vulnerable people from the vices of European settler society. Of particular concern were the issues of alcohol consumption and sexual exploitation of Aboriginal women. Segregation in this context was aimed at removing Aboriginal people from European society in an effort to protect their health and well-being. At the same time, however, Aboriginal people were thought to be a ‘doomed race’. This allowed politicians, administrators and other influential members of settler society to ignore any long term responsibility for the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal people. The idea that Aboriginal people were a ‘dying race’ allowed many violent acts and atrocities to go unreported and unpunished. The idea of race has affected Aboriginal people of mixed descent in many different ways under the policies of segregation and assimilation. They have been defined and redefined as Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal under different regimes at different times, often to limit

Patrick Sullivan Hume, "Under a Blue Gum Tree," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 42-3. 174 Despite recent critiques of the concept of ‘race’ and its limited value in a biologicl context, race evolved to become a means of social organisation, and this has had long term social implications for people defined by racial stereotypes, resulting in unequal treatment and access. Audrey Smedley and Brian D. Smedley, "Race as Biology Is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem Is Real: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives on the Social Construction of Race," American Psychologist 60, no. 1 (2005), Myrna Tonkinson, "The New Indigenous Affairs Orthodoxy," Eureka Street 18, no. 18 (2008). 173

76

expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. In various contexts Aboriginal people of mixed descent have been characterised as superior to Aborigines and inferior to whites, or having the worst attributes of both ‘races’. As a consequence a number of policy practices have directly targeted or ignored people of mixed descent; variously demanding absorption, education, assimilation and control. These prejudicial attitudes and actions further led to a range of injustices with long term consequences for Aboriginal people. These include confusion about identity, loss of family and cultural connections, and inequality in education and employment. The mixed descent population threatened to undermine the ideals of the Australian colonies and states. The idea that the Aboriginal population would disappear offered the promise of a new country without an indigenous or black ‘problem’ unlike many other colonies in the world. And this was a central part of the twentieth century White Australia policy. Aboriginal people of mixed descent were a reminder that there was indeed a growing Aboriginal population and that racial purity was a fiction. Many government efforts were therefore targeted at these groups. Authorities were determined to control the genetic make-up of the Aboriginal population, leading them to intervene in the most personal relationships. Marriage was targeted as a means of controlling the number of children of mixed descent. They even had their say over who you could marry. That happened twice in my family.175 My maternal grandfather had granted my parents permission to marry. But permission had to be obtained from the Catholic Bishop of the Kimberley because being an Aborigine my mother was a ward of the state, and under his guardianship. Permission was denied because my father was a Muslim…. I was born out of wedlock on 2 November 1940.176 Under assimilation policies and practices skin colour came to be an important element of race. Marriage became a way of controlling the colour of Aboriginal children The Chief Protector of Aborigines, A.O. Neville, had been very angry when Mum married Dad, because at that time a woman was supposed to marry someone lighter in colour than she was. The Aborigines Department was trying to breed out our colour so we wouldn’t exist anymore.177 ‘Grandad really loved Grandmother, but he only thing these white people could think about was mixing the right colours together.’ You see, the half-castes and the full bloods were not supposed to mix up together. That was because they wanted to make a white Australia. ... That Mr Neville, oh he was a devil all right! He was the Chief Protector for a long time here and he was very keen on the whole idea of breeding us out.178 And skin colour, more than family kinship, intelligence or adaptation determined where and how Aboriginal people would be treated in the system. And for a long time skin colour

Taylor, "A Nyungar Is Battling," 97. MaryAnn Bin-Sallik, "Her Spirit Could Not Be Broken," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 118. 177 Winch, "My Mother, My Daughter," 83. 178 Taylor, "A Nyungar Is Battling," 97. 175 176

77

has been used by non-Aboriginal people as a means of judging whether or not Aboriginal people were ‘authentic’ and hence worthy of respect and support. Even though I was born at the Moore River Native Settlement, I never stayed there permanently – because I was the wrong colour. … as it turned out I was too light for Moore River, so they shoved me off to Sister Kate’s Home in Queens Park. Mr Neville liked the lighter coloured kids to go there hoping that they’d turn out white in their ways so they would fit right in to white society. “I was about eight years old when they sent me there.179 “As I looked at that beautiful baby lying in my arms I was determined to be the best mother in the world for her. With this in mind I attended an Infant Health Centre. The infant health nurse asked me, ‘What is she?’ At first I though I did not hear her properly. She must have thought I was stupid, so she repeated the question, ‘what is she?’ I was thinking she was stupid, as anyone could see I had a beautiful baby daughter. Finally she looked at my daughter Donna and bluntly said, ‘Is she 7/16?’ She was asking how much Aboriginal blood Donna had. That was how the Aborigines Department and later the Native Welfare Department used to record Aboriginal children in their files, by what they thought was the percentage of Aboriginal blood in the child. I felt numb. This was racism against my precious baby. I was trembling when I left the Centre.180 The use of colour could also lead young Aboriginal people to self-hatred: The wee girlie has settled down with us very well. She is a charming girl and we are already much attached … I was very pleased to note how modest she is about her person. She is saying her prayers also. She wanted Him to make her ‘my colour’ (i.e. white). Poor little girl. I explained that God had made men in lots of colours and she seemed much happier then.181 ‘Yes I actually did, and I said to myself, ‘These people are different they’re dark’ and I thought I was white you see. I said, ‘I wonder why they’re so dark?’ I was looking at my sister Sally and thought, ‘Dear she’s really black’ and you know, I was really confused. I looked at my skin, and I thought, ‘I look brown like them too,’ but I said, ‘Oh no, I’m white … and I was real hurt because I didn’t want to be brown, you know, I wanted to be white’. Alice Adams, former resident of Cootamundra182

Religion “When I was ten years old and my sister Patsy was eight, we were placed in Nazareth House, a home run by Roman Catholic nuns. There we slept in a large dormitory and I had the responsibility of

Colbung, "The Spirit Has More Strength," 68-9. Violet Bacon, "Joining My Identity Pieces Together," in Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, ed. Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia, and Blaze Kwaymullina (North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007), 159. 181 Letter from a foster mother in NSW cited in Read, "The Stolen Generations the Removal of Aboriginal Children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969." 182 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 404. 179 180

78

looking after my younger sister. Religion was strongly taught and mass was said every day, and although some good things happened, like learning to swim, it never made up for being away from my family. What it did do was reinforce my feelings of being different from other people”.183 Religion recurs throughout the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. Many denominations of Christians played a role in shaping and implementing these policies. Motivations included religious apostasy – a desire to convert Aboriginal people from their own religious beliefs to those of Christian doctrine. Christianity was regarded as a cornerstone of ‘civilisation’, and as part of the social program of retraining Aboriginal people conversion to Christianity. In many instances humanitarian missionaries had good intentions in their efforts to protect Aboriginal people from the vagaries of settler society. However, while they advocated the separation of Aboriginal people from wider society, they simultaneously wished to instruct them in settler values, particularly of religion. However, the conversion rate in the early colonies was very poor and Aboriginal people refused to abandon their own beliefs. This meant that in some instances missions allowed Aboriginal people to continue their own religious practices and through segregation some elements of Aboriginal culture were able to survive. Not all reserves and missions were religious institutions. Governments acquired the management and control of missions and established their own institutions during periods of renewed activity in Aboriginal affairs. Nevertheless, Christianity was taken to be synonymous with European civilisation – a state to which Aboriginal people were to subscribe. Hence governments often used Christian groups to manage the institutions. This also reduced government expenditure. Consistent with the idea that Christianity was a core element of civilising Aboriginal people, assimilation policies were also based on ideas of religion.

Education The education of Aboriginal people to be like Europeans has been a central element of segregation and assimilation. Reading and writing went hand-in-hand with religious instruction. Aboriginal people were asked to perform acts of reading as a demonstration of their ability and conversion. The literacy skills that Aboriginal people acquired through native schools and missions also had unintended consequences. The education given to Aboriginal people is sometimes read as another indicator of oppression, but literacy skills proved invaluable to those who received them. These skills provided Aboriginal people with the means to engage with colonial powers. It was often the literate members of a group who could articulate and present protests on behalf of their people. Literacy was therefore a desirable aspect of colonial society for Aboriginal people. It also posed something of a threat to settlers who did not wish to see Aboriginal people as equals. Consequently education offered to Aboriginal people has primarily been manipulated to meet the needs of colonial society. This pattern is particularly noticeable in the settlements

183

Bacon, "Joining My Identity Pieces Together," 157.

79

and reserves established under segregation and continued towards assimilation. In these instances there was a strong focus on the exploitation of Aboriginal labour, and education was less about literacy and learning, and more about creating a class of workers. Education also ensured the separation of children and parents. the mother was not convinced of the necessity, but spoke instead of the injustice of her childhood years when children were ‘taken away to be apprenticed and never paid’ [The Welfare officer] reported the mother’s feelings to be so strong as to ‘colour her whole attitude towards official interference’ and that she would accept no financial help and have her son educated elsewhere. L believed on the contrary that the child needed a boarding education so that he could ‘learn a trade’. At length [the Welfare officer] ‘got around her objection that he was being taken away to a home’ with the promise that he could return for the summer holidays.184 Education was in many instances denied to Aboriginal children in an effort to keep Aboriginal people in subservient positions. However, parents recognised the value of education and wished their children to be schooled. But even these basic rights were often only provided under stringent conditions, notably through the exclusion of Aboriginal families. Throughout Australian history, education has been provided to Aboriginal children only when children were separated from their parents and placed in missions and boarding schools. In other instances authorities denied Aboriginal access to education if they did not conform to a particular code of behaviours. I moved to Perth because the kids wanted to go to school. But some schools wouldn’t let them in. You had to have a house, this was required by the Native Welfare and the Education departments, and then you had to have proper beds, you couldn’t just have a mattress and a rug on the floor, though that’s all we did have at the time.185 Even when Aboriginal parents conformed to all the requirements, hostility from wider society often forced children from the schools. Parents of non-Aboriginal children objected to their own children being educated alongside Aboriginal children and raised protests with the state. This forced Aboriginal people into a segregated education system. The lack of access to mainstream schools was often a motivating factor for Aboriginal parents who sent their children to settlements and missions. They hoped that in these institutions their children would receive an education. However, the institutions provided a very poor level of education. Some authorities voiced the opinion that Aboriginal people were incapable of learning, and turned their attention to training Aborigines as domestic servants and farm labourers. One of the problems with growing up segregated the way we did was that we never got a proper education. I had to get a permit to go to school in Merridin, which shows you how hard it was for Nyungars to get ahead. I learned more about religion than anything else. We weren’t allowed to speak our language and we were shown books about Captain Cook and told how he discovered Australia when we’d been living here all these years.186

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 509-10. Crabbe, "Keeping a Family Together," 33. 186 Taylor, "A Nyungar Is Battling," 102. 184 185

80

By denying access to education, governments and authorities ensured that Aboriginal people would remain as an underclass of people. They would have few skills to give them independence and little opportunity to voice their concerns through official channels.

Economics Segregation is often referred to as protectionism in Australia indicating the very strong link between protectionist ideals and the practices of segregation. While this is primarily presented and read as protection for Aboriginal people from the undesirable aspects of European society, the practices of segregation were often aimed at the protection of the vulnerable British colonies and settlers. The practice of removing Aboriginal people from their traditional lands and placing them on discrete reserves greatly reduced the likelihood of attack by Aborigines defending their land. This offered a physical protection to colonists, especially those on the edge of settlements. And in doing so, the land could be freely claimed. The taking of Aboriginal land through segregation policies was therefore a foundation to all colonial economies in Australia. In contrast, the effects for Aboriginal people were to create long term poverty and dependency. While the reserves and missions were established in effect in exchange for land, governments failed to adequately resource them. Government funding of Aboriginal affairs has always been grudgingly allocated, and in many instances funding was insufficient to maintain Aboriginal communities. Rather than offering physical protection to Aboriginal people, the missions and reserves directly contributed to poverty and ill health. In the frontier regions, particularly in the Northern Territory and northern regions of Queensland and Western Australia, pastoral economies relied heavily on Indigenous labour. In contexts where traditional lands were being significantly diminished, Aboriginal people had little choice but to work on pastoral stations. Out of the reach and sight of government authorities, pastoralists were often extremely brutal in their dealings with Aboriginal people. Kidnapping of women and children for sexual and economic exploitation was widespread. Aboriginal men and women worked for little pay or meagre rations so that the profits of these industries were returned entirely to the landowners. However, it was not only the renegade pastoralists who profited in this way. Under the guise of protection and education all early missions and settlements were preoccupied with making Aboriginal people self-sufficient agriculturalists. This would free the state of continuing expenditure. However, in the focused efforts to convert Aboriginal huntergatherers to agriculturalists, these institutions created a work force for the emerging colonies which suffered consistent labour shortages. We have heard there is going to be very strict rules on the station and those rules will be too much for us, it seems we are going to be treated like slaves, far as we heard of it – We wish to ask those Managor of the station Did we steal anything out of the colony or murdered anyone or are we prisoners or convict. We should think we are all free as any white man of the colony. Coranderrk Aborigines, Argus 1882187

187

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 166.

81

The institutions also served to reduce expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. The effectiveness of missions was constantly pressured by financial constraints, and in many instances Aboriginal people found themselves living in worse conditions and with limited food on missions than they did in their own impoverished camps. By creating profitable agricultural enterprises, funds were raised for additional missionary activities. This practice often meant food and other resources were unavailable to the Aboriginal people who produced it. While they continued to suffer hunger and malnutrition, produce could be sold to raise funds and reduce costs for running institutions. The constant pressure to reduce expenditure on Aboriginal people saw the emergence of some of the most controversial and divisive practices and policies. This was particularly the case in the way in which Aboriginal people of mixed descent were reclassified as nonAboriginal. This was done explicitly to limit the number of people on government reserves – and ultimately to see them sold off or closed – and to limit the number of Aboriginal people who could claim rations and other assistance. Efforts to minimise expenditure on Aboriginal affairs continued into the assimilationist period. The control of bodies of workers could provide both reduced expenditure through service to government, and even direct financial profit through controlling employment. Aboriginal girls in institutions sewed clothes that could be distributed throughout government institutions. This further reduced government costs. Wages for Aboriginal labour was withheld and controlled by the state and in many inistances were never paid to the workers, directly contributing to government profits (especially in Queensland). Governments also sought to reduce expenditure even when the costs were a direct result of their own policies and practices. The management and operation of the large homes and children’s institutions was a costly exercise. This was a significant factor in the government decision to make extensive use of private homes and foster care to raise Aboriginal children removed from their families. The inadequacy of government expenditure is directly implicated in the failure of many of the policies and practices, leading to increased hardship for Aboriginal people. The practice of exploiting Aboriginal labour for rations and withholding wages, further reduced the lifeskills available to Aboriginal people. They had little knowledge of how to earn and manage their own affairs. … they couldn’t cope. I mean they weren’t taught how to manage money or even to live in white society, because all they only knew was how to live the way they had lived at Lake Tyers.188

Evidence to the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families," 63.. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 500.

188

82

83

5. Locating Histories and Narratives The purpose of this project is to identify heritage sites that are best able to illustrate the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. It deliberately commenced with an analysis of the histories and narratives that comprise the theme, rather than making assumptions about the kinds of sites that might be relevant. This section commences the process of identifying sites that illustrate the theme.

Places and the Spaces Between Places are not simply locations or sites. Places are constituted through the people, objects and stories associated with and contained within particular locations or sites. Narrative is therefore a strong and critical element of place. In other words, every place includes narratives and has the potential to represent those narratives in a physical location. The potential of sites to represent a narrative, or ‘tell the story’, is central to understanding the importance of heritage places. As the first step in identifying significant heritage sites that illustrate and communicate the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ this project established a number of key narratives that comprise the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. The identification of heritage places of potential significance will be established by finding locations and sites that can represent the key elements narratives. The most obvious site types that represent the narratives of the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ are missions, reserves and children’s homes. These were established by various governments and authorities to control Aboriginal people in the implementation of segregation and assimilation polices. These sites can therefore be interpreted as the locations of non-Aboriginal control and oppression of Aboriginal people. Despite this, many of these sites have great significance for Aboriginal people. For many people these sites became their home where they lived for long periods of time and established bonds with other Aboriginal people to create new kinds of family. In some instances, the agency of Aboriginal people was seen in which locations were chosen for particular reserves and how they operated. And in recent times some of these sites have been returned to Aboriginal ownership in recognition of their strong association with these sites. Nevertheless, such sites remain in essence artefacts of the state. So while these are in many instances Aboriginal sites of great significance to Aboriginal people, in the majority of cases they were created by non-Aboriginal authorities. The sites that illustrate these themes are therefore sites that illustrate the histories of dispossession, segregation and even incarceration imposed on Aboriginal people under policies of both segregation and assimilation. The narratives, however, also suggest that Aboriginal peoples’ lives were shaped by these policies far beyond the particular reserves, missions and children’s homes. Intervention extended into schools, churches and private homes. While all places contain stories and narratives, not all narratives are emplaced. This is particularly significant consideration in illustrating and representing the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. The narratives that have been identified thus far do not always have a clear association with specific locations. Rather, these narratives cross a number of related sites. This is especially true of the experiences of Aboriginal people who resisted and escaped the intervention of authorities. Experiences are often constructed within the

84

spaces in between, or in the shadow of the reserves, missions and children’s homes. The story of dispossession, and the associated policies of segregation and assimilation, is largely one of social fragmentation and disruption. This includes a high degree of mobility as Aboriginal people were physically relocated from traditional land to reserves, and from one reserve to another, and from one place of care to another. For others, mobility was a means to escape enforced moves by the state. In many instances this mobility not only fractured the associations between people, but between people and places. Therefore the narratives of the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ cannot be entirely represented by the large scale institutions but must also include the spaces and places between. The narratives of Aboriginal people in particular are often about the experiences of avoidance or escape from the institution and thus unexpected sites might illustrate other aspects of Indigenous experience beyond more commonly recognised site types. The places associated with the policies of segregation and assimilation are not only the reserves and missions that dot the entire Australian landscape. Between the established and official reserves, missions and homes are numerous private homes and properties that employed or otherwise took in Aboriginal workers and children under both policies and throughout the country. Within the theme of ‘From Segregation to Assimilation” are the spaces of conflict between white settlers and Aboriginal people, as well as other spaces where Aboriginal people slipped away from the system. These are not localities that can be recognised and listed, but the stories are compelling and an important part of how these policies impacted on the lives of Aboriginal people. These in between spaces include narratives of mobility as a means of evading authority; the sacrifice of property and possessions to avoid detection; the stations and properties where Aboriginal people continued to hunt and live even after they were settled by non-Aboriginal people; and remote areas in the bush or at the margins of settlement where government authorities seldom ventured. About this time the Native Welfare was taking kids away from their families and sending them to Carrolup, New Norcia, Roelands and Mogumber missions. It was the government that was doing it. … In those days it wasn’t even safe letting your kids go to school, because they took them away from there too. All this made people a bit frightened to stop around the towns. My parents were frightened of losing us so when they got wind of what was happening we ended up running away to Treesville, which is between Quindanning and Collie. They thought we’d be safer there because it was out in the bush and they didn’t think Neville, the Chief Protector of Aborigines of Western Australia at the time, would go that far. He went everywhere else of course, but they thought that’d be the end of the road even for him.189 … For Nyungars we lived all right. There were other families who were a lot worse off than us. After a while we left Collie and went to Treesville, which is not far from Harvey. Dad heard that the Native Welfare was going around collecting all the kids up and he didn’t want us to be taken away. Oh they were good at stealing kids back then! We packed up at night and sneaked away in a horse and cart in the dark so nobody knew where we went. We left the house behind and gave the cows away. All we took with us was some feed, some rugs and a few clothes. Dad gave up everything because he wasn’t going to lose his kids”.190

189 190

Crabbe, "Keeping a Family Together," 29. Hume, "Under a Blue Gum Tree," 41-2.

85

(Hume 2007, pp. 41-2) Nonetheless many of the experiences of segregation and assimilation were centred in the institutions or grew in the shadows of those institutions and authorities. For instance, the era of assimilation in Western Australia is strongly associated with the individual Mr Neville or ‘Devil’, reaching beyond the sites of Mogumber and Sister Kate’s.

Patterns in Space and Time The Histories section illustrates how each of the Australian colonies developed independently and with some significant differences in population, timing and resources. Some, like the Northern Territory and Queensland, were annexed from existing colonies; South Australia and New South Wales respectively. As a consequence these share some similarities with their parent colony. However, they also moved to establish their own policies and practices. While settlers faced similar conflicts with Aboriginal people over land in each of the emerging colonies, the specific conditions and corresponding response by governments varied. In the early days with a small colonial population, the attitude of individual governors and administrators had a considerable impact on Aboriginal-settler relations, and could vary considerably. Issues such as violence, labour shortages and settler attitudes to Aboriginal people all impacted on how policy developed and was implemented. In addition to the local conditions, the broader context also impacted on Aboriginal-settler relations. Policies and laws concerning Aboriginal people did not develop in isolation. Rather, they were affected by world events and wider political issues. Despite these many variables, there are aspects of the theme that are broadly shared across jurisdictions. As this report demonstrates, many experiences and outcomes of both policies have had similar repercussions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The similarities are a product of the social setting in which the events unfolded, the movement of individual administrators and officials between regions, and the direct and deliberate importation of policies and laws from other colonies and even other parts of the world. One of the most explicit examples is found in the appointment of the same individuals as protectors or investigators across different colonies. This led directly to the development of very similar legislation and practices in diverse regions and circumstances. For example, George Augustus Robinson was first appointed Protector in Tasmania before taking up a similar post in the Victorian colonies. For example, the early protectionist legislation of 1850s Victoria was copied by NSW in the 1880s, and refined by the Queensland legislation of 1897. This in turn influenced regimes in Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory at the beginning of the twentieth century. Within the complexity of histories that comprise the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’, it is possible to find patterns and similarities across jurisdictions and regions, and across human experience. These patterns are an important step in distilling the most significant aspects of the story, and make it possible to begin the process of identifying sites that illustrate the stories. The histories of colonial/state administration outlined in the earlier section, is overwritten by geographic-cultural blocks. So while it is possible to compare and contrast different administrative regimes, it is also possible to see parallels between different regions. This is particularly the case in comparing and contrasting settled

86

areas and those of the frontier. This dichotomy was present in all colonies, but the frontier shifted at different times in different regions. The geographic size of the colonies, the rate of colonial expansion, and types of land use contributed to the implementation of segregation and assimilation policies.

Segregation Under segregation regimes, official and systematic protectorates characterised the management and control of Aboriginal people around settlements. These institutions were regarded as a humane way to ‘ameliorate’ the Aborigines – offering physical and moral protection from settler societies. Outside the settled areas, the physical and often violent conflicts of the frontier and its distance from administrative and government controls created a much more ad hoc system of missions and reserves. Reserves were established to keep Aboriginal people out of towns or off properties. And in the absence of systematic government control, the frontier dealt with Aboriginal people as they saw fit. The few missions created on the frontier offered some sanctuary. Hence segregation can be taken to comprise regimes with a clear protectorate administration, ad hoc systems of reserves and missions, and a frontier with little or no protection for Aboriginal people. The colonies of Victoria, Van Diemen’s Land and South Australia were the first to introduce a systematic and controlled protectorate system. The earliest of these was the implementation of Robinson’s plan at Wybalenna. This plan directly influenced the establishment and operation of protectorates elsewhere despite the clear failure of the settlement to provide any form of protection for Aboriginal people.191 The segregation plans had a dual intention; to protect Aboriginal people from the vices of settler society and to protect settlers from retaliation of local Aboriginal people defending their land. Thus protectorates were a useful means by which to depopulate the country and make it ‘free’ for European settlers. The Protectorates themselves share the common elements of officially appointed Protectors and the confinement of Aboriginal people within structured settlements or villages where they would be Christianised, educated and civilised, and transformed from gatherer-hunters to sedentary agriculturalists. The situation evolved somewhat differently in New South Wales, Queensland and parts of Western Australia. Here protection was initially characterised by the ad hoc system of reserves to control and manage Aboriginal people within settled regions. On the whole, the administrations took no responsibility for how Aboriginal people were dealt with in the more remote and frontier regions. In other words, authorities turned a blind eye to a number of atrocities and cruelties against Aboriginal people while pastoral expansion took place. In this way Queensland commenced as the frontier of New South Wales and only some years after responsible government did it begin to implement protectionist measures. The furthest reaches of Queensland, such as Cape York, continued to operate as a selfdetermining frontier. The Queensland frontier was characterised by coercion and violence, particularly through the use of Native Police. By the time New South Wales and Queensland were separated, the native police corps only operated in Queensland. As the frontier moved further north, the native police were eventually confined to the far reaches

191

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000.

87

of Cape York. It was only with the introduction of the Aboriginal Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897 that the government proposed a full system of segregation. This pattern is echoed in other settlement-frontier contexts. The frontier continued longest in the northern parts of Australia, including northern Western Australia and the northern parts of South Australia which later became the Northern Territory. These regions were characterised by large scale pastoral properties and a sparse settler population. As a consequence the pastoral and mining industries in these regions became very dependent on Aboriginal labour. Aboriginal people were nevertheless subject to enormous cruelties and only the missions provided any form of relief. The movement of missions into the ‘last frontier’ is characterised by a steady migration from south to north through the continent. For example, the German Missions of South Australia gradually migrate northwards to establish Hermansberg in Central Australia and later as far as Hopevale in Far North Queensland. And similarly, in Western Australia, the Benedictine missions initiated in New Norcia north of Perth, extended their operation to Kalumburu in the Kimberley region. The cultural-regional patterns echoed or reflected the various colonial economies. The protectorates and reserves established in settled regions of the colonies effectively removed Aboriginal people – and thus conflict – from desirable land. Segregation in this instance contributed significantly to colonial economies through the acquisition of Aboriginal land at no cost. On the frontier the exploitation of Aboriginal labour at little or no cost, was critical to the expansion of the pastoral industry. In other words, segregation on the frontier facilitated the amassing of profit and wealth by individual pastoralists. Despite awareness of cruelties and the role played by the missions in frontier regions, the government was under pressure to maintain the status quo. This was particularly the case in relation to pastoral interests where interference in Aboriginal-settler relations threatened to undermine the economic growth in pastoralism. For example, the Aborigines Protection Board in Western Australia raised the following concern about the establishment of Beagle Bay Mission in the remote Kimberley region: As the natives in the neighbourhood … for the most part in the employ of the settlers, the establishment of a mission could only result in the withdrawal of the natives from their employment and cause ill-feeling.192 The distinctions between the economies of settled areas and frontier had further implications for how Aboriginality was defined and controlled. Central to the process of segregation and the establishment of protectorates was a definition of Aboriginal people that separated and excluded those of mixed descent. Under these systems, Aboriginal people were defined to include only those of ‘pure’ descent. These individuals were regarded as an evolutionarily disadvantaged population who would simply ‘die out’. This promised to solve any long-term conflict between settlers and Aborigines and salved the conscience of settlers who could not fail to notice the high mortality and ill health among Aborigines. It also promised finite government expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. In contrast the population of people who could claim mixed descent expanded rapidly. These people were largely excluded from early protectorates, in the belief that they could find a place in settler society and be absorbed socially and culturally. It also ensured that

Cited in Christine Choo, Mission Girls: Aboriginal Women on Catholic Missions in the Kimberley, Western Australia 1900-1950 (Nedlands, W. A.: University of W.A. Press, 2001), 56. 192

88

governments were not financially responsible for the largest segment of the Aboriginal population. Aboriginal people of full-descent can be seen to occupy the space that is the frontier. Labour on the frontier was controlled by the pastoral industry rather than government. However, the supply of Aboriginal labour was supported and guaranteed through the implementation of government policies. For instance, the decision in the Northern Territory to exclude ‘full blood’ Aboriginal people from provisions of the Aboriginals Act 1910 was influenced by economics and the needs of an emerging pastoral industry. In this the situation is reversed to that of states like Victoria. However, both were oriented towards the control of Aboriginal people in the settled regions – more specifically targeting people of mixed descent. At the same time it was content to ignore the plight of Aboriginal people on pastoral stations, ensuring that the pastoral industry continued to control and exploit them for labour and profit. The decision reflects a pattern in which the frontier is a space in which ‘full blood’ or ‘real’ Aboriginal people exist, but are ignored in the belief that they will ‘fade away’ or die out. On the other hand, settlements are the domain of ‘halfcaste’ people, contaminated by European society, who despite their increasing numbers must be controlled and made invisible. And in the case of missions and government these definitions further served to reduce expenditure. These patterns and attitudes towards the frontier led some governments to question whether expenditure was even necessary in these regions: Though in my own opinion it seems misdirected of their efforts to labour in such an out of the way corner where the aboriginals [sic] are not being interfered with or demoralised by the whites when there are so many spots where their good influence might be used to counteract the evils of immorality and drunkenness…193

Assimilation The distinction between settled areas and the frontier established under the segregation era laid the foundation for where and when assimilation was adopted by governments throughout Australia. Assimilation was not recognised as relevant where the administration had determined that Aboriginal people were no longer ‘a problem’ because they no longer recognised their existence. This was the case in Tasmania and Victoria which introduced early protectionist regimes. As relatively small colonies with arable land, European settlement had displaced Aboriginal people from almost all the territories, leaving most Aboriginal people in camps and reserves. By denying the existence or legitimacy of people of mixed descent they were able to disregard any responsibility or expenditure on Aboriginal affairs. In much of New South Wales and the southwest of Western Australia, widespread agriculture similarly displaced Aboriginal people from the land. Assimilationist policies were aggressively pursued by governments that wished to achieve the same resolution that had been claimed by Tasmania and Victoria – in other words they wished to make the Aboriginal population ‘disappear’. These and other states also had extensive tracts of land suited only to large scale pastoral activity. In these regions, the frontier remained an active concern. For instance, even though South Australia had established an early

193

H. Prinsep to Premiere’s Secretary 1899, cited in Ibid..

89

protectorate system, it included a large area of frontier comprised of its own desert lands, and some continuing responsibilities in the Northern Territory. These patterns further effected the relationship between economics and assimilation, as was seen in Queensland’s reluctance to abandon a system of protection that generated profits for the government. Definitions of Aboriginality also continued to be moulded by the settler-frontier pattern. In the ‘frontier states’ like Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland, the frontier was recognisably populated with Aboriginal people. In these northern and remote parts of Australia, indigenous people maintained a distinct sense of their own Aboriginality, partly because they were ignored by assimilationist practices and policies. In some instances, such as the Northern Territory, Aboriginal people were explicitly excluded from the terms of assimilation. Despite this degree of cultural and social autonomy, the state continued to intervene where the Aboriginal population was thought to be ‘impure’. Children of mixed descent were removed from communities and families in the north to institutions in the south. The many children’s institutions around Australia were home to Aboriginal children from diverse geographic and cultural regions, bringing about a new ‘pan-Aboriginal’ identity within the settled regions. A further shift occurred between the eras of segregation and assimilation. In the segregation era, individual Protectors were known identities with personal convictions that shaped Aboriginal affairs in their field of influence. The Protectors appear through the histories as known characters. Despite the good intentions of many, they are characterised by flaws in personality and a poor understanding of Aboriginal society and culture. A few developed positive relationships with local Aboriginal people, but many others came to symbolise the system that oppressed Aboriginal people. Some of the last Protectors took on the new roles that came with assimilation policies in the 1940s. However, under assimilation the individual had less explicit impact on Aboriginal people’s lives as government intervention moved towards a complex system of multiple government departments, agencies and officers.

90

Narrative Framework and Places As discussed there are many sites and locations with the potential to illustrate aspects of the narratives for the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ and many more narratives that cannot be directly illustrated by places. This section represents a preliminary analysis of the sites and their potential to illustrate aspects of the story. The preliminary analysis aims to identify places that illustrate the core narratives identified in Table 5. These are Control, Race, Religion, Education and Economics. Control has been identified as a narrative that is central to the entire theme and each place should be able to illustrate this. The remaining topics are considered separately under each of the main policy headings; segregation and assimilation. Given the different events and timing in each colony/state the analysis is further considered according to present-day states. The analysis takes as its starting point the list of missions and reserves compiled by Baulch.194 That report identifies some 668 reserves and mission sites throughout Australia. There are some large and well-known institutions where hundreds, even thousands, of Aboriginal children were taken and raised. There are also a number of smaller institutions. The jurisdiction, administration and size of these institutions produced different experiences and outcomes for Aboriginal people. Each has the potential to tell some part of the narrative of ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. In this section, the narrative framework is cross-referenced to the sites identified in the Baulch report. This attempts to identify sites that are capable of reflecting the core narratives of the theme, From Segregation to Assimilation. This provides a raw means by which to compare sites within and between different regimes and policy eras. These are presented in simple tabular form below. An additional column is included to include any related places or sites. This is important as it becomes possible to include narratives associated with sites that would not necessarily be recognised as relevant or sufficiently significant.

Places of Segregation Tasmania The Baulch report identifies three Tasmanian sites. These all present powerful stories to illustrate the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. Two of the Tasmanian sites represent the narrative of segregation. The Hobart Orphan School and Bruny Island ration station are additional associated sites that complement these stories.195

Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia." 195 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 105-9. 194

91

Table 6: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Tasmania Site

Control

Race

Hobart Orphan School Wybalenna, Flinders Island

3

3

3

3

Oyster Cove

3

3

Religion

Education

Economics

3 3

3

3

3

Related Sites Wybalenna Oyster Cove Hobart Orphan School Bruny Island ration station196 Oyster Cove Cape Barren Island Wybalenna Hobart Orphan School

Victoria The Baulch report identifies some 42 missions and reserves in Victoria. Like Tasmania, the state of Victoria did not acknowledge the existence of its Aboriginal population and therefore resisted the adoption of a formal policy of assimilation. The government had already ceased to create new reserves and by 1924 only Lake Tyers continued to operate under supervision. As a consequence most of the Victorian sites identified can be regarded as originating in the period of segregation. The following examples are able to illustrate the narratives as indicated: Table 7: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Victoria Site Yarra Mission Buntingdale Mitchellstown Mount Franklin Station Mordiallac reserve

Control

Race

3 3 3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3 3 3 3

3 3

Ramahyuck

3 3 3

Coranderrk

3

Narre Narre Warren Merri Creek School Lake Boga Yelta Ebenezer (Lake Hindmarsh) Mohican Lake Tyers

196

Religion

Education

3 3

3

Economics

3 3 3 3 3

Related Sites

Coranderrk

3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3

3 3

3

3 3 3

3

3

3

Coranderrk Camfield School for Aborigines, WA

3

Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 124-26.

92

Ballarat Children's Home Framlingham Lake Condah

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3

3

The group of reserves established early under Robinson’s protectorate constitute an important element of the story of segregation. Victoria had very clear policies of segregation and these sites engage with a number of evocative narratives. A number of the other sites are important in demonstrating Aboriginal agency in the selection and operation of the reserves. For example, Aboriginal people from Framlingham and Coranderrk actively shaped those missions through protest.

New South Wales The Baulch report identifies some 254 reserves and missions in New South Wales. The following table presents six of these sites that have the greatest potential to illustrate the narrative themes relevant to the theme Segregation. Table 8: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: New South Wales Site Blacktown Native Institution Wellington Valley Maloga School/ Cummeragunja Warangesda

Control

Race

Religion

Education

3

3

3

3

3 3

Economics

Related Sites Bells Creek

3 3

La Perouse

3 3

3

Brewarrina Reserve

3

3

3

3

3 3 3

Circular Quay, Wreck Bay

3

Queensland The Baulch report identifies 55 missions and reserves for Queensland and the Torres Strait. The Protection era continued well into the twentieth century in Queensland, giving a particular emphasis to associated sites. The impacts of missionary activities in the Torres Strait have generally been of a very different nature to those experiences elsewhere in Australia. Consequently attempts to convert Islanders to Christianity was generally more successful and there is a more positive mission legacy in the Torres Strait. The Torres Strait Missions established under the London Mission Society are therefore grouped together.

Table 9: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Queensland Site

Control

Race

Religion

Moreton Bay

3

3

3

Education

Economics

Related Sites

93

Torres Strait Island Missions: Dauan, Mabuiag, Saibai, Yam, Yorke, Badu, Darnley, Murray, Coconut, Moa, Boigu and Horn Islands Bloomfield River (Wujal Wujal) Mapoon Yarrabah (BellendenKerr)

3

3

3

3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3 3

3 3 3

3 3

3 3

3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3 3

Napranum (Weipa) Bogimbah Mission (Maryborough) Aurukun Cherbourg (Barambah) Kowanyama (Mitchell River Mission, Trubanaman) Mona Mona Mornington Island (Zion Hill) Cowal Creek (Injinoo) Palm Island

3

3

Lockhart River

3 3 3

3 3 3

Woorabinda Hopevale (Cape Bedford)

3 3

3 3

Bloomfield River, Fraser Island, Bessie Point

Durundur

3

3

Hull River Reserve, Phantome Island

3 3

3 3

3 Woorabinda

3

South Australia South Australia had an early protectorate like those of Victoria and Tasmania, but unlike those states, it also adopted a legal protection model in the early twentieth century. The Baulch report lists 29 missions and reserves for South Australia. Table 10 lists those sites within this group that have the potential to illustrate the narratives of segregation. Table 10:Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: South Australia Site

Control

Race

Religion

Education

Economics

Related Sites

Moorundie

3 3

3 3

3

3

3

The Native Location, Point Pearce, Adelaide School

3

3

3

3

3

Poonindie Raukkan (Point McLeay)

94

Point Pearce Koonibba Oodnadatta Colebrook Children’s Home Nepabunna

3 3 3

3 3

3 3

Ooldea Ernabella Finniss Springs Yalata

3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3

3 3

3

Poonindie Colebrook Children’s Home Oodnadatta

3

3 Koonibba Mission, Yalata Fregon

3 3

Northern Territory Baulch lists 77 missions and reserves for the Northern Territory.197 Collectively these demonstrate a high level of mission activity with the purpose of protecting Aboriginal people from the influences of settler (and later mining) societies. This protectionist pattern continues after the adoption of assimilation policies. The sites included in this list also indicate a pattern of constant movement from one location to another in response to social, climatic and economic pressures. The following table indicates those sites which have the potential to illustrate narratives of segregation for the Northern Territory. Table 11: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Northern Territory Site

Control

Port Essington (Victoria) Hermannsburg (Ntaria) Roper River

Race

Religion

3

3

3

3

Bathurst Island Kahlin Compound

3 3

3 3

3 3

The Bungalow

3

3

Angurugu

3

3

Oenpelli (Rose River) Milingimbi

3

Education

Economics

Related Sites

3 3 Groote Eylandt, Finke River Mission House,

3

3 3

3 3

3

3

3

The Bungalow, Bagot, Half-Caste Home Jay Creek, Alice Springs Telegraph Station Finke River Mission House

Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia." 197

95

Yirrkala Little Flower Bagot Compound

3 3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3

3 3

Arltunga

Western Australia Two-hundred and two missions and reserve sites have been identified in Western Australia.198 These were often small and dispersed sites established in response to complaints about the presence of Aboriginal people near towns or camped on stations or private property. In essence a series of small reserves were established as a means of controlling where Aboriginal people could camp. These controls were thought to be necessary to provide adequate water and sanitation but often to minimise disruption to non-Aboriginal people and property. Western Australia further implemented a settlement system to complement protectionist legislation introduced in the early twentieth century. Table 12: Segregation Narrative-Place Checklist: Western Australia Site

Control

Race

Religion

Education

Economics

New Norcia Swan Native and half caste home Ellensbrook Home (Busselton) Beagle Bay

3 3

3 3

3

3 3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

Welshpool Reserve Kalumburu (Drysdale River) Bernier Island

3 3

3

3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

Moola Bulla

3

3

Mount Margaret Mission

3

3

Dorre island Forrest River (Oombulgurri) Mowanjum (Kunmunya, Wotjulum) Marribank (Carrolup) Mogumber Mission (Moore River Native Settlment)

198

Related Sites Kalumburu

Lombadina (Djarindjin)

3

3 New Norcia Dorre island Bernier Island

3

3

Pantijin

3

3

Mogumber

3

3

Carrolup, East Perth Girls’ Home, Siter Kate’s, Sister Kate’s, Beagle Bay Cosmo Newbery

3 3

3

Ibid.

96

La Grange (Bidyadanga) Munja Station Tamborah

3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3

3 3

Places of Assimilation Many assimilationist practices evolved long before assimilation was adopted as a formal policy in Australia. And assimilation was adopted by different states at different times according to their own social, political and economic needs. Nevertheless in 1937 the First Commonwealth-State Native Welfare Conference adopted assimilation as a national direction for the handling of Aboriginal affairs. Tasmania was not represented at this meeting as it claimed that there were no Aboriginal people remaining in Tasmania. Many of the institutions established under segregation continued to operate into the new policy era. So many of the institutions and sites identified under segregation can also illustrate the narratives of assimilation, and some expanded, or gained greater significance during this era. There were yet other sites established specifically to implement assimilation agendas. An indicative list of these sites is suggested by state. Tasmania Tasmania was the only state in Australia not to adopt a formal policy of assimilation. This was based on the falsehood that there were no longer any Aboriginal Tasmanians. Nevertheless assimilationist practices persisted from the Segregation era until the recent past. Aboriginal children on the islands were subjected to particular scrutiny and many removed under welfare laws. Table 13: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Tasmania Site

Control Race Religion Education Economics Related Sites

Cape Barren Island Reserve

3

3

3

Victoria Like Tasmania, the Government of Victoria did not acknowledge its Aboriginal population, choosing to classify people of mixed-descent as non-Aboriginal. This cost saving initiative excused the government from taking responsibility for Aboriginal affairs. As a consequence no Aboriginal institutions were established after 1900, and a systematic closure of stations commenced the 1920s. Aboriginal people continued to suffer discrimination within society and through official interference. Many found themselves in a state of abject poverty. Consequently many Aboriginal children were sent into care. Unlike other states with designated Aboriginal children’s homes, Aboriginal children in Victoria were cared for in mainstream child welfare agencies. With the passing of the Aborigines Act 1957, the Victorian government moved to a policy of assimilation. The report that led to this legislation recommended the closure of the last remaining station at Lake Tyers. This new

97

policy of assimilation removed many earlier discriminatory powers, and the Board no longer had direct control over Aboriginal children. Nevertheless the Board could instruct police to remove children from their families, and as a result an increased number of children were removed during the 1950s. Many were sent to the Ballarat orphanage, Bayswater Boys Home and Box Hill Boys Home.199 Table 14: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Victoria Site

Control Race Religion Education Economics Related Sites

Ballarat Children's Home Box Hill Boys Home Bayswater Boys Home Lake Tyers200

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

New South Wales and ACT Following the First Commonwealth-State Native Welfare Conference, New South Wales moved towards an assimilation policy and passed the Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Acts of 1940 and 1943. These introduced a sweeping program of assimilation with a strong focus on child education. There was an escalation in child removals, and a number of large children’s homes were established to house them. However, the financial burden was unsustainable and the government turned increasingly to foster care and adoption in the 1940s and 1950s. Table 15: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: New South Wales & ACT Site

Control

Race

Religion

Bomaderry Children’s Home

Education

3

3

3

Burnside Children’s Homes Cootamundra Girls Home (Bimbadeen) Kinchela Boys Home

3

3

3

3

3

3

Economics

Related Sites Cootamundra Girls Home Kinchela Boys Home

3

Ibid, Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 498-501. Although Lake Tyers was established during the segregation era, it was the last remaining Aboriginal station when assimilation was adopted as an official policy by the Victorian government. As a consequence the closure of Lake Tyers tells an important part of the story of assimilation in Victoria.

199 200

98

Queensland The Queensland Government was reluctant to move to an assimilation framework and only did so the 1960s. Nevertheless a number of the sites identified from the segregation era illustrate critical aspects of the assimilation narratives. Table 16: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Queensland Site

Control

Mapoon Yarrabah (Bellenden-Kerr)

3 3

Weipa (Napranum) Bogimbah Mission (Maryborough) Aurukun Cherbourg (Barambah) Kowanyama (Mitchell River Mission, Trubanaman) Mona Mona Mornington Island (Zion Hill) Cowal Creek (Injinoo) Palm Island Lockhart River Woorabinda Doomadgee

Religion

Education

Economics

3 3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3 3

3

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Edward River (Pormpuraaw) Bamaga Hopevale (Cape Bedford)

Race

3

3

Related Sites Fraser Island, Bloomfield River Old Mapoon Fraser Island, Yarrabah

3 3

3

3 3 3

3 3

3 3 3 3

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

3 3 3 3

3 3 3

Hull River Bamaga Cape Bedford

Elim, Woorabinda

South Australia Having explored both nineteenth and twentieth century protectorate systems, South Australia was one of the first states to adopt a formal assimilation policy. This followed patterns established elsewhere, including fostering fair skinned children and establishing training stations for assimilation in remote areas. The following sites from the Baulch Report are able to illustrate the narratives of assimilation in South Australia. An additional site, the Campbell House Farm School, is also included. Table 17:Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: South Australia

99

Site

Control

Raukkan (Point McLeay) Morialta Children’s Home Gerard

3

Swan Reach Colebrook Home Nepabunna Ooldea Ernabella Umeewarra (Davenport) Yalata Campbell House Farm School

Race

Religion

Education

Economics

3 Swan Reach Mission Gerard

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Related Sites

3

3 3 3

3 3

3

3

Port Augusta

3 3

Yalata, Gerard, Cundeelee Fregon

3

3 3

3 3

Ooldea

Northern Territory The implementation of assimilation in the Northern Territory was heavily influenced by ideas of race and the frontier. Whereas assimilation was intended to apply to all Aboriginal people, in the Northern Territory the policy fostered a series of controls over people of full-descent and abandoned people of mixed descent to wider society. The following sites have the capacity to illustrate aspects of assimilation narratives. Some originate in an era of segregation, but came to be instruments of assimilation as well. Table 18:Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Northern Territory Site

Control

Race

Religion

Hermannsburg (Ntaria) Roper River

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

Oenpelli (Rose River) Milingimbi

3

3

3

3

Darwin Half-caste Home

3

3

Alice Springs Telegraph Station Yirrkala

3

3

3

3

3

Economics

3

Bagot Compound

3

3

Angurugu

3

3

3

Related Sites

Finke River Mission House

Elcho Island Kahlin Compound, Pine Creek, Telegraph Station The Bungalow, Jay Creek

3 3 3 3

Tennant Creek

Education

3 3 3

Phillip Creek Kahlin, Darwin Half-caste Home Finke River Mission House

100

Croker Island (Minjilang) Garden Point (Melville Island) Papunya Retta Dixon Home

3

3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3

Darwin Baptist Home Palmerston

3

Haasts Bluff

3 3

Numbulwar (Rose River) Beswick Reserve (Barunga Tandangal Bamyili) Ali-Curung (Warrabri) Umbakumba (Groote Eylandt) Amoonguna

3

Bagot Compound

St Marys Hostel Yuendumu

Kahlin

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

Hooker Creek (Lajamanu) Roper River

3

Phillip Creek

3

Telegraph Station

3

3

3

3 3

3 3 3

3

Western Australia The Neville administration in Western Australia saw the early and widespread adoption of assimilation principles and practices well ahead of any formal policy. In particular, Neville was a strong advocate of biological assimilation. As the state moved towards a broader assimilation policy, many of the instruments and practices were aimed at the Aboriginal people of the southwest, or Nyungars. The institutions used to implement assimilation policy were in many instances adapted from the protectionist settlements and missions. There is therefore considerable overlap between the sites listed under segregation and those listed for assimilation in Western Australia. Table 19: Assimilation Narrative-Place Checklist: Western Australia Site

Control

Race

Religion

Education

Economics

New Norcia Beagle Bay

3 3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3

3

New Norcia

3 3

3 3

3

3 3

3 3

Carrolup

Kalumburu (Drysdale River) Mogumber Mission Moola Bulla Mount Margaret La Grange (Bidyadanga) Carrolup (Marribank)

3 3 3

Lombardina

3 3 3

3

Related Sites Kalumburu

Sister Kate’s, Beagle Bay

3 3

3

Mogumber

101

Munja Station Gnawangerup Balgo Hills (Bililuna, Lake Gregory) East Perth Girls Home (Bennett House) Sister Kate’s Home (Mangun) Derby Leprosarium Roelands Native Mission Farm Tamborah Cosmo Newbery Jigalong Tardun (Pallotine Mission School) Cundeelee

3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

3 3 3

3

3

3 3

3 3

3 3 3 3

3 3 3

3

3

Mogumber

Parkerville Children's Home, Moola Bulla

3 3 3 3

3

3

3 3

3

3 3

3

Fitzroy Crossing Wonguntha Mission Training Farm201

3 3

3

3

3 3

Mt Margaret Mission202

Some spellings appear as Wongutha Mission Training Farm, e.g. Wongutha CAPS, "History: Wongutha Mission Training Farm," http://wonguthacaps.wa.edu.au/about/history/#farm. 202 The founder of Wongutha was the son of the missionary who established Mount Margaret. 201

102

6. Exemplary Places There are a great many sites, and many spaces between sites, that tell part of the story of ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’. Collectively they are all equally important because they demonstrate the far-reaching extent and implications of these policies. Together they show how every aspect of Aboriginal people’s lives in the past and present has been effected by these policies and practices. Selecting a few sites to tell these stories is inevitably a fraught process. Even those sites that tell especially compelling stories may only tell a small part of the overall narrative. Others may tell many parts of the story, but to a lesser degree than some of the others. And it is inevitable that the selected sites are an artefact of existing records and research knowledge. Despite the difficulty, the structure identified in the narrative framework, together with the regional patterns provides some direction. For instance, many of the sites assessed and listed in the previous section may have been established during a ‘protectionist’ era, but due to local circumstances and practices, may never have demonstrated the most compelling elements of segregation. And similarly, a number of sites established in what might be determined chronologically as part of the segregation era, over time, are better able to illustrate the stories of assimilation. The approach of identifying narratives ahead of sites makes it easier to compare sites with another. As a starting point the tables from Section 4 were used to identify which sites can illustrate all of the core narratives of control, race, religion, education and economics. Exemplary sites will have the capacity to reflect all of these narratives. It is further expected that these sites will illustrate the temporal-spatial patterns of the narratives. To this extent the sites are identified according to the patterns of implementation within the sub-themes of segregation and assimilation. Within segregation, these include two separate protectionist eras – the initial nineteenth century protectorates and later twentieth century protection legislation – as well as protectionist practices on the frontier. The sub-theme of assimilation is illustrated through the spatial patterns of settlements and frontiers, and also encapsulates the transition from segregation to assimilation.

Nineteenth Century Protectorates The earliest protectorates emerged in Van Diemen’s Land, South Australia and Victoria with the establishment of Government Protectorates. These are characterised by the appointment of Protectors of Aborigines, the removal of Aboriginal people from traditional lands to isolated ‘villages’, a program of training and enculturation into British culture including Christian teaching, agricultural practices, domestic dwellings and cooking, and education. By 1832 Governor Arthur was convinced that they had determined the best way to deal with Aboriginal people and recommended a similar scheme in other Australian colonies. Specifically he thought it necessary to remove Aboriginal people from their traditional environment. In return reserves or protectorates would be established for Aboriginal people where missionaries could introduce them to Christianity and they could be trained

103

in European ways.203 The colonial office responded by instructing Governor Hindmarsh in South Australia to establish a protectorate in 1834. Although a Protector was appointed in 1837, relations between Aborigines and settlers were already very poor. Arthur’s three part plan – to establish a treaty with Aboriginal people, to establish protectorates and civilise Aboriginal people was possibly behind the establishment of the Batman Treaty. However by 1840 this approach was largely ignored. It was replaced by a policy of removal and the idea of treaties was abandoned for the remainder of the nineteenth century. And no new reserves were established in the eastern colonies after the Port Phillip Protectorate was abolished in 1849.204 The Protectorates were sometimes a product of Aboriginal negotiation. In Tasmania the government entered into an agreement with Aboriginal people in return for an end to the ‘Black War’ and in several Victorian cases, Aboriginal people actively campaigned to have government protectorates established in particular localities. Wybalenna Wybalenna was the settlement where Tasmanian Aborigines were taken after Robinson had rounded up survivors of the ‘Black War’ in 1833. This settlement ultimately failed with most Aboriginal people dying, and the few survivors were sent to Oyster Cove in 1847. Despite the relatively short and unsuccessful life of the settlement, the implementation of Robinson’s plan at Wybalenna foreshadowed and directly influenced the development of Aboriginal missions and government settlements on the Australian mainland during the twentieth century.205 For this reason Wybalenna is highly significant, not only as the earliest protectorate in Australia, but also for its influence on the administration of Aboriginal people throughout the country.

Figure 2: Wybalenna, the Aboriginal settlement, Flinders Island 1847

Ryan, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, 176-77. Ibid., 177. 205 Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. 203 204

104

© State Library of Victoria (H22449)

Wybalenna illustrates a number of significant narratives in the sub-theme of assimilation, including: Control • The establishment of Wybalenna was in response to the formidable resistance posed by the Aboriginal Tasmanians. This was a negotiated outcome and the land was allocated in agreement of ending the Black War. • Wybalenna was established in an effort to resolve conflict between Aboriginal people and settlers in Van Diemen’s Land. The removal of Aborigines to a remote island location gave the government complete control over Aboriginal people and ensured that colonial expansion could proceed unhindered. • Aboriginal residents were subjected to a strict program of cultural training including conversion to Christianity and education in English and literacy. Further efforts to ‘civilise’ Aboriginal people focused on transforming Aborigines from huntergatherers to settled agriculturalists. • Aboriginal residents were made to build their own homes and live their lives within the settlement.

Figure 3: Residence of the Aborigines, Flinders Island © State Library of Tasmania (AUTAS001124065012)

Race • The segregation of Tasmanian Aborigines on the Bass Strait Islands was formulated with the idea that Aboriginal people were a doomed race, destined for extinction. • In 1830 Robinson was determined to remove Aboriginal women and children from sealers on Bass Strait islands to Wybalenna. This official intervention into ‘mixed

105

•

race’ families was unique at the time and would become common practice in all Australian jurisdictions during the following century.206 Despite the rigorous program of training and control at Wybalenna, Aboriginal people persisted in maintaining their own cultural traditions and practices, including hunting and gathering, social structures and beliefs.

Religion • Religious instruction was given to Aboriginal residents as part of the program of ‘civilising’ Aboriginal people through Christianity. • Literacy skills were also acquired through religious instruction. • The Aboriginal people of the Bass Strait islands developed their own version of traditional and Christian beliefs and practices. Education • The Wybalenna settlement included a school that also functioned as a Church. • Some Aboriginal people at Wybalenna had been students at the Hobart Orphan School. These individuals were instrumental in orchestrating resistance and protests. • Aboriginal protest at Wybalenna is available in the historic record in the form of a Petition to Queen Victoria. This lists a range of grievances and represents ‘the most important Aboriginal historical interpretation available for the colonial period anywhere in Australia’.207

Figure 4: Shepherd's hut, Wybellinna (Water colour by John Skinner Prout) 1845 © National Library of Australia (pic-an2479062)

Economics • Wybalenna was established with the intention of making it a self-sufficient agricultural venture. 206 207

Ibid., 101. Ibid, Reynolds, Fate of a Free People.

106

• •

The closure of Wybalenna and the transfer of survivors to Oyster Cove was considered economically expedient. When Aboriginal adults were moved to Oyster Cove, Aboriginal children were removed with the aim of integrating them into colonial society rather than remaining as a segregated Aboriginal community.

Poonindie Poonindie was the first major mission station established in South Australia. Archdeacon Hale was disillusioned with existing policies and proposed the establishment of a Native Training Institution at Port Lincoln. The mission was established by the Anglican Church in 1850.208 It represents a relatively successful attempt to create an economically viable and socially relevant community, and epitomises mid-nineteenth century ideology. When it closed in 1875, most residents were sent to Point Pearce.209

Figure 5: Poonindie Mission Station, Port Lincoln, South Australia 1853 © National Library of Australia (pic-an21082612)

Control Hale’s vision in 1850 was for to create:

208 David Hilliard and Arnold D. Hunt, "Strands in the Social Fabric: Religion," in The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, ed. Eric Richards (South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986), 202-03. 209 Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia."

107

an Institution where those natives who have been brought up at the Adelaide school, and others who may seem fit subjects for admission into it, may be gathered together in one little community apart from the vicious portion of the white population, and the wild portion of the blacks, where they may be kept under regular Christian instruction, and enjoy the means of grace – where the attempt may be made to lead them by degrees into habits of industry and a more settled mode of life.210 The site was deliberately located at some distance from the influences of Aboriginal families. Initially Hale had wished to established the mission on Boston Island to ensure complete isolation. However, a lack of water forced him to select the site north of Port Lincoln.211 The farming enterprise was quickly established through a strict work regime. Hale believed that this had given Aboriginal people a new strong work ethic. He was less successful in ensuring their health. In 1856 it was reported that 29 people out of a population of about 60 had died in six years. In the same period only three children were born. Poonindie is a story of success, but also of failure. One of the key aims of the settlement was to maintain a fully segregated community. However, this began to be undermined as the colonial settlement expanded, and the mission increasingly had to accept local Aborigines. The decrease in isolation was counteracted by the strict regime of control so that the farm continued to flourish.212

Figure 6: Entrance to Poonindie Mission © State Library of South Australia

Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 304. Hall, A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children. 212 Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 305. 210 211

108

Race The isolation of the site was seen as especially important to maintain the educational program for children who had attended the Aborigines School in Adelaide. The first residents were children from the Adelaide school and married couples from Adelaide. Significantly local Aboriginal people were excluded to maintain the separation between institutionalised Aboriginal people and those outside of the colonial systems. Religion The intentions of the mission at Poonindie were to separate Aboriginal people from the remainder of society and convert them to Christianity Religious instruction and the conversion of Aboriginal people to Christianity was a central part of the education and social training for Aboriginal residents. The site included a church (Figure 7)

Figure 7: Twenty children and a pastor, Poonindie Native Mission School. n.d. © State Library of Victoria

Education Education and training were also provided at the mission, and the settlement included a school. There was a particularly strong emphasis on farming and many descriptions and images of the settlement emphasise agricultural achievements and show paddocks and equipment (Figure 9). There is an educational establishment where some of the pupils can show creditable specimens of penmanship, etc. Singing classes for practising sacred music are held in the church. Everybody looked fat, happy and clean. One of the laws is that everyone must have a hot bath every Saturday evening and a cold one as often as he or she likes. The curfew bell tolls a little later than under the Norman rule and when it rings lights are put out and all retire to rest. Every Saturday boys with little carts may be seen picking up all pieces of paper, rags, bones, etc., and taking them away for manure. Every morning the men proceed to their rural avocations some reaping, some shepherding, some building... Meantime the wives are washing and cooking and the children learning and playing and on Sabbath they listen in the beloved church to their pastor... 109

It is impossible for any thoughtful man to visit the Poonindie Institution without being deeply interested... It is an immense step in one generation - from the ignorant savage life to the order and discipline pervading this little self-supporting settlement. Observer, 11 January 1873213

Figure 8: Portrait of Nannultera, a young Poonindie cricketer, 1854 © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an2242510)

The mission further provided for residents’ cultural life including a choir and musical instruments. Poonindie was further recognised for its cricketing excellence, 214 and is associated with the now famous portrait of Nannulterer, a young Poonindie cricketer (Figure 8). Recent research also suggests that cricket fell off quickly at Poonindie after half the population died there between 1856 and 1860, leaving only 44 people on the mission.215 It is interesting to reflect, that apart from labour tasks, the activities promoted about the mission are strongly associated with the ideals of ‘civilisation’, music, reading and religion, and even cricket being the most genteel of sports.

Anonymous, "An Australian Arcadia," Observer, 11 January 1873, 6g. Paul Cliff, "Portrait of Nannultera, a Young Poonindie Cricketer," National Library of Australia. 215 Ibid. 213 214

110

Economics The initial mission was established on a 1200 hectare property granted by the government. Archdeacon Matthew Blagden Hale was the first superintendent of the mission. He ensured the commercial success of the property by purchasing an adjacent sheep run, providing a significant additional 3,100 hectares. Hale’s commitment to the site was further witnessed by his participation in physical work around the farm, alongside the Aboriginal residents.

Figure 9: Native mission station, South Australia, ca. 1875 © National Library of Australia (pic-an24631105)

By 1870 Poonindie was completely self-sufficient. It commanded high prices for its wheat and wool. Not only was it out of debt, but it was also able to support additional missionary activities.216 By the 1880s Poonindie had become a model village. The workers were recognised as for their excellence in shearing and ploughing, which gave them access to contract work outside the settlement. Despite these and other favourable reports about the productivity and well-ordered nature of the property, some visitors observed that the residents appeared a little joyless.217 In 1894, Poonindie was closed, after white settlers had agitated for the resumption of its lands for subdivision and occupation. Its residents were dispersed. Some found shelter at the Point Pearce or Point McLeay mission stations.

216 217

Summers, "Colonial Race Relations," 305. Ibid.

111

Loddon River

The first Protectorate Stations in Victoria included Michellstown, Goulbuurn River, Geelong and Arthur’s Seat. In 1840 further Protectorate Stations were established, including the Loddon River Station at Mount Franklin. This was 41,073 acres of prime land and immediately 130 Jaara people moved there as residents and trainee farmers. Also known as Jim Crow and Mount Franklin, the Loddon River Station was arguably the most successful of the Port Phillip Aboriginal Protectorate Stations. It closed in 1864 and residents moved to Coranderrk. Control The station lured Aboriginal people to it through the provision of food. It also offered a refuge from the highly violent colonial conflict in the region. Through the segregation of Aboriginal people on the station, land in the region became ‘peaceably’ available for colonial expansion. Race

Religion • The Loddon River station was established by Edward Stone Parker, a staunch evangelical Christian. • His religion led him to believe that Aboriginal people were immoral. He was particularly concerned by their polygamous relationships and allegations of infanticide. • Parker was committed to effecting change through Christianity and placed his greatest efforts with converting the younger members of the group. • Parker attempted to learn the Daungwurrung language, but found it impossible to translate Christian ideas and morality. • Despite the success of the station in terms of agricultural produce, there is little to suggest that the Daungwurrung rejected or even significantly modified their own beliefs and customs: The mass of the Aboriginal population of this District remains unchanged in their characteristic habits and inclinations, and in some instances I have witness more determined hostility to religion, and more inveterate attachment to their own sensuality and superstition than ever.218 Education • Aboriginal elders at Loddon River criticised Parker for interfering in the education of their children.

218

Parker 1849, cited in Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 43.

112

• •

In 1848 a school was established at the station – and according to Parker was well received by some of the younger men.219 After the closure of the government station, Parker was appointed as visiting magistrate at the Loddon Aboriginal School.

Economics • Despite Parker’s religious zeal and moral judgements about Aboriginal people, he established a good rapport with the residents of the station. The station was quickly established through clearing and enclosing 15 hectares of land and planting crops. • A strong motivation among the Aboriginal workers was that the produce was for their own consumption and benefit. They were assured that the station was their compensation for loss of land, and the ending of violence against settlers.220 • When a Legislative Council review led to the closure of the station in 1849, the productivity of the farm had grown significantly. • Parker subsequently leased the station land and employed Aboriginal people as pastoral workers.

Figure 10: Aboriginal farmers at Parker's Protectorate, Mt. Franklin ca. 1858 © State Library of Victoria (H84.167/43)

219 220

Ibid., 42. Ibid., 41-2.

113

Figure 11: Aboriginals' farm near Mount Franklin ca. 1858 © State Library of Victoria (H84.167/25)

Protection on the Frontier In the absence of government protectorates in much of Australia, a number of reserves and missions were established. In rural areas these served to confine Aboriginal people to particular localities and keep them out of the way of settlers who objected to their presence on properties and in town. In areas of violent conflict, particularly those frontier areas distant from government influence, missions offered sanctuary to Aboriginal people. Hermannsburg Mission The Hermansburg Mission was established and managed by German Lutheran missionaries and the Lutheran Church between 1877 and 1982. It functioned as a refuge for Aboriginal people during the violent frontier conflict that was a feature of early pastoral settlement in central Australia. It continued to play a role through a number of policy changes, illustrating the core narratives of the theme, From Segregation to Assimilation. The mission illustrates several phases of missionary and government policy and was the longest-running Aboriginal mission in Australia. It was continuously managed by a denominational body and operated as a separate Aboriginal settlement throughout its history. Control • The Lutheran missionaries were independent and outspoken, and played a key role in mediating between pastoralists, the police and Aboriginal people. They also spoke out publicly about frontier violence, sparking heated national debate.

114

•

Despite this, the missionaries were committed to converting the Aboriginal people to ‘civilisation’ through Christianity and the adoption of a settled way of life. This is reflected in the layout of the mission that imposed a new order on Aboriginal life.

Figure 12: Gardens at Hermannsburg Mission, 1900 ©State Library of South Australia (B42460)

Race • Characteristic of most missions in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Lutherans were committed to converting Aboriginal people from their own beliefs and customs to those of European society. There was a strong emphasis on church, schooling, work and self-sufficiency. • The indoctrination of children was regarded as critical, and as in many other cases, Aboriginal children were separated from their parents in an effort to convert Aboriginal people to a new way of life. • Unlike many parts of Australia, the Aboriginal population of Hermannsburg was substantial and by 1950 there were a large number of children, countering the widely held belief that Aboriginal people were a doomed race, destined for extinction. Religion • The physical layout of the mission placed the church at its centre, clearly indicating the significance and role of religion in the lives of residents. • In 1887 the first seven Aboriginal teenagers were baptised.

115

Figure 13: Hermannsburg Mission Church, 1932 ©State Library of South Australia (B8576)

Education • As with other Lutheran missions, the construction of a church-school was a priority at Hermannsburg, as an expression of religious faith. • The missionaries made some effort to learn the local languages and even produced some written materials in language.

Figure 14: Hermannsburg Native School, 1920 © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an23208412)

116

Figure 15: School Children at Hermannsburg Mission 1955 © Northern Territory Library (PH0127/0200)

Economics • The mission operated a productive station, complete with gardens, dates, cattle and milking cows (Figure 16 and Figure 17) • Following WWI there were many calls for Hermannsburg to be closed because it was regarded as a German institution. The government responded by withdrawing funding, but the Lutheran missionaries resisted and managed to fund the mission through independent sources.

Figure 16: Hermannburg Mission Milkmaids 1920/21 © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an23208292)

117

Figure 17: Hermannsburg Mission Stockman and his horse ca. 1900 ©State Library of South Australia (B42469)

Figure 18: Portrait of Albert Namatjira at Hermannsburg Mission, 1946/47 © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an23165034)

•

Hermannsburg is well known for its art, which has been celebrated since resident Albert Namatjira and other Aboriginal artists began to paint in watercolour. The Lutheran missionaries played an important part in supporting and promoting Namatjira’s early artwork, and managing his affairs. Namatjira's was the first Aboriginal artist to be commercially exhibited nationally and internationally. He maintained a close association with Hermannsburg Mission throughout his later life, frequently returning to the mission until his death. Aboriginal artists from

118

other family groups in this area continue the tradition of watercolour painting today.

Drysdale River Mission (Kalumburu) The mission officially opened in 1908 at Pago, and was gradually transferred to the Kalumburu site between 1931 and 1940.221 This followed the findings of the Roth inquiry that had revealed a number of cruelties to Aboriginal people. The Aborigines Protection Act 1905 partially addressed the concerns, but in the remote north of the state, atrocities continued. The Catholic Church saw a need and opportunity to establish a mission in the region. Control • The mission was initiated in a climate of Aboriginal-settler conflict, and the missionaries entered under the guise of protection. However, the work also served to remove conflict from the region and make it safe for settlers to travel through and claim land in the region. • Aboriginal people attacked the missionaries when they first tried to establish the mission. • The mission was modelled on a monastic lifestyle of prayer and toil. • The mission aimed to convert local Aboriginal people to Christianity and a settled way of life. • Aboriginal people were to be segregated and self-sufficient in agriculture. Race • Attacks by Aboriginal people were not recognised as the legitimate defence of their land, but evidence of the ‘savagery’ and ‘barbarity’ of Aborigines. • Aboriginal people used the mission as a safe-haven when avoiding attacks by other Aboriginal groups. • ‘Half-caste’ boys were taken to the Drysdale Mission and became founders of the mission and intermediaries between the ‘wild blacks’ and the mission. • The Benedictine Mission wished to increase the Aboriginal population at the mission and in the northwest generally, and were dismayed by the small number of children in the group. • Children were housed in separate dormitories. Religion • Kalumburu Mission was established with the express purpose of evangelizing Aboriginal people of the remote northwest of Western Australia. • The monks wanted Aboriginal people to be married in Christian traditions. • Baptism was voluntary and slow to be accepted by Aboriginal people.

Choo, Mission Girls: Aboriginal Women on Catholic Missions in the Kimberley, Western Australia 19001950, 65-79, Eugene Perez, Kalumburu : The Benedictine Mission and the Aborigines 1908-1975: The History of Kalumburu Mission in North Western Australia (Wyndham: Kalumburu Benedictine Mission, 1977).

221

119

•

Adults were less inclined to adopt new beliefs than the younger people.

Education • The Benedictines aimed to educate and train Aboriginal people and convert them to a new way of life. • At the site of Kalumburu Aboriginal people were encouraged to become settled and to live in houses surrounded by fenced gardens. • They were particularly concerned to provide this indoctrination to children and younger members of the community.

Figure 19: Aboriginal people in the Mission Yard, Drysdale River Benedictine Mission, 1919 © Battye Library (734B/926)

Economics • Aboriginal people provided labour for managing cattle, crops and gardens. • Nuns were brought from Spain via New Norcia to provide training and guidance to Aboriginal mission girls. They also took on the maternal roles of housekeeping, cooking and laundering. Moola Bulla Moola Bulla operated as a training station from 1920 to 1955. It was established to reduce Aboriginal-settler conflict and violence in the Kimberley region, particularly to end Aboriginal killing of cattle. The station provided labour for the Kimberley cattle industry and was also a repository for children of mixed descen, particularly darker skinned children. Control • Moola Bulla was established to remove Aboriginal people from pastoral stations and prevent them from killing cattle.

120

• • •

It was established as a ration station and helped to centralise Aboriginal people from the east Kimberley into a single group. This arrangement of removal, concentraton and segregation protected settler interests and allowed pastoral expansion. Moola Bulla kept Aboriginal people out of sight and away from white centres.

Race • Children of mixed descent could be sent to Moola Bulla, and in 1930 was declared an institution for ‘half-caste’ children.222 When I was about twelve or thirteen years old I was taken to Moola Bulla. That's where I lost my Aboriginal ways. The Police came one day from Halls Creek when they were going on patrol to Lansdowne and found me, a half-caste child. The manager ... took me down to Fitzroy Crossing to wait for the mail truck from Derby to take me to Moola Bulla. When [the manager's wife] told my people, mum and dad, that they were taking me to Fitzroy Crossing for a trip, they told her `you make sure you bring her back'. They did not know that I would never see them again.223 •

Moola Bulla also became the place for children with darker skin: Some kids who were brought to Moola Bulla and who were too white would be sent to Sister Kate's in Perth and some of them who were too dark for Sister Kate's were sent to Moola Bulla. There was a half-caste boy who was at Moola Bulla, his mother was half-caste and his father white, and I suppose they couldn't bear to see him down the camp with all these Aboriginal people so they sent him to Sister Kate's.224

• •

The superintendent of Moola Bulla believed that Aboriginal people could only be changed by separating children from adults. When Moola Bulla was sold Aboriginal residents were immediately removed from the property into makeshift camps in Hall’s Creek and Fitzroy Crossing.

Religion • Presbyterian missionaries established a school at Moola Bulla in the late 1930s Education • Children were trained in pastoral and domestic skills. • There was no school until 1929 when the storekeeper’s wife was appointed as a teacher. • Presbyterian missionaries established a school in the late 1930s but this was closed during the war and many children were transferred to Beagle Bay.

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 244-45. Kimberley Land Council submission 345, cited in National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 224 Confidential evidence 814, Western Australia, cited in Ibid. 222 223

121

Figure 20: School at Moola Bulla Station 1952 © National Archives of Australia (A1200/19)

Figure 21: School at Moola Bulla Station 1952 © National Archives of Australia (A1200/19)

Economics • The centralisation of Aboriginal people at Moola Bulla created a pool of trained workers for local employers. • Moola Bulla greatly reduced the number of Aboriginal imprisonments and thus reduced government expenditure. • The aim of the settlement was to become self-supporting.

122

Figure 22: Aboriginal Children branding cattle at Moola Bulla, ca.1910 © Battye Library (733B/176)

•

The settlement was sold to pastoral interests in 1954 at a time when it was regarded as the best property in the Kimberley. I can't remember anything much about the day we were evicted from Moola Bulla [in July 1955] because they just came and told us to go. There was no explanation, we don't know what happened. We were stunned. There were four kids and no money to feed them. A transport contractor, took all the people into Halls Creek. We camped around the race course for a few days, whilst asking for jobs on other stations ... The welfare gave us some rations, that's all. It was July and pretty cold and we camped, waiting, just like a refugee camp. We were brought to Moola Bulla as children without our consent nor our mother's and the later kicked off the land after living there for so long. It caused us a lot of pain inside. We were displaced and lost with no sense of belonging.225

Coranderrk Corranderrk was established near Healsville in 1863. It operated as a Government station until 1924. Together with Framlingham, it was the largest of the managed reserves in Victoria with an area of some 4,850 acres. The community set up their own sawmill, dairy, barns, butcher, bakery and school. In the 1870s-80s Coranderrk residents, led by the famous Wonga and Barak, took the initiative in rebelling against harsh treatment of Aborigines by the Board for Protection of Aborigines. Despite some success, the settlers in the surrounding region lobbied to have the mission closed to make the land available for

225

Kimberley Land Council submission 345, cited in Ibid.

123

settlers. The land was reduced in size twice before the reserve closed and the Coranderrk residents moved to Maloga/Cummeragunja and Lake Tyers.226

Figure 23: Dairy herd and milkers at Coranderrk, 1900 © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an3129006)

Control • The Kulin people who settled at Coranderrk in 1863 did so after a series of complex negotiations with authorities, the Protector and even Queen Victoria. In this process they ensured that the location of the reserve was meaningful to them, selecting a traditional camping ground. 227 • In June 1860 the government established a reserve and rationing system under a Central Board that introduced increased controls over the management of Aboriginal people, and Coranderrk became a government controlled reserve.228 • In addition to the Kulin who had chosen to live at the site, the General Inspector for the Board brought additional resident sfrom other reserves and regions, including Mount Franklin. • Many children separated from their parents were brought to Coranderrk. Parents often followed them229 • A boarding house was established to enforce the separation of children on the reserve. Here, children were strictly controlled and locked into the dormitories at night.230 • The relatively benign management of John Green was deliberately removed in 1874 by the Board to ensure greater control over Coranderrk.

226 Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia.", Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800. 227 Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 124-25. 228 Ibid., 126-6. 229 Ibid., 131-2. 230 Ibid., 135.

124

Race • The Coranderrk station originated as a boarding house for orphans and the Board began a program of removing Aboriginal children from their parents and placing them at Coranderrk despite the reluctance of their parents. • The Aboriginal people at Coranderrk Station ran a consistent and sophisticated campaign against the introduction of the 1886 Act which discriminated against people of mixed descent. They protested consistently to ensure that they could remain on the reserve and lobbied to have the reserve better managed.231 Religion • Although Coranderrk was government rather than Christian controlled, the prevailing beliefs that Christianity was a cornerstone of Aboriginal people’s salvation and welfare brought religious indoctrination. • The manager, John Green, was a lay Presbyterian and held prayers twice a day and four service on Sundays. • Aboriginal people attended services and took an interest in biblical stories and hymns and rituals.232 • William Barak produced drawings of ceremonial life, hunting and fight scenes from memory, reaffirming his Aboriginality.233 Education • The Board sought to reshape Aboriginal children through separation from their parents and education. • Schooling became compulsory after 1872, and teachers at Coranderrk found the children to be intelligent and capable.234 Economics • The Kulin regarded Coranderrk as land that they negotiated and owned. They worked feverishly to make it productive, building many homes on the property and producing traditional product that could be exchanged and sold for desirable goods. • They were supported in this view by the relatively moderate management of John Green. • Green eventually agreed to pay workers at Coranderrk. This, in part, recognised that food produced by the Aboriginal workers was used to support many orphans and elderly people who were not related to the workers. However, only men and not women were paid.235 • As with other reserves, the standard of living at Coranderrk was poor and illness widespread. A large number of people died from disease; almost twenty percent of the population in 1875 alone.

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 165-66. Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 140. 233 Ibid., 164. 234 Ibid., 136. 235 Ibid., 141-2. 231 232

125

•

William Barak sold his drawings, and women made baskets for sale, to tourists who visited the reserves.

Protection in the Twentieth Century Protection re-emerged as a major means of tackling the ‘Aboriginal problem’ at the end of the nineteenth century. After the introduction of the Queensland Aboriginal Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897, a number of other states implemented similar legislation; including, Western Australia, South Australia, New South Wales and the Northern Territory. This legislation led to governments assuming control over a number of missions, and generally increasing surveillance and interference in people’s lives. Cummeragunja The Maloga Mission school for Aboriginal children was established on the banks of the Murray River in 1874. It began as a personal venture by Daniel Matthews who received a small annual grant from the NSW Government. The adjacent Cummeragunja station was established on 1,800 acres set aside by the Aborigines Protection Association. Located on the Murray River on the New South Wales side of the Victorian border, the settlement aimed to become self-sufficient. However, the station was gazetted as a Government Reserve in 1883. In 1887 the Maloga Mission school and houses were moved to Cummeragunja. At this time Aboriginal residents began to petition for freehold farm lots. With the introduction of the New South Wales Aborigines Protection Act 1909 the Aborigines' Protection Board assumed responsibility. This had devastating consequences for residents. Residents went on strike in the 1940s because they were not paid for clearing land, fencing, shearing and many other tasks. The strikers were forced to leave the mission. In 1953 the Aboriginal Advancement League campaigned for title to the reserve and in 1964 the descendants of the original Aboriginal occupants were granted permissive occupancy.236

Christine Brett, "“We Have Grown to Love Her”: The Aborigines Inland Mission, Aboriginal People and the Nsw Aborigines Protection Board, 1905-1920.," (2004), http://rspas.anu.edu.au/pah/TransTasman/papers/Brett_Christine.pdf, National Foundation for Australian Women, "Cummeragunja Reserve (1883 - )," Australian Women's Archives Project Web Site, http://www.womenaustralia.info/biogs/AWE1093b.htm, Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia.", Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800.

236

126

Figure 24: Cummergunja 1884 (From Photograph Album of Nicholas Caire) © National Library of Australia (nla.pic-an3096938-2 PIC/8465/2 LOC Album 397)

Control • Under mission control, Aboriginal people at Maloga were subjected to strict religious structures. • The Aboriginal people of Cummergunja were particularly politically active in the nineteenth century and initially enjoyed some success in agitating for land.237 • The Aborigines Protection Act 1909 empowered reserve managers to remove residents for misconduct or because it was believed they should be earning their living elsewhere. • The New South Wales Board attacked the independence of the Cummeragunja reserve by removing farm equipment, tearing down houses and leasing some of the land to settlers. Race • Under the 1909 Act Police removed ‘half-caste’ children to training institutions. Many families responded by fleeing across the Murray to Victoria to live in riverbank camps. • In 1938 about 170 residents walked off the mission in protest of the way they were treated by the manager, and crossed the river to settle in Victoria. Religion • Cummeragunja is associated with the nearby Maloga Mission which was established in 1874 by Daniel Matthews. Matthews was a missionary and humanitarian with a strong commitment to religious instruction.238 • In 1888 a number of Aboriginal people left Maloga Mission to settle on the nearby government station at Cummeragunja because they were tired of the stringent religious life at Maloga.239

237 238

Doukakis, The Aboriginal People, Parliament And "Protection" In New South Wales, 1856-1916, 7. Ibid., 8.

127

•

The teacher at Cummeragunja was committed to ideals of self-improvement through Christianity.

Education • Thomas James, the school teacher at Cummeragunja, was highly influential. He strongly supported the community’s desire for independence and helped to establish Aboriginal political leadership.240 • Figure 25 suggests there was a school for Aboriginal children at Cummeragunja.

Figure 25: Aborigines Welfare Board, tour of south & western NSW 1963 © State Library of New South Wales (GPO 2 – 21426)

Economics • The station was established in an effort to become a self-sufficient farm and by the turn of the century Cummeragunja was a prosperous community. • By 1908 the station comprised a neat village with 300 residents.241 • After the New South Wales Aboriginal Protection Board took control of Cummeragunja in 1915 all funds raised from the farm went to the Board. • Aboriginal workers on the station were subsequently paid in inadequate and unhealthy rations rather than wages. • The Aboriginal residents were also used to produce other goods, as suggested by Figure 26 which shows a group of Aboriginal girls and women knitting for the war effort. • In 1953, Cummeragunja was closed as a station and reduced to reserve status. The few remaining residents agitated for the right to begin farming again.

Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 262. Ibid. 241 National Foundation for Australian Women, "Cummeragunja Reserve (1883 - )." 239 240

128

Figure 26: Cummeragunja Government Mission: Aboriginal women and girls242 knitting socks, jumpers and balaclavas for the war effort. © Australian War Memorial (P01562.0010)

Carrolup Native Settlement The Welshpool Reserve, Moore River Native Settlement and Carrolup were all established as part of a ‘native settlement scheme’ promoted by the Western Australian Protector, AO Neville. These were modelled on the early protectorates with the idea that each would become a self-sufficient settlement for Aboriginal people who would be trained in agricultural and life skills, be educated and adopt Christianity. Carrolup was established in 1915which later became Marribank Farm School for boys and state wards under assimilation policies, was the most sustainable of the settlements. Control • The Carrolup camp was first established by the forced removal of Aboriginal people from Katanning, following complaints of white residents about the Aboriginal camps.243 • In living memory, Mr Neville is strongly associated with the most draconian of interventions in the lives of Aboriginal people in Western Australia. The Carrolup

242 Identified, left to right, back row: Merle Morgan, June Morgan, Weeny Charles, Amy Briggs, Valda McGee, Edna Walker, Sheila Charles, Joan Charles, Elsie Cooper, Midge Walsh, Florry Walker. Front row: Joyce Atkinson, Clare Charles, Alma Charles, Ada Cooper, Nelly Davis?, Elizabeth Morgan, Lauraine Charles, Greta Cooper, Violet Charles, Wynnie Walker, Hilda Walker, Georgina Atkinson, Lydia Morgan, Reta Cooper, Maggie Weston. 243 Haebich, For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 19001940, 145-47.

129

• •

• •

settlement was established with all the key characteristics of his administration – control, efficiency and control.244 In 1915 Neville appointed a superintendent and expanded the size of the settlement to ensure that it would become self-sufficient. Regulations passed in 1918 were designed to ensure compliance for Aboriginal people living at Moore River and Carrolup and included provisions to expel inmates who failed to work as directed, to confine people for up to fourteen days for misconduct, neglect of duty or insubordination, and to inflict corporal punishment on children who tried to leave the settlement without permission. In 1918 the Superintendent of Carrolup was reprimanded for chaining a girl to a bed for three days to prevent her from leaving the settlement.245 Children were separated from their parents in dormitories and parents lived in camps.

Figure 27: Aboriginal Children at Carrolup, ca. 1940 © Battye Library (217091PD)

Race • Aboriginal children of mixed descent who had been removed from their parents were sent to Carrolup from 1915. • Neville was a strong believer in classifying Aboriginal people according to degrees of Aboriginal descent, and children at Moore River were subjected to the humiliating process of being graded according to their appearance, particularly skin colour.

244 245

———, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 260. Ibid., 410.

130

Religion • Neville was opposed to mission control of Aboriginal people, but Christianity remained a central part of life on the settlement, and a critical element of training Aboriginal people. • Neville allowed the AAM missionaries to continue working at Carrolup • The Methodist Church assumed responsibility for the settlement in 1951 and changed its name to Mogumber Mission. Education • Aboriginal children were excluded from state schools and the native settlements became the only educational opportunity for Aboriginal children. • The emphasis of education was on vocational and practical training.246 • A teacher was appointed in 1917 Economics • Settlements were established with minimal government funding and were expected to support themselves and generate additional income. • Aboriginal labour was used to develop Carrolup into a self-supporting farming enterprise. This included production of meat, vegetables and fruit for the settlement residents. • One woman from the camp make all the clothes for the Carrolup children in 1916. This was extended to the production of clothing for all Aborigines in the state. Under the direction of a sewing mistress Aboriginal girls from the Dulhi Gunyah Orphanage sewed about three hours a day. They produced about 7,500 garments each year, significantly reducing government expenses. • Rations were reduced, and their distribution was centralised at the settlements including Carrolup. Cherbourg (Barambah) The reserve established in Queensland’s south began as Barambah in 1901 and was later renamed Cherbourg. It was the first settlement to be established after the passing of the Aboriginal Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897. Over the years people from 40 different cultural groups were sent to Cherbourg and the settlement became a home to many. Variously described as bold, well meaning and misguided, it was a social experiment in institutional control that impacted on the lives of thousands of Aboriginal families. Control • People were forcibly resettled at Cherbourg from many areas of Queensland. • The superintendents had their own police and people were imprisoned for minor misdemeanours. • Some residents were sent to Cherbourg as a punishment for failing to work as directed.

———, For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 19001940, 166-7. 246

131

• •

The girls’ domitory was surrounded by high fences, windows were barred and inmates locked in at night.247 Children were separated from adults in dormitories, and all residents were separated according to sex and age.248 …I was 6 months old. Because the dormitory is such a big place and it’s made up, you know ... it’s split that way [in half] downstairs with your women that side, your girls that side. I stayed with my Mum for 4 years on that side with the other mothers. The boys went into the boys’ home - my grandfather’s sons. And he had Mum’s younger sister and younger brother - they stayed with the old people. But the rest of them - the boys - were put in a home. Mum was put in the dormitory. I stayed with her until I was 4 years of age. You slept with your mother because there was basically no room for a cot or anything and for the 4 years you’re there living with her. But when I turned 4, and because I was such an intelligent child, sneaking off to school because all the other kids are going ... matron made the decision that, ‘Peggy has to go to school’. And so immediately that decision was made, I was transferred over to this section. I was taken away from her. Separating her from me was a grill. There was chicken wire across there. That was the extent of how far you could go to this [other] side. Once you were separated from your Mum, you’re not to go back to her again. Absolutely no interaction. You have a bed on your own. No contact during the day. I’m out of her control. She is no longer actually my mother type of thing. So you go under the care and control of the Government. That’s what happened.249

Figure 28: Womens Quarters at Barambah Settlement, 1911 © John Oxley Library (picqld-2003-04-10-12-40)

247 Mary-Jean Sutton, "Re-Examining Total Institutions: A Case Study from Queensland," Archaeology in Oceania 38, no. 2 (2003). 248 Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia," 20. 249 National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families."

132

Race • Diverse cultural groups were forced to live together, and forbidden to speak their own languages. This had a dramatic and negative impact on traditional Aboriginal language and culture. • Inmates retained regional affiliations and kinship ties despite significant efforts to separate families and rupture kinship networks. • Residents further developed a distinctive Aboriginal domain within which they were able to resist attempts to transform their family structures, privacy and domesticity. They successfully maintained, in modified form, a lifestyle that was communally based highly interactive.250

Figure 29: Boys Quarters at Barambah, 1911 © John Oxley Library (picqld-2003-04-10-12-15)

Education • The settlement included a reformatory school, training farm, and home training centre for girls. • Training was provided in a variety of agricultural, industrial and domestic fields. • The school's objective was to prepare the children for future life on the settlement’, in other words to turn them into good and industrious inmates and diligent and obedient workers. Economics • The legislative framework of the 1897 Act was ostensibly introduced to protect and preserve Aboriginal people and culture. It also provided a system of control that helped to create a cheap and reliable labour force. • The training and incarceration of Aboriginal residents at Cherbourg created a major labour depot for workers required for the most menial and dirty tasks at the

Christine Choo, "A Dumping Ground: A History of the Cherbourg Settlement.(Book Review)," Australian Aboriginal Studies 2002, no. 2 (2002).

250

133

settlement and in the wider community. Research by Blake suggests a ‘slave mode of production’.251 Palm Island The Department of Aboriginal and Islander Affairs established a reserve on Palm Island to replace the cyclone ravaged Hull River Reserve in 1918. In the following two decades 1,630 Indigenous people from throughout Queensland were relocated to Palm Island, and by the early 1920s Palm Island had become the largest of the Government Aboriginal settlements. Palm Island was regarded as a prison by Indigenous people. In 1957 residents went on strike in protest at the treatment of women and a wages cut. Twenty-five men and their families were expelled as a result of the strike. A second strike occurred in 1974 after the community council was sacked. In 1986 the state government passed title to the community council.252 Control • Administrators used the island location to isolate and control indigenous people. • At the settlement authorities implemented a rigid work regime, and constant surveillance. • In 1927 a hospital was built at nearby Fantome Island and a leprosarium was established in 1939, both used to further isolate and control Aboriginal people. • Palm Island quickly gained a reputation amongst Aborigines as a penal settlement, with many people removed from across the state as punishment for infringements of the legislation. This could include minor misdemeanours, subordination or simply being of mixed ancestry. • New arrivals came after being sentenced by a court, or released from prison or were sent by administrators of other missions wishing to weed out their more illmannered Aboriginals. These removals to the Palm Island Mission continued until the late 1960s. • In the 1950s a former police officer, Roy Bartlam was the superintendent. He imposed a stringent regime of control. Workers could be arrested for being late and imprisonment for failing to work was common. The police used batons and physical threats to intimidate and control residents. Race • Aboriginal women who conceived children from white men were sent to Palm Island as punishment. • Children of mixed descent were also sent to Palm Island. • Parents and children were segregated in the settlement

Ibid. Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia." 251 252

134

Religion

Figure 30: Local Church on Palm Island, ca. 1932 © John Oxley Library (picqld-2006-07-05-14-00)

Education • Palm Island was registered as industrial school under the Children’s Services Act 1965 to receive children sent by the Department of Native Affairs and the State Children's Department. • Most of the island’s children were confined to the Industrial School. The curriculum was extremely limited and did not go beyond Grade 4. It was designed to prepare Aboriginal children for lowly manual work such as domestic duties and stock-work. Economics • Palm Island Mission became a tourist attraction. Aboriginal people performed traditional dance and sold artefacts. • When the Government withdrew from Palm Island Aboriginal people were left untrained and unprepared. There was a total lack of socio-economic infrastructure and people quickly became dependent on welfare.

135

Figure 31: Tourists arriving at the Palm Island Settlement ca. 1940 © John Oxley Library (picqld-2007-09-26-11-09)

From Segregation to Assimilation

Moore River Like Carrolup, Moore River Native Settlement was established as part of a ‘native settlement scheme’ promoted by the Western Australian Protector, AO Neville. These were modelled on the early protectorates but Neville was also a strong advocate of biological assimilation. This was expressed in the management of Moore River from its earliest years, but the settlement also continued to operate into a period of formal assimilation. In 1951 the settlement became a children’s mission and was renamed Mogumber Methodist Mission. Control • Moore River Native Settlement was established by the Western Australian Government as a place to send Aboriginal people who were living in camps around urban areas. • Originally for southern people the settlement also took people from distant regions including the goldfields, Murchison, Pilbara and the Kimberleys, as part of a program of disrupting family ties. • In living memory, Mr Neville is strongly associated with the most draconian of interventions in the lives of Aboriginal people in Western Australia. Life at Moore River reflects this in a number of ways. • Marriages were controlled as part of an agenda of biological assimilation.

136

Figure 32: Staff and children at Moore River Native Settlment ca. 1930 © Battye Library (226002PD)

Race • Within a year of opening, Moore River began to accept Aboriginal children of mixed descent who had been removed from their parents. • Neville was a strong believer in classifying Aboriginal people according to degrees of Aboriginal descent, and children at Moore River were subjected to the humiliating process of being graded according to their appearance, particularly skin colour. • Aboriginal residents were brought from many regions of Western Australia and a new sense of Aboriginal identity was strongly influenced by the common experience shared at Moore River. Religion • Neville was opposed to mission control of Aboriginal people, but Christianity remained a central part of life on the settlement, and a critical element of training Aboriginal people. • A church is a central feature of the site. • The Methodist Church assumed responsibility for the settlement in 1951 and changed its name to Mogumber Mission. This introduced a strong religious and moral element to the management. Education • When missionaries took control of Moore River and Carrolup became Marribank Farm School for boys, the missions became the principle agents for education and assimilation. • The Depression pushed many Aboriginal people out of work forcing many to move to Moore River during the 1930s.

137

Economics • The settlement was intended to be self-supporting like Carrolup, but the location was less conducive to agriculture. • Aboriginal children from Moore River were sent out to work on stations or as domestic servants. Cootamundra The Cootamundra Domestic Training Home for Aboriginal Girls (Bimbadeen College) was the main location in New South Wales for girl children removed from their families under the Aborigines Protection Act 1909. The building was originally constructed in 1887 as a hospital, but was converted to a girls’ home in 1911. In an effort to assimilate children of mixed descent, children were separated from their families and declared wards of state. As the number of children under government control increased they were housed in specialised institutions such as Cootamundra. Aboriginal girls of mixed descent were segregated from their families and trained to be domestic servants. They were sent into the community in this role where it was expected that they become assimilated.

Figure 33: Dormitory at Cootamundra, n.d. © State Records NSW (4346_a020_a020000151.jpg)

Control • The dormitory system at Cootamundra set out a strict regime of control. • Families were strictly separated from children, and this was enforced through deceptions about parents and children’s whereabouts and wellbeing. • Girls were subjected to corporal punishment and other forms of deprivation and detainment. Race • Children of mixed descent were targeted for training as domestic servants, and an anticipated assimilation through employment. • Skin colour determined opportunities and placements.

138

Education

• •

•

“The girls were taught reading, writing and arithmetic. All the girls had to learn to scrub, launder and cook”253 The education at Cootamundra was oriented towards training girls for subservient roles. Prior to 1946 Aboriginal girls at the home attended the Cootamundra East Aboriginal School. After this time the girls from the Aboriginal Girls' Training Home started attending Cootamundra Public School.

Economics • Girls at Cootamundra were trained to be domestic servants and at age fourteen were sent out to work. • The girls at Cootamundra were better prepared for work than boys. Described by one of them as ‘slavery’, their training in the home coincided exactly with the tasks they needed to carry out as domestic servants.254

Kahlin Compound

Kahlin Compound was established outside Darwin in 1913. In contrast with the Christian agenda of ‘civilising’ Aboriginal people on Aboriginal mission stations, Kahlin was established by the Commonwealth government to provide an institution for Aboriginals employed in town. It was intended that workers and their families could be contained, controlled and segregated from wider society. The compound was also shaped by assimilation policies and practices, especially the separation of children of mixed descent. The Compound became the key provider of labour for most of Darwin as well as supporting itself. However, by 1934 a large population of Aboriginal people within the town was regarded as undesirable and by 1938 all the Kahlin residents had been moved to Bagot. Control • Kahlin was established in the context of increased intolerance of Aboriginal camps in and around the town of Darwin. People were forcibly removed and the camps destroyed. • The compound was surrounded by a timber and barbed-wire fence • Children were separated from adults and the site included separate boys’ and girls’ dormitories. • Girls were locked up in dormitories.

National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 254 Read, "The Stolen Generations the Removal of Aboriginal Children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969." 253

139

• •

A full-time superintendent and matron were appointed to ensure that there was constant supervision to control Aboriginal inmates day and night.255 The Aboriginals Act prevented unauthorised people from entering the compound and required all Aborigines to be at the compound or their employer’s quarters after sunset.

Figure 34: Children at the Kahlin Compound, ca. 1930 © Northern Territory Library (PH0280/0009)

Race • A fence separated Aboriginal people of full and mixed descent at the compound. • In 1925 Aboriginal girls of mixed descent were moved to a separate house just outside the compound. Boys were later moved here and held within a wired area. • Aboriginal children of mixed descent were removed from their parents. • Children of mixed descent were placed in missions and institutions according to colour and ratio of Aboriginal ancestry. Education • A school was established for Aboriginal children of full and part descent, but the level of education was very poor. • The training given to children was simply to give them tasks to maintain the Home and inmates clean and orderly. Occasionally some needlework was taught. • The majority of boys and girls left school to take up work at fourteen.

Samantha Wells, "Labour, Control and Protection: The Kahlin Aboriginal Compound, Darwin, 1911-38," in Settlement: A History of Australian Indigenous Housing, ed. Peter Read (Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press [online], 2000). 255

140

Economics • Rations would be distributed to ‘old and indigent natives’ but able-bodied Aborigines were expected to be self-supporting, employed either in the compound garden, in business places or private houses. • Although Aborigines from outside areas were not to come into the compound, administrators recognised that a ‘demand for domestic labour’ might require Aboriginal numbers to be ‘replenished periodically’.256 • Girls were placed in service as domestics at the age of 14 and boys were trained to become messengers for government departments or sent away to work in the pastoral industry. • The compound was intended for employed Aboriginal people with the expectation that they would contribute a portion of their wages to the maintenance of the compound. • Kahlin was to be self-sufficient and residents tended chickens, a large herd of goats and gardens. They also baked bread, collected water and milk. Residents made and sold water canteens and iron tanks and supplied fruit, vegetables, fish and wood to the compound, the Half-caste Home, the Government Hospital, Government House, and the Police Department. Women at the Half-caste Home conducted a laundry service and made clothes for sale to government departments. Within a decade, Aboriginal residents were performing most of the domestic and manual labour in and around Darwin and were primarily responsible for the upkeep of the compound.257 • During the 1920s the rapid increase in forcible removals led to overcrowding in Kahlin Compound. The Methodist Missionary Society offered to take mixed descent children to its mission on Goulburn Island. The proposal was strongly opposed by Darwin residents because it threatened the availability of cheap domestic labour. Assimilation Sister Kate’s In the early 1930s Kate Clutterbuck, an Anglican nun, offered to open a home in Perth for `half-caste' children if government funding were provided. When the home opened in 1933 other Missions began to send the lightest skinned children to Sister Kate’s. In 1951 control transferred from government to mission. Sister Kate's Home operated until 1974 with an average of 85 children staying there at any one time. It was eventually re-named Mangun and placed under Aboriginal control.258 Control • As at many institutions, Aboriginal people at Sister Kate’s were monitored and controlled. • Children of mixed descent had been taken from their families and were denied contact.

Ibid. Ibid., 68-9. 258 Baulch, "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia.", Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. 256 257

141

Race ‘We went in Aboriginal and we came out white’259 • • • • •

Sister Kate’s was established with the express purpose of grooming fair-skinned Aboriginal children for ‘ultimate absorption’ into wider society. Children were sent to Sister Kate’s on the basis of skin colour. The home was designed to facilitate assimilation of fairer skinned children. Demarcation between castes was rigidly maintained. Aboriginal customs, culture and history were forbidden topics in the home. Some children at Sister Kate’s grew up without knowing that they were Aboriginal.

Religion • Children were indoctrinated into Christianity. • Sister Kate’s was transferred to Methodist control in the early 1950s, after the Anglican nun herself died in 1946. Education • Education at Sister Kate’s was oriented towards making Aboriginal children’s minds ‘white’. • From the age of six, Aboriginal children attended the Queens Park Primary School which was the local ‘white’ school. • In 1948 the first children from Sister Kate’s enrolled in high school. • They were also trained in domestic tasks through their daily chores. Economics

Figure 35: Fundraising fete for Sister Kate's, 1945 © Battye Library (226643PD)

259

Cited in Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 280.

142

•

•

Although the home was oriented towards assimilating fair skinned Aboriginal children as white children, they were subsidised at a much lower rate than nonAboriginal state wards. Sister Kate therefore lobbied various private sponsors. Aboriginal children at Sister Kate’s were controlled to the extent that when they left they found themselves unprepared for living in the outside world.

Kinchela Boys’ Home This Kinchela Boys’ Home was established in 1924by the New South Wales Aborigines Protection Board. It was intended to provide training for boys between the age of 5 and 15, after which time they were apprenticed to the Board. This usually resulted in the boys being sent to work as rural labourers. The board retained all their earnings until they became adults. The home closed in 1970. Control • Boys in the home suffered a range of controls including physical and emotional punishments. • Boys were given numbers to replace their names when they entered the institution. Race • Children were denied a name and a family. • Many younger children were sent to the Bomaderry Mission Home before being sent to the Kinchela Home for the boys or to the Cootamundra Home for the girls so that they had little idea of their cultural origin. We didn’t have a clue where we came from. We thought the Sisters were our parents. Babies were coming in nearly every day. Some kids came in at two, three, four days old - not months - but days. We didn’t know what was meant by ‘parents’ ’cause we didn’t have parents and we thought those women were our mothers.260 Education • Boys were offered little education and most did not progress beyond grade three. • The principle aim of education was in fact to train the boys for agricultural labour. Economics • • •

Boys were trained to earn their livelihoods through lowly labouring positions. They were usually poorly paid and created a cheap source of labour for surrounding farms, and in some instances were not paid at all. In the 1940s the exploitation of Aboriginal youth was brought to the attention of the public and condemned in the State Parliament of New South Wales.261

National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." 261 Christine Tandy, "The Treatment of Children at Kinchela Training Home for Aboriginal Boys," Intercultural Studies 1, no. 1 (2001). 260

143

Figure 36: Aboriginal boys on a tractor at Kinchela, ca. 1959 © National Archives of Australia (A1200, L31986)

Lake Tyers

Lake Tyers was one of nine, nineteenth century, Aboriginal missions in Victoria. No new reserves were created during the assimilation era in Victoria and in fact many reserves were closed. More people moved there after the closure of Lake Condah, Ramahyuck, Coranderrk and Framlingham, and tension between groups increased. Lake Tyers became the last managed Aboriginal reserve in Victoria and therefore illustrates some of the narratives of assimilation. It became a stronghold when all other Reserves and Stations in Victoria were officially closed down. Control • The people who lived at Lake Tyers were strictly regulated and controlled • The government forced a number of people to move to Lake Tyers when it closed the other reserves and insisted that government support would only be given to those at Lake Tyers. Race • Like the Kulin at Coranderrk, the Gunai determined the siting of two missions, including the Lake Tyers site which was a favoured camping location.262

262

Broome, Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800, 125-26.

144

• •

The 1910 legislation made provision for ‘half-caste’ Aborigines to be eligible for assistance. However, they had to be at Lake Tyers to receive support. With the move to assimilation the government wished to disperse the remaining residents on Lake Tyers. However, the community mounted a strong protest and the government was forced to make a compromise and establish the site as a reserve.

Education

Figure 37: State School at Lake Tyers ca. 1938 © State Library of Victoria (H99.170/5)

Economics • Aboriginal people who left Lake Tyers found themselves without economic and social skills to cope in the outside world.

145

Attachment 1: Events, Acts, Policies and Practices relevant to the theme ‘From Segregation to Assimilation’ Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1800 

NSW 

•

1801 

 

 

1802 

NSW 

•

His Majesty forbids any act of injustice or wanton cruelty to the Natives 

 

1803 

TAS 

•

Risdon settlement 

 

VIC 

•

Port Philip settlement established and abandoned 

 

1804 

TAS 

• •

Number of Aboriginal people shot at Risdon.   2 yo boy is taken by Government Surgeon, Dr Jacob Mountgarrett. First officially recorded  removal of an Aboriginal child.263 

 

1805 

 

 

 

1806 

 

 

 

1807 

 

 

 

1808 

 

 

 

1809 

 

 

 

1810 

 

 

 

1811 

 

 

 

1812 

 

 

 

1813 

 

 

 

1814 

NSW 

•

Governor Macquarie funds first school for Aboriginal children ‘Native Institution for  Aboriginal Children at Parramatta’ 

 

1815 

NSW 

•

Reserve for Broken Bay people established at George’s Head 

 

1816 

 

 

 

1817 

 

 

 

1818 

 

 

 

1819 

 

 

 

1820 

TAS 

•

Rev Knopwood has 12 Aboriginal children living with him. 

 

NSW 

•

Native Institution at Parramatta’ closes 

 

1821 

 

 

 

1822 

 

 

 

1823 

 

 

 

263

 

The 6 year ‘black wars’ around Hawkesbury and Parramatta commenced the previous year. 

   

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 65-6..

146

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1824 

TAS 

•

Tasmanian War (1824‐1831) 

 

QLD 

•

Penal colony at Redcliffe 

 

 

NT 

• •

North coast proclaimed as British in the name of King George IV.  Fort Dundas established on Melville Island 

 

1825 

QLD 

•

Moreton Bay established as penal outpost of New South Wales. 

 

1826 

 

 

1827 

TAS 

•

Bruny Island Aboriginal Establishment (1827‐1829) 

 

1828 

 TAS 

•

 

•

Colonel George Arthur Governor of VDL proposes distant Aboriginal reserve on north‐east  coast.   Declares state of martial law and authorises ‘roving parties’ to scour the bush for Aboriginal  people.  Arthur establishes a ration station at Bruny Island. 

NT 

•

Fort Dundas abandoned. 

 

TAS 

•

Colonel George Arthur appoints committee of colonists, chaired by Anglican archdeacon  Broughton, to advise him on captured Aborigines.  Arthur appoints missionary, George Augustus Robinson to Bruny Island ration station.  Robinson attempts to establish an Aboriginal settlement on Bruny Island. 

 

•

1829 

• •

1830 

 

 

WA 

Western Australian Act 1829 

 

TAS 

•

 

•

Infamous Black line established to capture Aboriginal people in ‘settled districts’George  Augustus Robinson ‘Friendly Mission’ commences.  Orphan School established by the govenrment.  

 

1831 

NT 

•

Small settlement established at Port Essington 

1832 

TAS 

•

Governor Arthur approves plan to remove Aboriginal boys aged between 6 and 9 from island    settlements to Hobart Orphan School or to be placed with approved employers.  Treaty with Aboriginal people 

•

WA 

• •

1833 

  A meeting at Guildford to discuss the “Aboriginal Question” Robert Menli Lyon reminds  settlers that they have seized Aboriginal land and calls for a mediator between the Aborigines  and settlers. Calls for conciliatory or coercive measures.  Stirling establishes Corps of Mounted Police. 

TAS 

•

Aborigines transported to Flinders Island – Wybalenna established with the aim to civilise and    Christianise Aboriginal people and to train them to build huts, tend gardens, catch fish and  cook according to European traditions.  

WA 

• •

Yagan is killed.  Lake Monger and Upper Swan ration stations established to prevent starving Aborigines  stealing food from settlers.  First steps to prevent Aborigines entering City of Perth. 

•

147

 

Colony/State  Events 

1834 

TAS 

•

GA Robinson announces that all Aboriginal people have been removed from the colony. 

SA 

•

The 1834 Act establishes colonies of southern Australia with no mention of Aborigines. The  Board of Colonization Commissioners empowered to declear all land available for purchase  by British subjects.  

WA 

• •

Battle of Pinjarra in which some 30 Pinjarup people are killed.  Agricultural Society of Guidford, R. M. Lyon gave notice of a motion to set aside lands for the  sole use of Aborigines in every district and to secure Aboriginal rights and privileges, including  unrestricted fishing and hunting rights on all unclaimed lands.  Matter was deferred until  Stirling returned and Lyon was expelled from the society.   Governor Stirling leads 25 mounted police against the Aboriginal people with many killed.  Native Institution established at base of Mount Eliza (Kings Park).  F.F. Armstrong, Methodist colonist with proficiency in local Aboriginal language.   Training Aboriginal people to procure subsistence from fishing, land clearing, road making, to  eventually be employed in agriculture.   Confined to the institution and controlled. 

• • • • •

1835 

1836 

VIC 

Batman Treaty  • John Batman seeks to acquire 600,000 acres of land in Victoria.  • Attempts to establish a treaty with local Aboriginal people.  • Governor Bourke excludes the treaty.  •   • Magistrate appointed to Port Phillip. 

 

NSW 

•

Vagrancy Act prohibits white people from wandering or living with Aboriginal people 

 

SA 

•

Charles Grant, (later Lord Glenelg) asks Colonization Commissioners for assurance that rights    of Aboriginal people will be protected. Glenelg urged the appointment of a ‘Protector of  Aborigines’ and a scheme for purchasing Aboriginal land. Agreed to protect Aborgines from  violence, to provide subsistence, shelter, education and Christian teaching .  

WA 

•

Aborigines expelled from camp at Lake Monger. 

 

TAS 

•

Robinson appointed Commandant of Wybalenna. 

 

VIC 

•

Port Phillip Settlement Proclaimed 

 

SA 

• • •

SA Colony Proclaimed  Interim Protector of Aborigines appointed as first public servant   Matthew Moorhouse appointed as replacement Protector and establishes The Aborigines  School 

 

WA 

•

1836‐38 Louis Guistiniani, former Jesuit Priest, condemns brutal treatment of Aboriginal  people. Established a mission at Guildford. 

 

C’wth 

•

Select Committee 1836‐7 (House of Commons) inquiry into condition of Aboriginal  inhabitants of all British colonies.  Recommends correction of wrongs  Treat natives as British subjects  Promote Christianity and ‘civilisation’.  

 

• • •

1837 

 

Abolition of slavery in British  colonies

Year 

VIC 

• • • •

  Buxton Committee Report   Church of England George Langhorne establishes Village Mission Settlement in current Royal  Botanic Gardens.  Attempts to isolate Aboriginal people from settler influences.  Corps of Native Police formed under Superintendent Christian Ludoph Johannes de Villiers  along Dandenong Creek 

148

Year 

Colony/State  Events  NSW 

•

First Native Police Force established  

QLD 

•

Governor of NSW, Bourke, advised by Lord Glenelg that Aborigines must be treated as British    subjects.   Reverend JCS Handt (previously in Wellington Valley NSW)appointed missionary to the  Aborigines at Moreton Bay Penal Settlement. 

•

1838 

 

SA 

•

Prohibition placed on supply of alcohol to Aborigines.  

 

C’wth 

• •

British House of Commons Inquiry into Conditions of Aboriginal peoples in British Colonies.  Committee recommends that 'Protectors of Aborigines' be appointed in Australia 

 

TAS 

•

Robinson announces departure from Wybalenna to take up position of Chief Protector of  Aborigines at Port Phillip.   Conditions at Wybalenna deteriorate.264 

 

George Augustus Robinson appointed Chief Protector of the Aboriginal Protectorate of Port  Phillip.   Instructed to journey inland, establish reserves for Aboriginal people continuing to live in a  traditional way.   265  Four assistant protectors appointed   Buntingdale Weslyan Mission established near Birregurra.   One square mile with five mile exclusion zone.  Aimed to convert Aboriginal people to Christianity.   Required adoption of English names and relinquishment of cultural practices and customs. 

 

 

•

Myall Creek Massacre and trial for which seven men were hanged for the murder of more  than 28 Aboriginal men, women and children.  Aboriginal people prohibited from purchasing alcohol. 

QLD 

•

German Lutheran mission at Zion’s Hill, 10 miles from Moreton Bay.

SA 

•

The Native Location, an Aboriginal Reserve, is established on northern side of the Torrens  River. Two Lutheran Missionaries, C.G. Teichelmann and C.W. Schurmann, arrive to provide  religious and secular education in native language.  

 

WA 

•

The Mount Eliza Aboriginal Feeding Station closes and the site is purchased for a steam mill. 

 

VIC 

• • • • • •

George Augustus Robinson arrives in Melbourne to take up position of Chief Protector.  Village Mission Settlement closes due to lack of financial support.  Native Police Corps temporarily abandoned.  Dredge establishes Protectorate Station at Michellstown, Goulburn River.  Charles Sievewright departs for Western District and establishes a base at Geelong.  William Thomas established a Protectorate Station at Arthurs Seat, but was recalled by  Robinson twice before being asked to move the station further beyond the limits of the fast  growing settlement of Melbourne. 

 

SA 

•

C.W. Schurmann becomes teacher at the school for Aboriginal children established at the  Native Location.   Matthew Moorhouse takes up position as Protector of Aborigines. 

 

•

VIC 

• • • • • • •

NSW 

1839 

 

•

•

WA 

• •

266

 

 

John Hutt, former member of evangelical Anglican ‘Clapham Sect’ and Aborigines Protection    Society appointed as Governor of Western Australia.  Introduced a system of protectorship, including education and training.  

Ibid., 115-18.. James Dredge, Edward Stone Parker, Charles Sievewright, and William Thomas. 266 Present day Nundah Reid, 'That Unhappy Race': Queensland and the Aboriginal Problem 1838-1901, 7.. 264 265

149

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1840 

VIC 

• • • • • • •

1841 

1842 

268

  Dredge replaced by William LeSouef and shifts the Michellstown Protectorate station to  Murchison.  Edward Parker established Protectorate Station on Loddon River at Mount Franklin near  Daylesford and Franklinford on 41,073 acres of prime land and immediately attracted 130  Jaara people as residents and trainee farmers.   Governor La Trobe orders that no Aboriginal people may visit township of Melbourne for any  reason.   As a result Thomas settles with Bunurong people at Narre Narre Warren near Dandenong.  Ration reserve with some agricultural skills training.    Amendment to the Publican’s Act 1838 restricting sale of alcohol to Aboriginal people 

SA 

• •

.G. Teichelmann and C.W. Schurmann publish Kaurna grammar and vocabulary.  Maria shipwrecked on the Coorong and twenty‐six survivors massacred by Milmenrura  people.  

WA 

•

Hutt appoints two Protectors: Charles Symmons and Peter Barrow to Study Aboriginal people    and find compatible industries for employment. 

TAS 

•

 

•

Dolly Dalrymple successfully petitions for release of her mother, Wortemoeteyenner  267 (daughter of Mannarlargenna) from Wybalenna, to live with her and her family.   An inquiry recommends that 3 orphans and other school age children at Wybalenna be sent  268 to Orphan School in Hobart. Parents oppose the plan but 8 children are removed.  

VIC 

• • • •

Government school at Narre Narre Warren  Sievewright establishes Protectorate station at Keilambete near Lake Terang   Warrandyte reserve established at Pund bend on Yarra River.   Aboriginal camping reserve opens at Mordialloc. 

 

SA 

• •

Aborigines in Rufus River region attack overland party. Several hostile exchanges follow.   A ration depot and government station is established at Moorundie to provide food in  exchange for peace. 

 

WA 

An Act to constitute the Island of Rottnest a Legal Prison 1841    • Act established a prison for Aboriginal offenders so that ‘they may be instructed in useful  knowledge and gradually trained in the habits of civilized life”.   • An Act to allow the aboriginal natives of Western Australia to give information and evidences  without the sanction of an oath. 1841 

TAS 

• • •

267

 

 

Last Aboriginal family group (a couple and five sons – the youngest William Lanne) comes  from the bush to Wybalenna.   Another six children sent to the Orphan School despite protests by parents.  Fanny Cochrane sent to Robert Clark in Hobart but returned 10 months later. 

 

Native Police Corps established at Port Phillip  Robinson orders Sievewright move the Keilambete Station to a more suitable location at Mt  Rouse near Penshurst, a site known as a traditional meeting place. 100 square miles of  bushland became a temporary camping and hunting area after Sievewright was suspending  for misappropriation of funds and was never replaced. 

 

VIC 

• •

NSW 

Lands Act includes provision to create Aboriginal reserves. 

 

QLD 

• •

 

Transportation to Moreton Bay ceases and penal settlement closes.   Large number of Aborigines poisoned at Kilcoy Station. 

Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000, 93-4. Ibid., 118-9.

150

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

SA 

•

Moorhouse raises idea of removing children from parents to aid the civilising process. 

 

 

WA 

•

Smithies Wesleyan Mission 

 

1843 

TAS 

• •

Jeanerette dismissed from Wybalenna for incompetence.   Replaced by surgeon Dr James Milligan who arrives with 3 children from the Orphan School. 

 

VIC 

•

Loddon Protectorate Station undermined by lack of Government funding and gradually  becomes settled by non‐Aboriginal people.  Narre Narre Warren school closes. The station is abandoned and occupied by Native Police  (until 1853).269 

 

•

1844 

1845 

1846 

QLD 

•

  Colonial government and mission committee in NSW withdraw support for missions in the  settlement, citing financial pressures. Mission at Moreton Bay expected to be self‐sufficient. 

SA 

•

School for Aboriginal children at the Native Location becomes a boarding school to limit the  influence of parents.  

 

QLD 

•

Revival of Zion’s Hill mission with arrival of Gerler and Gericke 

 

VIC? 

•

depression 

 

SA 

Ordinance No. 12: An Ordinance for the Protection, Maintenance and Upbringing of Orphans    and other Destitute Children and Aborigines.  • First legislation relating to Aboriginal people in SA.   A scheme of indentured apprenticeships for Aboriginal children thought to be orphaned and  • destitute.   • Largely drawn from the Aborigines School, and not very successful.  •   • Native Location School abandons Dresden Missionary Society philosophy and introduces  more practical subjects after public criticism. 

WA 

An Act to Prevent the Enticing Away the Girls of the Aboriginal Race From School or From Any  Service in Which They Are Employed 1844 (Repealed 1905, revived 1841, amended 1875)  • One of the protectorate measures introduced by Hutt  • Encouraged establishment of missions. 

 

QLD 

•

Schmidt leaves Moreton Bay mission. 

 

VIC 

•

Merri Creek Aboriginal School for Aboriginal children opened by Baptists on 27 acres at Yarra    Bend, Northcote. 

TAS 

•

Walter Arthur and his companions forward a petition to Queen Victoria in effort to prevent  the reinstatement of Jeanneret.270 

WA 

•

Catholic Mission for Aboriginal people established by Spanish Benedictines Serra and Salvado    at New Norcia.  Initially outside British settlement   Planned as a self‐contained village of Christian Aboriginal people working as farmers and  artisans.  Children to remain with parents, and traditions allowed 

• • •

1847 

TAS 

•

In May Jeanerette dismissed. Wybalenna closes and 47 Flinders Island Aborigines moved to  former female penitentiary at Oyster Cove. 

Known as the Dandenong Police Paddocks A transcription of the petition is found in Reynolds Reynolds, Fate of a Free People, 7-9.. Haebich, Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. 269 270

151

 

 

Year 

1848 

1849 

Colony/State  Events 

 

•

Children in the group sent to the Orphan School, and others into apprenticeships and other  employment. 

QLD 

•

Missionary work at Zion’s Hill ceases 

VIC 

• •

  Buntingdale Mission abandoned due to lack of funds and increased demand for land.  Chief Protector requests increased funds as more Aboriginal people are forced onto reserves.  The government dismantles the Protectorate. Only William Thomas continues to be  employed. 

WA 

•

Protector of Natives renamed Guardian of Natives and Protector of Settlers by Lt. Fitzgerald.   

VIC 

•

Port Phillip Protectorate Abolished 

 

NSW 

•

An Act to provide for the Care and Education of Infants who may be convicted of Felony or  Misdemeanour. [5th September, 1849]  A convicted child under 19 may be assigned to care and custody. 

 

•

 

QLD 

•

Frederick Walker establishes Native Police Force on McIntyre River in response to calls for  more protection from Aboriginal attacks. 

 

WA 

•

 

•

Anglican sponsored Society for the Propagation of the Gospel granted £50 to Archdeacon  Wollaston to establish Aboriginal missions  (Wollaston supported removal of children). 

QLD 

•

Zion’s Hill mission abandoned. 

 

VIC 

• • • •

Murchison Station closes due to lack of funds and pressure from local landowners.  Land remains reserved for the benefit of Aborigines until revocation in 1858  Mt Rouse Protectorate divided for non‐Aboriginal selection and settlement.   Pirron Yallock Reserve, west of Colac, established as a Camping Reserve. 

 

SA 

• •

  Poonindie ‐ first major mission station ‐ established near Port Lincoln.   Deliberately distant from the influences of families (especially for Children who had attended  the Aborigines School in Adelaide). 

1851 

VIC 

• • •

Merri Creek Aboriginal School closes.  Increased missionary activity from this time.271  272 Moravian Missionaries establish reserve at Lake Boga . 

 

1852 

WA 

•

Mrs Anne Camfield granted £100 per year for a co‐educational institution for Aboriginal  children at Albany. 

 

1853 

 

 

1854 

QLD 

•

Walker dismissed. 

 

1855 

TAS 

• •

Denison departs.  Expenditure on Aboriginal people halved and all able bodied people of mixed descent  273 instructed to leave and make their own way in society.  

 

NSW 

•

Imperial Government assents to responsible government in NSW.  

 

1850 

 

271 Only Lake Boga, Ebenezer and Yelta mission were run entirely by churches, after this time all missions (Except Ramahyuck were taken over as Govenremnt Stations. 272 Fail to convert Aboriginal people to Christianity primarily because they could not supply regular rations and Aboriginal people would not stay on the reserve. 273 This cost saving move was replicated in Victoria some 30 years later.

152

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

•

Official Native Police Force established 

QLD 

•

William Ridley appointed missionary in northern districts – the first since the Lutherans  became inactive in the 1840s. 

 

VIC 

• • •

Victoria becomes independent of NSW and takes on responsible government  Pirron Yallock Reserve reduced in size and used by Native Police.  John Goodwin selected a site for Anglican mission at Yelta, but was unable to supply regular  rations. 

 

TAS 

• •

Van Diemen’s Land renamed Tasmania  Mary Ann and Walter Arthur petition Governor for a convict labourer on 15 acre grant near  Oyster Cove. 

 

NSW 

•

Constitution Act comes into effect.  

 

SA 

•

Position of Protector abolished and responsibility for Aboriginal people transferred to the  Minister for Crown Lands 

 

NSW 

•

Dawson River Massacre in which a number of settlers are killed by Aboriginal people. 

 

 

 

 

QLD 

•

  NSW Legislative Assembly appoints Select Committee to investigate outrages between  Aboriginal people and settlers in Northern Districts with view to provide better protection of  life and property. 

VIC 

• • •

  Loddon Protectorate Station comprises only 113 acres and is no longer viable.   Lake Boga Mission abandoned.  Select Committee of the Legislative Council established to investigate condition and needs of  Aboriginal people. 

 

SA 

•

The Aborigines Friends Association, a protestant missionary group is established. 

1859 

VIC 

• •

•

  Report of Select Committee of the Legislative Council is handed down.  Delegation from Kulin peoples request William Thomas for a grant of land on which to settle  near Acheron and Little Rivers. Board agrees. Superintendent J Hickson appointed to assist  with agricultural establishment, and 4 white trustees to oversee station management. Moved  to Mohican.  Moravians establish Ebenezer mission at Lake Hindmarsh supported by Presbyterian Church  and government.  Camping Reserve established on Little River near Geelong 

QLD 

•

The colony of Queensland is proclaimed on 10 December. 

 

SA 

•

Mission at Point McLeay established by the Aborigines Friends Association 

 

QLD 

•

Land Act 1860 rushed through parliament to fund the new colony through land sales 

 

VIC 

Central Board for the Protection of Aborigines established274.    • First of its kind in Australia.  • Inherited Mohican Station, Mt Franklin Station, Lake Hindmarsh Mission, Yelta Mission  • Set about creating own stations and encouraging missionaries. Supervises mission and  govenremnt stations – Ebenezer (1859‐1904), Lake Hindmarh (1859‐1904), Lake Tyers (1861‐ 1908), Ramahyuck (1862‐1905), Framlingham (1865‐1890), Lake Condah (1867‐1917),  Coranderrk 91863‐1923). 

1856 

1857 

1858 

•

1860 

274

‘Central Board Appointed to Watch over the Interests of Aborigines’

153

 

Year 

1861 

1862 

1863 

Colony/State  Events  SA 

Select Committee of the Legislative Council    • Appointed to investigate condition of Aboriginal people and make recommendations for  improvements.   Followed a number of public criticisms about condition of Aboriginal people. George Fife  • Angus a prominent colonial founder testified that Aboriginal people had been shamefully  neglected.  • Found that Aboriginal people would become extinct.  • Recommended Aboriginal people be separated from white society and be placed on reserves. Recommended Aboriginal children be removed from their parents and raised in schools.  • Many witnesses thought this undesirable.   • No immediate steps to implement committee recommendations.  • Position of Protector Reinstated 

NSW 

Selection Acts   • Squatters forced to take up freehold title 

 

QLD 

•

 

•

Another Squatter’s parliamentary inquiry concludes that Aborigines are irredeemable and  frontier violence is to be solved by force.   Letters of protest over treatment of Aboriginal people by the native Police, including  Frederick Walker 

VIC 

• •

Warrandyte reserve lands revoked.  Lake Tyers Aboriginal Reserve established by the Anglican Church. 

 

 

 

 

NSW 

Licensing and Publicans’ Act amended to remove prohibition of sale of alcohol to Aborigines. 

 

 

 

 

VIC 

•

Ramahyuck Mission established on the banks of the Avon River near Lake Wellington by Rev    Friedrich Hagenauer   Wonga and Barak lead >40 Aboriginal people from Mohican due to dissatisfaction with  interference. Chosen site becomes Coranderrk Station. 

•

1864 

1865 

1866 

 

NT 

• • • • •

VIC 

•

Loddon Protectorate Station closes and remaining Aboriginal people transferred to  Coranderrk Station.  Neglected and Criminal Children’s Act 

 

NT 

• • •

South Australia responsible for Aborigines in the NT.  First part‐time appointment of sub‐protector.   Children being removed from parents by pastoralists rather than governments during this  era. 

 

VIC 

•

Framlingham Mission established by the Church of England in southwest Victoria. Control and    administration taken over by government within the year. 

QLD 

Industrial and Reformatory Schools Act 1865  • Provision for Aboriginal children to be sent to industrial schools or reformatories on ground  of neglect.   • Being Aboriginal was proof of neglect and missions were declared to be industrial school or  reformatories for Indigenous children. 

 

VIC 

•

 

Northern Region (present day NT) granted to Government of SA under Royal Letters Patent.  Similar policies and practices applied to Aboriginal people as in SA.  System of sub‐protectors of Aborigines  Government announced intention to create separate reserves for Aboriginal people  Distance made administration difficult. 

Framlingham Aboriginal Reserve established by Melbourne Anglican Mission Committee on 

154

 

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

banks of Hopkins River near Warrnambool. Transferred to the Central Board due to a lack of  funds. 

SA 

•

German missions established at Kopperamanna and Killalpaninna in desert east of Lake Eyre.    

TAS 

•

Industrial Schools Act 1867

VIC 

•

Board attempts to relocate Framlingham Aboriginal people to Lake Condah, but 60 people  refuse to be moved. 

 

VIC 

•

Yelta mission closed 

 

SA 

•

Mission at Point Pearce established by Yorke Peninsula Aborigines Mission. 

 

1869 

VIC 

Aboriginal Protection Act 1869 276    • Victoria the first Colony to enact a comprehensive scheme to regulate the lives of Aboriginal  people. The Board for the Protection of Aborigines had powers to exert an extraordinary level  of control over Aboriginal people's lives (regulation of residence, employment, marriage,  social life and other aspects of daily life).  • Governor can order the removal of any child from their family to a reformatory or industrial  school.    • Framlingham re‐opens.   • Lake Condah Station established as an Anglican mission. 

1870 

SA 

• •

Poonindie, the Native Training Institution at Port Lincoln, is self‐sufficient and profitable.   Settlers agitate for the resumption of the land and its subdivision for settlers.  

 

WA 

•

Swan Native and Half‐caste Mission established by the Anglican Church. 

 

1871 

WA 

An Act to regulate the hiring and service of Aboriginal natives engaged in the Pearl Fishery; and to    prohibit the employment of women therein, 1871  • Aboriginal people only employed with a written contract witnessed by JP or Police Constable.  (repealed 1873) 

1872 

 

 

 

1873 

WA 

The Pearl Shell Fishery Regulation Act, 1873  

 

1874 

VIC 

Neglected and Criminal Children’s (Amendment) Act  

 

NSW 

•

 

WA 

Industrial Schools Act (WA)    • Empowered managers of missions to detail children until aged 21 or to place them in service  or apprenticeships without parental consent.   •   Amendment to 1849 Ordinance including Aboriginal people of mixed descent in the provision to  try Aborigines before a bench of local justices.  

1875 

WA 

•

The Pearl Shell Fishery Regulation Act, 1875 

 

1876 

NSW 

•

Maloga Mission Committee established (later renamed the Aborigines Protection 

•

1867 

1868 

275

 

 

Maloga Mission founded by Daniel Matthews. 

Criminal And Destitute Children:-An Act to encourage the Establishment of Training Schools. [11 October, 1867]. 276 An Act To provide for the Protection and Management of the Aboriginal Natives of Victoria. [11th November 1869] 275

155

In

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

Association). 

di a n  A ct  ( U S A)

QLD 

•

Durundur Mission established by the Catholic Church. 

 

NT 

•

Hermannsburg Mission established by German Lutheran missionaries. 

 

TAS 

•

Hobart Orphan School closes. 

 

VIC 

•

Remaining Aboriginal people from Mordialloc reserve transferred to Coranderrk. 

 

1879 

QLD 

Orphanages Act 

 

1880 

NSW 

•

Association for the Protection of Aborigines establishes the Warangesda Aboriginal Station.  

 

WA 

•

Fairbairn Commission 1880 

 

TAS 

•

Cape Barren Island Reserve created 

 

NSW 

• George Thornton appointed Protector of Aborigines  • Recommends establishment of reserves for Aboriginal people throughout the colony.  State Children Relief Act 1881277  • Establishes State Children's Relief Board.   • `Boarding out' officers may remove children from charitable institutions and place them in  licensed homes.   • Regulations may be made to outline conditions for adoption. 

 

NT 

•

 

1877 

1878 

1881 

1882 

•

Acts of brutality against Aboriginal people reported by Inspector Foelsche, police officer  responsible for NT.  Daly River Mission established by the Catholic Church. 

NSW 

•

WA 

Forrest Commission 1883    • Governor Broome appoints Select Committee, chaired by John Forrest, to inquire into the  treatment of Aboriginal natives.  • First comprehensive investigation of Aboriginal people in WA, focussed primarily on Perth  and Rottnest.   • Reported that Aboriginal people were disappearing and anticipated extinction of indigenous  peoples. 

1884 

 

 

 

1885 

 

 

 

1886 

VIC 

Aborigines Protection Act 1886 (the 'half‐caste' act)  • Requires all Aboriginal people of mixed decent under 34 to leave the stations.  • Reduces economic viability of Coranderrk 

 

1883 

277

Aborigines Protection Board established to manage reserves and control Aboriginal people of    NSW. 

An Act to establish a System of boarding-out. Children. [5th April, 1881]

156

Colony/State  Events 

 

•

School at Ramahyuck closes. 

QLD 

•

Lutheran mission established at Cape Bedford, and later renamed Hopevale Mission.  

 

WA 

Aborigines Protection Act 1886 (WA)  • Outcome of the Forrest Commission.  • Aimed at ‘better protection and management of Aboriginal Natives’  • Introduced separate system of legislation for Aboriginal workers, including a lower working  age of 14 compared with 21 for non‐Aboriginal workers.   • Established an Aboriginal Protection Board   Aimed to prevent relations between Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal people.   • • Segregation controls on able people of mixed descent  • Legalised the removal of Aboriginal people from townships under orders of JP.  

 

1887 

VIC 

Neglected Children’s Act 

 

1888 

 

 

 

1889 

WA 

Constitution Act 1889    • S70 specifies the administration of Aboriginal affairs is the responsibility of the Governor and  thus the British Colonial Office, and denies this role to the WA government.   • Specifies an annual grant of £5000 or 1% of gross colonial revenue for the Aborigines  Protection Board. 

1890 

NSW 

•

VIC 

Aborigines Protection Act, 1890 

 

WA 

•

Catholic Mission established at Beagle Bay in the north of Western Australia. 

 

1891 

QLD 

•

Presbyterians establish Mapoon Mission. 

1892 

NSW 

Protection of Children Act 1892278  • Unlawful to receive into care a child under three without a written order of a Justice of the  Peace  • Outlines payment schedule and restrictions   • Register of children in care 

QLD 

• •

Presbyterian mission established at Deebing Creek.  Anglican Mission established at Yarrabah. 

SA 

•

Poonindie Mission trustees agree to close the Mission following prolonged agitation. 

NSW 

•

Dormitory for girls at Warangesda station established as the Girls Training Home,  Warangesda Aboriginal Station 

WA 

•

WA Constitution Act amended to exclude all people of Aboriginal descent from the franchise. 

NSW 

Custody of Children and Children’s Settlements   • court may refuse parental request for return of child when of the opinion that the parent has  abandoned or deserted or neglected the child; or   • where young age or health of the child determines the child should remain with its mother. 

SA 

•

1893 

1894 

 

A policy of removing mixed descent children exists 

279

Poonindie Mission closes. 

An Act to Provide for the Protection of Children [31st March, 1892] An Act to amend the Law relating to the Custody of Children, and to provide for Settlements for the benefit of Children in certain cases. [14th March, 1894.] 278 279

157

1890s Depression 

Year 

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1895 

TAS 

The prevention of Cruelty to, and better protection of, Children Act 1895280 

QLD 

•

1896 

1897 

1898 

Archibald Meston sends his “Queensland Aboriginals: Proposed System for their  Improvement and Preservation” to Colonial Secretary. Printed and distributed to all Members  of the Queensland parliament. He identifies food as the first condition.  A government mission is established at Myora on Stradbroke Island.  

SA/NT 

State Children's Act   • s.32 gave a police constable power to apprehend without a warrant any child who appeared  neglected or destitute.   • Children could be sent to an institution with agreement of a justice, without the consent or  presence of their parents.   • They would be detained until 18 years old.   • State Children's Council and a number of magistrates were of the opinion that the Act did not  apply to Aboriginal children. 

TAS 

Youthful Offenders, Destitute and Neglected Children's Act 1896281 

QLD 

Report on the Aborigines of Queenaland  • Archibald Meston commissioned to report on mission and other stations where rations are  distributed.  • Primary focus on protecting/ separating Aboriginal children from non‐Aboriginal society,  including kidnapping from parents.  • Urged for isolation on reserves and exclusion of non‐Aboriginal people. 282  • Report laid foundation for policies until 1965 

WA 

Adoption Act 

QLD 

Aboriginal Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897  • Puts Meston recommendations into effect.  • No court hearing required to remove children from families.  • Families usually but not always moved together. Children of mixed descent particularly  targeted for removal.  • Sense that these children should be institutionalised rather than being placed with private  families.  • Aborigines Department established  • WE Roth appointed Northern Protector.  •   • Fraser Island mission established by the government.  

WA 

Aborigines Act 1897 (WA)  • Western Australian government takes control of Aboriginal administration from British  Colonial Office.   • 1% clause removed to limit expenditure to  £5000  • Aborigines Department is established to distribute rations, blankets and clothing and medical  care to destitute Aborigines; manage Aboriginal reserves, provide education and  maintenance of Aboriginal children, protect aborigines from injustice and fraud, exercise  general supervision over all matters affecting Aborigines in the state.  

SA 

•

Koonibba Mission established by Lutherans. 

280 An Act for the prevention of Cruelty to, and better protection of, Children. [27 September, 1895]. 281 An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Destitute Children and Youthful Offenders and to make further provision for the Care and Control of neglected Children. [23 October, 1896]. 282 An idea taken from Canadian and American Governments – Meston 1896: 4,

158

1890s Depression 

•

 

Year 

1899 

Colony/State  Events  WA 

• • •

VIC 

Aborigines Regulations  • Amendment to the Act allows the Board to transfer all 'half‐caste' children to industrial  schools for agricultural and domestic service training. 

NSW 

Infants’ Custody and Settlements Act 1899.

SA 

Select Committee of the Legislative Council   Aborigines Bill 1899   • Introduced by the Select Committee to control interaction between Aboriginal and non‐ Aboriginal people through a permit system.   Permits required to employ Aboriginal people.  • Select Committee supported many provisions but favoured the introduction of a new Bill.   • • The Government failed to act in relation to reports of sexual abuse and economic  exploitation. 

NT 

• • • • • • •

1900 

 

Government assumes responsibility for administration of Aboriginal Affairs.  Aborigines Protection Board Replaced by Aborigines Department   Staff comprises Chief Protector, H.C. Princep, and 2 clerks. 

283

 

Inspector Foelsche (and Mounted Constable Thorpe) give evidence to the SA Select  Committee of the Legislative Council including:   Concerns about sexual and labour exploitation of Aboriginal women and children   Brutality of pastoralists in NT.   Missions to be responsible for able children of mixed descent.   Foelsche and Thorpe give evidence to the SA Select Committee, including   Increased number of 'half‐caste’ children.  Recommends that ‘half‐caste’ children be raised on mission stations and civilised. 

WA 

• • • •

Swann and Vasse Anglican homes subsidised to a greater amount than Catholic homes.  Education system included literacy, numeracy and Christianity in the morning.   Domestic chores for girls and agricultural chores for boys to make them a servant class.  Children at Swan Anglican Homes separated from their families under the terms of the  Industrial Schools Act 1874. 

NSW 

•

Brothers Jimmy and Joe Governor and Jacky Underwood murder seven whites in the Falls  Country.  

 

SA 

•

Chief Protector calls for a number of 'half‐caste' children to be removed from Point McLeay  and placed under the State Children's Department.   State Children’s Council of opinion that the Act did not apply to Aboriginal children 

 

•

WA 

•

 ‘An Act for the Further Protection of the Aboriginal ace of Western Australia’ Bill introduced    but not passed. 

An Act to consolidate the law relating to the custody of infants and the settlement of the property of infants.[Assented to, 22nd December, 1899] 283

159

Colony/State  Events 

1901 

NSW 

Infant Convicts Adoption Act 1901.284  • Anyone under 19 years convicted of a felony or misdemeanour may be assigned by the court  to the care or custody.  •   285 State Children Relief Act, 1901.   • Establishes State Children's Relief Board with authority to:  • direct removal of State children  • grant licences for the reception of State children as boarders  • apprentice any child  • approve and arrange terms of applications to `adopt' State children;   • Boarding out officer may remove State child from asylum, reformatory school, and arrange  for a child to be boarded out. 

QLD 

Aboriginal Protection and Restriction on the Sale of Opium (Amendment) Act 1901  • Fraser Island mission taken over from government by the Anglican Church 

Common‐ wealth 

Constitution Act  • Federation 

NSW 

• •

1902 

• •

 

Federation 

Year 

286   Children's Protection Act 1902   An offence for any person to receive a child under three to adopt, rear, nurse or otherwise  maintain for payment a child, other than a guardian, manager or officer of an institution or  private charity or a person exempted by Minister.   An offence to neglect or ill‐treat a child.  A neglected or ill‐treated child can be boarded out, sent to an industrial school or committed  to the care of a relation or other person. 

SA 

•

Governor of SA (Lord Tennyson) sends secret dispatch to the British Home Secretary  Chamberlain regarding the poor condition and protection of Aboriginal people. 

WA 

•

Amendment to alcohol laws extends prohibition to 'half‐caste' people living with Aborigines.   

C’wth 

Electoral Act   • SA’s Lord Tennyson urges for Aboriginal issues to be considered a federal issue. 

 

1903 

 

 

 

1904 

QLD 

•

Aurukun and Weipa Missions established by Presbyterians on Cape York, Far North  Queensland  Barambah Home established 250 km north of Brisbane by the government (renamed  Cherbourg Settlement in 1932)  Mitchell River Mission established by Anglicans. Bogimba Reserve, Fraser Island closes in  response to concerns raised by visiting missionaries.287  WE Roth appointed Chief Protector 

 

Roth Royal Commission  • Response to allegations of ill treatment of Aboriginal people by pastoralists and police in  northwest WA and poor administration. 

 

• • •

WA 

 

An Act to consolidate the enactments providing for the care and education of infants who may be convicted of felony or misdemeanour. [Assented to, 4th October, 1901.] 285 An Act to consolidate the Acts relating to the establishment of a system of Boarding-out Children. [Assented to, 19th December, 1901]. 286 An Act to consolidate the enactments providing for the protection of children in certain cases. [25th August, 1902] 287 Mark Finnane and John McGuire, "The Uses of Punishment and Exile: Aborigines in Colonial Australia," Punishment & Society 3 (2001): 292. 284

160

Year 

Colony/State  Events  • •

1905 

1906 

Appointed Dr Roth, Northern Protector of Aborigines in Queensland, as Commissioner  Recommended introduction of legislation similar to the Queensland Aborigines Protection  and Restriction of Opium Act, 1897, to enable greater protection and control. 

NSW 

Neglected Children and Juvenile Offenders Act 1905 288  • Neglected or uncontrollable children to be apprehended and brought before a court   • Child can be released on probation, or committed to an institution until 18 years old, or to  the care of a willing person.   • Children can be apprenticed under Apprentices Act 1901. 

WA 

Aborigines Act 1905 (WA)    • Outcome of the Roth Royal Commission with strong emphasis on protection.  • Extended Aborigines Department power to cover all Aboriginal inhabitants including 'half‐ caste' and anyone ‘averred to be an Aboriginal’   • People who already assimilated into the community were segregated with other Aboriginal  people.  Determined where people lived  • • Limited sexual relations between Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal – permission required fro  Chief Protector   • Entrance to town could be prohibited except for employment under permit agreement  • Aboriginal camps could be moved   • Governor could proclaim districts or towns prohibited areas  • s.8 made Chief Protector the ‘legal guardian of every aboriginal and half caste child until such  child attains the age of sixteen years’   • children can be removed from parents   • Aborigines can be detained on reserves  • Movement between districts was restricted.   • Aborigines Department responsible for education of Aboriginal children – thus establishing  segregated schooling.   • Chief Protector gained control of Aboriginal possessions and property.  • Facilitated exploitation of Aboriginal labour (Milnes p47)  • Strict penalties for Aboriginal people contravening provisions of the act. 

VIC 

Children’s Court Act 

WA 

• • •

1907 

 

 

 

  Prinsep appointed Chief Protector  Aborigines Department becomes full department responsible to Minister for Commerce and  Labour (1905‐8)  Still dependent on part time protectors 

TAS 

Infant Life Protection Act 1907 

 

WA 

State Children Act    • C.F. Gale289 appointed Acting Chief Protector and Royal Commissioner to investigate charges 

An Act to make better provision for the protection, control, education, maintenance, and reformation of neglected and uncontrollable children and juvenile offenders; to provide for the establishment and control of institutions and for contribution by near relatives towards the support of children in institutions ; to constitute children’s courts and to provide for appeals from such courts; to provide for the licensing and regulation of children trading in streets and in certain places open to the public ; to amend the State Children Relief Act, 1901, the Children’s Protection Act, 1902, the Infant Protection Act 1904, and the Crimes Act, 1900 ; to repeal the Reformatory and Industrial Schools Act, 1901 ; and for purposes consequent thereon or incidental thereto. [Assented to, 26th September, 1905.] 289 Gale was a former pastoralist from the Gascoyne region who had suggested to the Fairbairn Commission that settlers should be left to deal with Aboriginal people in their own way. 288

161

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

of ill‐treatment by Canning Exploration Party 

1908 

VIC 

•

Lake Tyers established as only official government station in Victoria.  

 

NSW 

•

Bomaderry Children’s Home established. 

 

NT 

•

Christian Missionary Society establishes Roper River Mission 

 

WA 

• •

  Gale Commission 1908 Exonerates Canning party of cruelty  Gale appointed Chief Protector in September and amalgamated appointment with Chief  Inspector of Fisheries.   Bernier and Dorre Islands established as Lock Hospitals to isolate Aboriginal people suffering  from venereal disease.  Catholics establish Drysdale River Mission (renamed Kalumburu).  

• •

 

C’wth 

Federal Invalid and Old Age Pension Act 1908  • Aboriginal people excluded from provisions. 

1909 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection Act, 1909290     • Board for the Protection of Aborigines granted statutory powers in relation to all reserves.   • Board to provide for the custody, maintenance and education of the children of `Aborigines'.   • Board may apprentice `the child of any Aborigine or the neglected child of any person of  apparent mixed descent.   •  The Board vested with power over all reserves including power to remove people from them.  • Entry onto reserves by non‐Aborigines forbidden.   • Regulations may be made for the care, custody and education of Aborigines and conditions  on which children may be apprenticed under the Act. 

SA 

• •

State Children's Council agrees to take Aboriginal children into its care.   Aboriginal girl removed from ‘black camp’ as an important precedent. 

 

WA 

•

Australian Aborigines Mission establishes Dulhi Gunyah Orphanage in Perth. 

 

VIC 

Aborigines Act 1910      • Removes distinction between Aboriginal people of mixed descent and increases provision for  Aboriginal people off reserves. 

SA 

Aboriginals Act 1910    • Protector reported that a number of children had been removed and placed under the State  Children’s Council.   • Considered the children to be happy and thriving  • Reiterated that all 'half‐caste' children were neglected 

NT 

Northern Territory Aboriginals Act 1910 (SA)    • Melville Island Mission established by Catholics 

 

 

WA 

• •

Catholic Church establishes Lombadina Mission in the Kimberley.  Presbyterians establish Walcott Inlet Mission (renamed Kunmunya) in the Kimberley. 

 

1911 

NSW 

•

Cootamundra Girls Home established 

 

1910 

 

291

An Act to provide for the protection and care of aborigines; to repeal the Supply of Liquors to Aborigines Prevention Act ; to amend the Vagrancy Act, 1902, and the Police Offences (Amendment) Act, 1908 ; and for purposes consequent thereon or incidental thereto. [20th December, 1909]. 291 An act to extend the powers of the Board for the Protection of Aborigines [19th October 1910]. 290

162

Year 

1912 

Colony/State  Events 

 

ACT 

• •

ACT Established  Board compels Aboriginal people to move to Egerton Mission Station at Yass 

 

QLD 

State Children’s Act  • Government establishes Taroom Aboriginal Settlement (later moved and renamed  Woorabinda) 

 

SA 

Aborigines Act 1911    • The Aborigines Act 1911 was a substantial and formidable piece of 'protective' legislation  with unprecedented powers for the control of Aboriginal people.   • Premiere introduced the Aborigines Bill to strengthen protection and control provisions for  Aboriginal and 'half‐caste' children because few magistrates were willing to commit children  to care. When eventually enacted:  • Repealed Ordinance No. 12, 1844.  • Stated intent was protection from alcohol, prostitution and other dangers.   • Highly restrictive and repressive with almost total control of Aboriginal peoples lives  • Reinforced segregation  • Aboriginal people prevented from camping or loitering in townships and other designated  places  • Restricted and controlled movement of Aboriginal people between districts.  • Chief Protector given authority to keep any Aboriginal person within reserve boundaries.   • To prevent miscegenation, Aboriginal women could not dress in men's clothes and could not  keep company with non‐Aboriginal men.   • Under Section 10(1) the Chief Protector became the legal guardian of every Aboriginal and  'half‐caste' child even if they had a living parent or relative.   • Section 36(1) required fathers of 'half‐caste' children to pay for their support. Even if other  support or accommodation was available.   • The Act gave Chief Protector power to appoint Protectors, usually police officers, to act as  local guardians for Aboriginal children within their districts.   • See NT.  • Aborigines Department 

NT 

•

WA 

Aborigines Act Amendment Act 1911 (WA)  • Increases power of Chief Protector to exclude rights of mother of illegitimate 'half‐caste'  children    • Moola Bulla Station Reserve (4 million acres) is established 

 

C’wth 

• • •

 

TAS 

Cape Barren Island Reserve Act, 1912    • Secretary for Lands responsible for welfare and well‐being of reserve residents.   • CBI reserve subdivided into homestead and agricultural blocks.  •  Persons named in schedule and their widows and descendants may make application for  licences to occupy land free of rent.   • Residents required to reside continuously in their houses for six months each year.   • Licences may be bequeathed to widow or descendants   • A licensee widow who marries `a white man' loses all her rights to the licence.   • Persons over 21 years who are not licensed occupiers or lessees may be removed from 

Administration of Northern Territory Aboriginal affairs transferred to the Commonwealth, but    SA continues to act as it agent in relation to the care of Aboriginal children. 

See NT.  Aboriginals Ordinance  Aboriginals Department  292

An Act `to provide for the subdivision of the Cape Barren Island reserve and for occupation of portion thereof by the descendants of Aboriginal natives'. 292

163

 

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

•

reserve.   In order to encourage the settlement of ‘half‐castes’ outside the Reserve licences may be  granted for Crown land elsewhere in Tasmania.   Regulations may be made to control reserve residents. 

NSW 

•

Cootamundara Home for Girls established in former hospital building 

SA 

•

  The Chief Protector suggested that both Point McLeay and Point Pearce should be placed  under government control. The system of dual management with Missions was not working. 

ACT/NSW 

•

Egerton Mission Station at Yass closes 

 

QLD 

•

Seventh Day Adventists establish Mona Mona Mission near Kuranda in Far North  Queensland. 

 

SA 

Royal Commission on the Aborigines (1913‐1916)  • Parliament appointed a Royal Commission to investigate the control, organisation and  management of mission stations. Recommends a shift to Government control and greater  efforts to assimilate the increasing ‘half‐caste' population. 

 

NT 

•

Government establishes Kuhlin and Darwin Half‐Caste Home. 

 

WA 

•

Anglicans establish the Forrest River Mission (Oombulgurri) northwest of Wyndham in the  Kimberley 

 

QLD 

•

JW Bleakley appointed Chief Protector of Aborigines. 

 

SA 

• • •

Point McLeay and Point Pearce changed to Government stations  54 children in care of the State Children’s Council.  Koonibba Children’s Home established by Lutherans. 

 

NT 

•

Government establishes Bungalow Children’s Home at Alice Springs. 

 

VIC 

Neglected Children’s Act 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection Amending Act 1915293     • Grants increased powers to the Aborigines Protection Board.  • No longer a requirement for Court to find a case of neglect before an Aboriginal child can be  removed by the Board.  • Parents of a child removed in this way may appeal to a court.   • Apprenticeship of children by the Board no longer subject to the Apprentices Act 1901.   • Any child who refuses an apprenticeship may be removed for training at a home or institution  arranged by the Board. 

QLD 

• •

Salvation Army establishes Purga Mission near Ipswich.   Inhabitants of Deebing Creek moved to Purga. 

 

WA 

• • •

A.O Neville replaces Gale as Chief Protector.  Consistently pushes for protection and segregation.   Proposed greater segregation in education.  Aboriginal adults also subjected to Neville’s segregationist policies. 294  Carrolup Native Settment established by government. 

 

•

1913 

1914 

1915 

 

•

•

 

 

293 An Act to amend the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909; and for other purposes. [Assented to, 15th February, 1915] 294 Milnes suggests that this was imposed even on those individuals who believed they were removed from their Aboriginal heritage. Peter Milnes, From Myths to Policy: Aboriginal Legislation in Western Australia, 2nd ed. (Perth, W.A.: Belco Consulting, 2005), 54.

164

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1916 

NT 

•

Methodists establish Goulburn Island Mission. 

 

1917 

NSW 

•

Returned Servicemen’s Settlement Scheme places additional pressure on Aboriginal reserve  land 

 

SA 

•

  Government supported by the Advisory Council introduces a Bill for "Care, Control and  Training of Aboriginal Children [and] for placing Aboriginal children under the Control of the  State Children's Council".   Because children already under legal guardianship of the Chief Protector ‐ they proposed a  simple transfer of guardianship to the State Children's Council.   The Chief Protector increased his powers and children could be removed because they were  Aboriginal without any qualification of neglect or destitution.   A storm of protest, including the First Petition prepared by Australian Aboriginal people  submitted to a government. 

• • •

1918 

TAS 

 

Children of the State Act 1918295 

  296

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1918   • Removes provisions in 1909 Act which gave the Board power over a person `apparently  having an admixture of aboriginal blood in his veins'.  • Aboriginal children of mixed descent no longer entitled to remain on reserves with their  parents.   • Money saving strategy    • Kinchela Training Institution for Aboriginal Boys established in northern NSW. 

 

QLD 

•

 

SA 

  Advisory Council of Aborigines (1918‐1939)  • Seven Members to report to Commissioner of Public Works on any issue relating to  protection, control, training or education of Aboriginal people in SA.  • Established under Aborigines Act.  • Advocated for education and training of children to make them 'useful citizens'.   • Supported and reinforced practices of removing children and assimilation policies.   Developed educational program for Aboriginal children, particularly those of mixed descent.   • Wished to replicate the perceived success of Koonibba Children's Home at other mission  • stations.   The Advisory Council and Chief Protector disagreed about the treatment of children. The  • Council thought it possible to manage contact with parents and community at the same time  it implemented its 'educational scheme'. However, the Chief Protector favoured complete  removal from contact.   In many other respects the Council supported and reinforced removals.   • Council advocated legislative and regulatory changes, including extending the Act to  • 'disruptive' youths.  

NT 

Aboriginals Ordinance 1918 

 

WA 

• •

Moore River Native Settlement established.  Lock Hospitals close.  

 

C’wth 

•

Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 

 

Palm Island government reserve established. 

295 An Act to consolidate and amend “The Youthful Offenders, Destitute and Neglected Children’s Act, 1896,” make better provision for the Protection, Control, Maintenance, and Reformation of Neglected and Destitute Children, and for other purposes. [22 November, 1918]. 296 An Act to amend the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909, and the Aborigines Protection Amending Act, 1915. [Assented to, 12th March,1918]

165

Year 

Colony/State  Events  •

 

Excludes indigenous people from electoral rolls and denies them a right to vote. 

1919 

VIC 

Children’s Maintenance Act 

 

1920 

 TAS 

Adoption of Children Act 1920  First legal provision for adoption of children under 17.    • • Written consent of parents or guardian required unless child of the State or a `deserted  child'. 

 

SA 

•

 

•

Advisory Council urges for the children to be committed to the State by the Chief Protector  without a court appearance.   Legal adviser to the State Children's Council advises against this.  

NT 

•

Oenpelli Mission established  

 

NT 

• •

Christian Missionary Society establishes Emerald River Mission on Groote Eylandt  Methodists establish Elcho Island Mission in Arnhem Land.  

 

WA 

•

Mount Margaret Mission established by United Aborigines Mission in the Goldfields. 

 

SA 

• •

Origins in advice of the Advisory Council to the Commissioner of Public Works   Council members unanimous support recommendations. Included a provision 'illegitimate  children on Government Aboriginal stations should be placed under the care of the State  Children's Department at the end of nine months from their birth'.   Advice not accepted by the Commissioner. 

 

1921 

1922 

•

1923 

1924 

1925 

297

NSW 

Child Welfare Act 1923    • Court given similar power as in 1905 Act to commit `neglected' or `uncontrollable' child.  • All children committed to institutions are under the control of the superintendent until 18  years old, or until discharged, removed, apprenticed or placed out.   • A child may be adopted if the child's parents or guardian consent.   • Consent not required if court of the view that child is deserted or abandoned.  

 

SA 

Aborigines (Training of Children) Act 1923   Despite protest and the petition, the 1917 Bill passed into law.Continuing protests by  • Aboriginal people and the controversy generated by the act was problematic.  

 

NSW 

Child Welfare (Amendment) Act 1924   • Court may dispense with consent in any special circumstances where deemed expedient.    • Kinchela Training Institution for Aboriginal Boys moves to Kempsey. 

 

QLD 

•

Anglican Chruch establishes Lockhart River Mission 

 

VIC 

•

Lake Tyers becomes the last and only staffed Aboriginal station in Victoria.  

 

SA 

• • •

The Chief Protector suspends provisions of the Training Act.    As controversy subsides provisions are gradually reintroduced.  Oodnadatta Children’s Home established by United Aborigines Mission. 

 

NT 

Aboriginals Ordinance 

 

NSW 

•

 

Australian Aborigines Progressive Association (AAPA) is formed 

297

An Act to amend and consolidate certain Acts relating to children. [Assented to, 30th November, 1923]

166

Year 

Colony/State  Events  •

 

Calls for end of forcible removals 

SA 

• See NT.  Adoption of Children Act. 

NT 

•

1926 

SA 

Maintenance Act 

 

1927 

SA 

•

Colebrook Children’s Training Home run by United Aborigines Mission. 

 

NT 

•

Dr C Cook appointed as Chief Protector 

 

WA 

Wood Royal Commission 1927  • Response to allegation of massacre in the Kimberleys. 

 

VIC 

Aborigines Act 1928  •   Adoption of Children Act 

 

NT 

•

 

WA 

Education Act Amendment Act 1928 (WA)    • Regulation 85 allowed for exclusion of Aboriginal children on basis of objection by parents of  other children.  • Aboriginal children sent to ‘native schools’ at government settlements at Moore River and  Carrolup.   • Mr N. Harris, of Aboriginal and British descent, from Morawa led a delegation to Premier to  complain about the status of ‘part‐Aborigines’ and seeking exemption under the Act. 

NT 

Bleakley Report  • Board of Inquiry Concerning Killing of Natives in Australia by Police Parties and Others 

 

WA 

• •

Bill proposed to update the Aborigines Act 1905 rejected.  Labor Member representing northern pastoralists did not support the Bill. 

 

C’wth 

•

Suggestion for a Commonwealth Royal Commission inquiry into all Aboriginal administration    rejected.  

1930 

 

 

 

1931 

QLD 

•

Doomadgee Mission established by Brethren Assemblies on Gulf of Carpentaria.  

 

NT 

•

Boys from Darwin 'half‐caste' Home moved to Pine Creek Boys Home.  

 

1932 

 

 

1933 

WA 

•

Warburton Ranges Mission initiated by arrival of the United Aborigines Mission. 

 

1934 

ACT 

•

Aboriginal people at Yass from closure of Egerton Mission Station at Yass removed to  Hollywood Mission.   ACT children under control of NSW Protection Board. 

 

1928 

1929 

•

 

 

Chief Protector of Aborigines reviews administrative agreement regarding Aboriginal people    of NT and decides to extend existing arrangement with SA. 

Coniston Massacre – 32 Aborigines shot 

 

QLD 

Protection of Aborigines and Restriction on the Sale of Opium Amendment Act 

 

SA 

The Aborigines Act, 1934 – 1939  • Legislation consolidates provisions of the Training Act. 

 

WA 

Moseley Royal Commission  • Set up to investigate matters of immediate concern.  

 

167

Year 

Colony/State  Events  • • • •   •

1935 

1936 

1937 

 

Followed a number of protests by Schenk and Bennett at Mt Margaret.   Found little evidence of ill‐treatment  Reinforces the need to separate children from parents, and segregation more broadly.  Recommends greater powers of control  Sister Kate’s Children’s Home established in Perth.  

TAS 

Infants Welfare Act 1935298    • Used to remove Indigenous children from their families on Cape Barren Island. Head teacher  appointed as a special constable with the powers and responsibilities of a police constable,  including the power to remove a child for neglect. 

QLD 

Adoption of Children Act 

 

NT 

Commonwealth Adoption of Children Ordinance  • Catholic Church establishes Port Keats and Santa Teresa Missions  • Methodists establish Yirrkala Mission.  

 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1936   • Court may order the removal of Aboriginal people `living in insanitary or undesirable  conditions'  • Removed to a reserve or a place controlled by the Board or to the State where they come  from. 

 

SA 

Children’s Protection Act 

 

NT 

Aboriginals Ordinance 

 

WA 

Aborigines Act Amendment Act 1936 (WA) (Native Administration Act)    • Chief Protector and Aborigines Department becomes Commissioner of Native Affairs and the  Department of Native Affairs.  • Commissioner extends control and becomes the legal guardian of every Aboriginal person up  to the age of 21 (increased from 16).   • Definition of Aboriginal person broadened with individuals required to prove absence of  Aboriginal origin.   • Previously assimilated people now also fall within state control.  • Aboriginal people can be moved under orders of the Commission  • Movement of Aborigines prohibited without permission.  • Prohibition on sexual relations between Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal people  • Prohibition on alcohol  • Arrest without warrant  • Establishes court of native affairs.  • Commissioner could object to any marriage.   • Strong emphasis on ‘breeding out’ 

NSW 

• •

Board inquiry into allegations of extreme cruelty by the manager of Kinchela.   Transferred to Cummeragunja where Aboriginal people protest by moving off the station  across the river to Victoria.  

 

SA 

•

Open Brethren Assemblies establish Umeewarra Mission at Port Augusta. 

 

299

An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Welfare of Children and the Protection of Infant Life. [31 January, 1936]. 299 An Act to make further provisions as to the protection and care of aborigines; to amend the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909, and certain other Acts, in certain respects; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 10th July, 1936]. 298

168

Year 

Colony/State  Events  • •

First Commonwealth‐State Native Welfare Conference   Ministers and Heads of native Affairs Departments from each state and territory except  Tasmania   Meeting adopts assimilation as the national policy. 

 

• • •   •

Australian Aborigines Conference held in Sydney.   Aborigines mark the 'Day of Mourning'.  William Ferguson and John Patten ‘Aborigines Claim Citizen Rights’ 

 

SA 

•

Tindale and Birdsell offer support for the assimilation policy and oppose segregation. 

WA 

‘Regulations affair’    • Opposition attempts to embarrass government when Amendment Act requires parliamentary  approval.   • Uses material from Bennett and Schenk to show poor conditions of Aboriginal people.    • Carrolup Settlement reopened 

C’wth 

1938? [check date]   Commonwealth Minister for the Interior, Hon John McEwen, issues assimilation discussion  • paper.   Directed at Commonwealth responsibility for NT, but a foundation for formal assimilation  • policies adopted by all states.  

C’wth 

•

1938 

 

NSW 

Parliamentary Select Committee into Aborigines Protection Board 

169

 

 

Colony/State  Events 

 

1939 

NSW 

Child Welfare Act 1939300   • Replaces Child Welfare Act 1923.   • Neglected child may be released on certain conditions  • Child under care of the Minister is regarded as a State ward or committed to an institution.  • Minister of Child Welfare is the guardian `to the exclusion of the parent or other guardian'.   • Minister may direct the removal or transfer of any ward; remove children from charitable  institution, depot, home or hostel to be apprenticed, boarded out, placed out or placed as an  adopted boarder.   • An adoption order may be made in interests of child.   • Parents or guardian must consent to adoption but this requirement can be dispensed with  where the court deems it just and reasonable.  

QLD 

Aboriginals Preservation and Protection Act  • Director of Native Affairs Office  • Torres Strait Islanders Act.  • Director of Native Affairs could remove Indigenous people to and from reserves and separate  children from family.  • Director is made guardian of all Aboriginal children and has power to remove children  without referral to the minister. The Director gains total control of indigenous children’s lives.

SA 

Aborigines Act Amendment Act 1934   Significant changes include:   • Definition of Aborigine broadened to include anyone of Aboriginal descent (removal of  concept of 'caste')  • System to allow Aboriginal people to be made exempt from the Act provisions (dependent on  character, intelligence and development)  • Offence for non‐Aboriginal man to consort with Aboriginal women unless married to her.  • Abolition of Chief Protector position.  • Replacement by Aborigines Protection Board.   • Despite strengthened assimilation policy, Board is more cautious in removals.   • Protection Board maintain emphasis on training of young Aboriginal people for employment,  particularly domestic service.  

 

NT 

•

1940 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1940301   • Aborigines Protection Board replaced by Aborigines Welfare Board.   • An Aboriginal child found to be neglected under the Child Welfare Act 1939 to be committed  to the Board as a `ward of the Board'.   • Board has increased powers over such children, different to non‐Aboriginal children.  • Duties of the Board include assisting Aborigines to gain employment, ' to maintain them  while employed, assisting Aborigines to be assimilated   • The Board no longer has duty of education of Aboriginal children   • Retains duty of custody and maintenance. May establish homes for the reception,  maintenance, education and training of wards.   • Provision to place wards in homes to be ‘maintained, educated and trained'.   • Child wages paid to the Board and kept in a trust account until the ward is 21.   • Makes it an offence to try communicate with a ward in a home or enter a home without the 

Aboriginals Ordinance 

An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to children and young persons; to repeal the Child Welfare Act, 1923, and the Child Welfare (Amendment) Act, 1924; to amend the Interstate Destitute Persons Relief Act, 1919, and certain other Acts; to validate certain matters; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 23rd October, 1939]. 301 An Act to provide for the dissolution of The Board for the Protection of Aborigines and for the constitution of an Aborigines Welfare Board; to amend the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909-1936, in certain respects; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 22nd May, 1940]. 300 

170

World War II (1939‐1945) 

Year 

Year 

Colony/State  Events  •

SA 

• • • •

 

consent of the Board.   A neglected or uncontrollable child may be dealt with in accordance with the Child Welfare  Act, unless court decides to admit the child to State control.  1940s ‐ Aborigines Protection Board gives financial assistance to the Salvation Army to  operate training programs including:  Wistow (Mt Barker) a centre for boys   Fullarton home for girls   United Aborigines Mission establishes Cosmo Newbery 

WA 

• Neville retires and is replaced by F.I. Bray  • Balgo Hills Mission established by the Catholic Church in northern WA    An Act to Amend section 48 of the Native Administration Act, 1905‐1940  • Tightens liquor restriction. 

C’wth 

Commonwealth Electoral (War‐Time) Act, 1940  • Aboriginal people who joined armed forces entitled to vote and later able to drink alcohol in  uniform with comrades 

NT 

Aboriginal Ordinance  Child Welfare Ordinance (C’wth)  • Cathoic church establishes Garden Point and Melville Island missions.  • Methodists establish mission at Croker Island.  • Anglican mission on Groote Eyelandt 

WA 

Native Administration Act, 1905‐1940. No. 4 of 1941  • Institutes ‘leprosy line’ to prohibit Aboriginal people travelling from north to south.    • Roelands Children’s Home is established as an interdenominational insititution in the  southwest.  • Holy Child Orphange run by Catholics in Broome. 

C’wth 

Child Endowment Act 1941   • Recognises children of assimilated Aborigines. 

1942 

C’wth 

Social Service Amendment Act 

1943 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1943   • The Board may issue and cancel exemption certificates to Aborigines ‘deemed not to be an  aborigine’   • The Board may board‐out children admitted to its control.   • At minimum school leaving age Aboriginal children apprenticed or placed in employment.   • The Board holds authority for removal and transfer, apprenticeship and custody of wards. 

1944 

WA 

Natives (Citizenship Rights) Act 1944  • Allows Aboriginal people who renounce all tribal and native association, speak English, free of  disease and references from reputable citizens to be released from the jurisdiction of the  Department of Native Affairs.     • Native Welfare Council publishes The Tragedy of Native Affairs attacking the education and  administration of Moore River and Carrolup by the state. 

1941 

302

302 An Act to provide for the reconstitution of the Aborigines Welfare Board ; to constitute the Aborigines Welfare Board a body corporate, and to extend its powers, authorities, duties and functions ; for these and other purposes to amend the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909-1940 ; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 25th June, 1943.]

171

Year 

Colony/State  Events  •

 

Wandering Catholic Mission 

C’wth 

1944 Federal Referendum  • Fails to pass proposal to transfer powers, including administration of Aboriginal affairs from  states to Commonwealth.    Social Services Amendment Act 

TAS 

Cape Barren Island Reserve Act 1945    • Islanders required to develop and cultivate land on Cape Barren Island within 5 years or it  reverts to the Crown.  • Surveyor‐General to `manage and regulate the use and enjoyment of the Reserve', and   • Supervise matters affecting the interests and welfare of Reserve residents   • Leases to contain covenants that lessor and that and family will reside on it for at least nine  months per year.   • Lessee may bequeath lease to wife and children, living on the reserve at time of death.   • Any person over 21 who is not a lessee, may be removed from the reserve.   • Regulations may be made for peace, order and good government. 

WA 

•

Jigalong Mission established by the Apostolic Church. 

 

SA 

•

United Aborigines Mission establishes Gerard 

 

NT 

• •

The Australian Aborigines Mission establishes St Mary’s Home for Aboriginal Children.  The Retta Disxon Home is set up by the Australian Insland Mission.  

 

WA 

•

Aboriginal workers in the Pilbara organise a strike 

 

TAS 

Domestic Assistance Services Act 1947304   • Established a domestic assistance service to assist in homes where the mother is unable to  undertake `ordinary domestic duties’  

 

SA 

•

 

WA 

Child Welfare Act 

 

 

C’wth 

Social Services Act 

 

1948 

WA 

Bateman Report 1948  • Poor sanitation and hygiene at government institutions   • Moore River ‘useless’  • Labour for rations an ‘indictment’   • Department in need of reform  • Recommends assimilation and training of labourers in segregated colleges.   • Confirms ideas that Aboriginal children are difficult to educate and should be removed from  their parents    • S.G. Middleton appointed to Native Affairs Department Initiates assimilationist practices  including transfer of functions to mainstream departments and hand over of government  institutions to Christian missions. 

 

1945 

1946 

1947 

303

Oodnadatta Mission is reopened by the United Aborigines Mission. 

303 An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating to the Cape Barren Island Reserve. [28 November, 1945]. 304 An Act to make provision for the Establishment of a Domestic Assistance Service and to authorise the making of grants to Associations providing domestic assistance, and for purposes connected therewith. [2 May, 1947].

172

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

C’wth 

Nationality & Citizenship Act 1948    • United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide  • United Nations Declaration of Human Rights 

 

1949 

WA 

•

Catholic Church establishes Tardun Children’s Mission and St Joseph’s Farm 

 

1950 

NSW 

•

Board advertises for foster parents … for 150 Aboriginal children.  

 

1951 

SA 

•

South Australia Aborigines Protection Board adopts an official policy of assimilation after 40  years of assimilationist practices. 

 

WA 

• • •

Former Moore River Native Settlement becomes Mogumber Methodist Mission.  Carrolup Native Settlement becomes Marribank Farm School.  Government establishes Alvan House Hostel for Girls in Mt Lawley, Perth. 

 

C’wth 

3  Commonwealth/ State Native Welfare Conference   • Hasluck urges assimilation for all Aboriginal peoples across all states.  • Assimilation is affirmed as the aim of 'native welfare'.    • Sir Paul Hasluck appointed Minister for Terriotries. 

WA 

•

McDonald House Hostel for Native Boys established by the government in Leederville, Perth.   

C’wth 

•

Conference of State and Federal Ministers for Aboriginal Affairs 

1953 

NT 

Aboriginals Ordinance  • Amended to remove exemption for ‘half‐caste’  Welfare Ordinance1953  • Welfare Branch (1953‐64)  • Enshrined policy of assimilation through family welfare and citizenship. 

 

 

WA 

•

 

1954 

VIC 

Child Welfare Act 

 

NT 

Aborigines Welfare Ordinance  • H. Giese appointed Director of Welfare 

 

WA 

Native Welfare Act 1954 (WA)    • Repeals many draconian elements of the Aborigines Act 1905 and Aborigines Act  Amendment Act 1936  • Department becomes Department of Native Welfare with Commissioner of Native Welfare as  its head.  • Removes provisions for forced removals and placing of reserve placements.    • Rescinds penal sanctions relating to employment permits for Aboriginal people.  • Maintains a number of controls related to cohabitation, marriage leprosy control,  Departmental rights to supervise Aborigines’ economic affairs.   • Full‐citizenship rights for 'half‐caste' people  • Provision to remove prohibition on alcohol defeated by Legislative Council. 

VIC 

•

1952 

1955 

SA 

rd

 

 

Cosmo Newbery, near Laverton, taken over by United Aborigines Mission. 

 

• • • •

Premier Henry Bolte Commissions Charles McLean to review and recommend changes to  Aboriginal affairs policy.  Review finds poor living conditions.  Does support the Aborigines Advancement League petition for self‐government.   Instead recommends ‘helpful but firm policy of assimilation’.  This has similar focus on housing, education and employment as agreed by other states at  1951 conference. 

•

Board establishes Campbell House Farm School near Meningie. 

 

173

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

1956 

WA 

Grayden Report 1956  • Condemns the Department of Native Welfare and leads to another committee of inquiry in  1958 

1957 

VIC 

McLean Inquiry into the Operation of the 1928 Aborigines Act      Aborigines Act 1957  • Incorporates many McLean Enquiry recommendations.  • Central Board for the Protection of Aborigines abolished.  • Aborigines Welfare Board appointed to promote moral, intellectual and physical welfare and  assimilate Aboriginal people into the general community.  • The Board has no specific power in relation to Aboriginal children.  • Assimilation policies in relation to housing,   • Shifts responsibility for housing of Aboriginal children from non‐Government agencies to the  State. 

WA 

•

NT 

Child Welfare Ordinance 

WA 

Special Committee on Native Matters    Gare Report 1958  • Recommends increased expenditure on Aboriginal welfare, training for Welfare Officers and  full citizenship rights for Aborigines.   • Most recommendations ignored 

NT 

Wards Employment Ordinance 

 

C’wth 

Social Service Act  

 

TAS 

Child Welfare Act 1960305  • Replaced the 1935 Act.   • Honorary child welfare officers may be appointed (In 1966 an honorary child welfare officer  appointed on Flinders Island). 

 

VIC 

Social Welfare Act 

 

WA 

Native Welfare Act Amendment 

 

VIC 

•

NSW 

Child Welfare Amendment Act 1961 

 

NT 

Welfare Ordinance 

 

C’wth 

• •

 

SA 

Aboriginal Affairs Act 1962  • Aborigines Protection Board replaced by Aboriginal Affairs Board.  • Establishes Aboriginal Advisory Board.  • Continued provision for control of Aboriginal reserves.   • Repeals exemption certificate system. 

1958 

1959 

1960 

1961 

1962 

 

Katakuta Aboriginal Home for Young Men (formerly Alvan House) is run by the government  before being taken on by the Baptist Union the following year. 

 

   

At this time six government institutions exist to accommodate increased child removals since    implementation of the Aborigines Act 1957.  

Native Welfare Council  Select Committee on Voting Rights 

 

An Act to consolidate and amend certain enactments relating to children and other persons who have not attained the age of twenty-one years. [5 December 1960]. 305

174

Year 

1963 

1964 

Colony/State  Events  WA 

•

C’wealth 

Electoral Act 

   

Full citizenship rights for all Aborigines 

  306

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1963   • Repeals a number of provisions including:   • magistrate to send `mixed blood' Aboriginal people to a place controlled by the Board;   • offence to take an adult Aboriginal person away from NSW   • offence for non‐Aboriginal and Aboriginal people to live together. 

WA 

Native Welfare Act 1963 (WA)    • Enshrines many of Middleton’s assimilationist ideas and removed several repressive clauses.  • Commissioner of Native Welfare ceases to be guardian in law of all Aboriginal children  • Aboriginal people no longer restricted by ‘leprosy line’  • Aboriginal people to be subject to mainstream procedures of criminal code and child welfare  legislation.  • Suggested that Aboriginal people should receive equal wages (cf. NT)  • Aboriginal people still required to apply for citizenship rights.  • Liquor restrictions continued  • Correspondence to and from Aboriginal children in institutions continues to be subject to  censorship  • Provision for Aboriginal people to become farmers on excited blocks  • Larger child institutions wound back and smaller cluster homes established. 

VIC 

Adoption of Children Act 1964  • Increased regulation of adoptions.  • Aborigines Welfare Board approved as ‘private’ agency 

 

QLD 

•

 

Report of Special Committee of Inquiry into Legislation for Promotion of Well‐being of  Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in Queensland. 

 

  Adoption Act 

SA 

•

 

NT 

Social Welfare Ordinance  • Removes remaining restrictions on Aboriginal citizenship  • Social Welfare Branch 

 

 

C’wth 

•

Socal Science Research Council. 

 

1965 

NSW 

• • • •

  Assimilation Policy reaffirmed as   Adoption Of Children Act 1965307  Welfare and interests of child paramount consideration in making an adoption order   Consent not required if a person cannot be found or is incapable of properly considering the  question; is unfit to discharge the obligations of parent or guardian; failed to discharge  obligations of parent or guardian; any other special circumstances.  

 

1964 Annual report suggests assimilation may destroy cultural identity.  

 

QLD 

Aborigines and Torres Strait Islander Affairs Act 

 

An Act to remove certain restrictions imposed by the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909-1943, upon aborigines; for this and other purposes to amend the said Act; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 29th March, 1963.] 307 An Act to make provisions with respect to and consequential upon the adoption of children; to amend the Child Welfare Act, 1939, the Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages Act 1899, and certain other Acts; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 17th December, 1965]. 306

175

Year 

Colony/State  Events 

 

Children’s Service Act 

1966 

1967 

1968 

C’wth 

Native Welfare Conference suggests assimilation is a choice for Aboriginal people. 

 

NSW 

Adoption Of Children (Amendment) Act 1966   • Court power to dispense with consent due to `other special circumstances' removed.   • Court may dispense with consent where the interests and welfare of child are promoted by  the adoption order. 

 

SA 

•

1966 SA Aboriginal Lands Trust.  

 

C’wth 

• •

Cattle Station Industry (Northern Territory Award) 1966.  Provision for equal award wages for Aboriginal people in 3 years.  

 

VIC 

Aboriginal Affairs Act 1967    • Minister for Aboriginal Affairs with broad powers.   • Regulated Aboriginal access to training and other institutions on reserves, including power to  remove people.  

SA 

Aboriginal Affairs Act 1967    • Repealed Aborigines Act of 1934‐1939  • Abrogated Board's powers to remove children from families.   • Abolished most restrictions on Aboriginal people, esp. power to remove people to reserves.   •  Provided improved administration including assistance with assimilation into community  • Powerful Protection Board replaced with Aboriginal Affairs Advisory Board.   • Intention of the act ‐ that neglected, uncontrolled or destitute children be dealt with in same  way as other children in the state.   • Effectively ended practice of removal without legal action under Maintenance Act or Social  Welfare Act.  • Number of children in homes decreased by 25% but children in private care remained  constant.   • Begin to shift away from idea of assimilation with idea of Aboriginal identity being recognised  as important. 

C’wth 

1967 Federal Referendum  • Referndum to amend the Constitution   • Commonwealth has capacity to make laws regarding Aboriginal people.  • Commonwealth Council and Office of Aboriginal Affairs established. 

 

TAS  

Adoption of Children Act 1968   • Deleted the power of a `person of good repute' to apply for a child to be made a ward.  • Consolidated and amended previous laws relating to adoption. The Registrar‐General no  longer exercises the powers of a police magistrate   • The welfare and interests of the child must be served by the adoption 

 

VIC 

Aboriginal Affairs Act  • Concerns raised about unauthorised fostering of Aboriginal children.  • Aborigines Welfare Board abolished and functions transferred to new Ministry of Aboriginal  Affairs.  • Department of Aboriginal Affairs. 

ACT 

•

308

Responsibility for placing Indigenous children from ACT transferred to the Commonwealth 

308 An Act to make further provision with respect to the determination by the Court of applications for the adoption of children; for this and other purposes to amend the Adoption of Children Act, 1965; to validate certain matters; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to 13th April, 1966.]

176

 

Year 

Colony/State  Events  •

1969 

1970 

 

Department.   Brought about new practice of finding residential care and attempts and family reunion. 

NSW 

Aborigines Protection (Amendment) Act 1969309  • Repeals a number of earlier acts.  • Abolition of Aborigines Welfare Board.  • Aboriginal children under the care of Board become wards of the State.   • Aboriginal children's institutions deemed to be depots under the Child Welfare Act.   • Office of Aboriginal Affairs. 

 

VIC 

•

 

VIC 

Aborigines Land Act 1970  Community Services Act 

Aboriginal Affairs Act amended to require Minister to be advised when an Aboriginal child is  brought before the court. This ensured the Aborigines Advancement League were notified  and children were legally represented. 

 

   

An Act to make provisions with respect to matters concerning Aborigines; to repeal the Aborigines Protection Act, 1909, and certain other Acts; to amend the Attachment of Wages Limitation Act, 1957; and for purposes connected therewith. [Assented to, 20th March, 1969]. 309

177

References  

Anonymous. "An Australian Arcadia." Observer, 11 January 1873, 6g. Attwood, Bain Munro. Telling the Truth About Aboriginal History. Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005. Bacon, Violet. "Joining My Identity Pieces Together." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 149-62. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Baulch, Linda. "Scoping an Approach to Identifying National Heritage Significance for Missions and Reserves in Australia." In Draft study for the Australian Heritage Commission. Canberra, 2004. Bin-Sallik, MaryAnn. "Her Spirit Could Not Be Broken." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 109-34. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Bird, Carmel, ed. The Stolen Children: Their Stories: Including Extracts from the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. Milsons Point, N.S.W.: Random House Australia, 1998. Brett, Christine. "“We Have Grown to Love Her”: The Aborigines Inland Mission, Aboriginal People and the Nsw Aborigines Protection Board, 1905-1920." (2004), http://rspas.anu.edu.au/pah/TransTasman/papers/Brett_Christine.pdf. Broome, Richard. Aboriginal Victorians: A History since 1800. Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005. Byrne, Denis, Helen Brayshaw, and Tracy Ireland. Social Significance: A Discussion Paper. Sydney: Research Unit, Cultural Heritage Division, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001. Choo, Christine. "A Dumping Ground: A History of the Cherbourg Settlement.(Book Review)." Australian Aboriginal Studies 2002, no. 2 (2002): 84. ———. Mission Girls: Aboriginal Women on Catholic Missions in the Kimberley, Western Australia 19001950. Nedlands, W. A.: University of W.A. Press, 2001. Clendinnen, Inga. "Dancing with Strangers: Europeans and Australians at First Contact." Cambridge University Press. Cliff, Paul. "Portrait of Nannultera, a Young Poonindie Cricketer." National Library of Australia. Colbung, Ken. "The Spirit Has More Strength." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 65-80. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Commonwealth of Australia. "Aboriginal Welfare. Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities. Held at Canberra, 21st to 23rd April, 1937." In National Library of Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth Government Printer, 1937. Crabbe, Lena. "Keeping a Family Together." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 25-38. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Cuthbert, D. "Stolen Children, Invisible Mothers and Unspeakable Stories: The Experiences of Non-Aboriginal Adoptive and Foster Mothers of Aboriginal Children." Social Semiotics 11 (2001): 139-54. Doukakis, Anna. The Aboriginal People, Parliament And "Protection" In New South Wales, 1856-1916. Annandale, N.S.W.: The Federation Press, 2006. Evans, Raymond. "'Bleakley, John William (1879 - 1957)'." In Australian Dictionary of Biography, Online Edition. Canberra: Australian National University, 2006. Finnane, Mark, and John McGuire. "The Uses of Punishment and Exile: Aborigines in Colonial Australia." Punishment & Society 3 (2001): 279-. Government of South Australia. "Aborigines and Europeans." In Atlas South Australia. Place Published: Government of South Australia, 2000-2008.

178

Haebich, Anna. Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous Families 1800-2000. Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2000. ———. For Their Own Good: Aborigines and Government in the South West of Western Australia 19001940. 2nd ed. Nedlands, W.A.: University of Western Australia Press for the Charles and Joy Staples South West Region Publications Fund, 1992. ———. Spinning the Dream: Assimilation in Australia 1950-1970. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Press, 2008. Hall, Andrew. A Brief History of the Laws, Policies and Practices in South Australia Which Led to the Removal of Many Aboriginal Children, We Took the Children: A Contribution to Reconciliation: Commissioned by Family and Community Services, South Australia, 1997. Hilliard, David, and Arnold D. Hunt. "Strands in the Social Fabric: Religion." In The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, edited by Eric Richards, 194-234. South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986. Hume, Patrick Sullivan. "Under a Blue Gum Tree." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 39-50. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Johnston, Chris. What Is Social Significance? A Discussion Paper, Technical Publication Series No. 3. Canberra: Australian Heritage Commission, 1992. Kinnane, Stephen, Penny Robins, Roger Scholes, and Lauren Marsh. The Coolbaroo Club. Australia: Coolbaroo Club Productions in association with Annamax Media, 1996. videorecording. Marsh, Lauren, and Anna Haebich. "Living the Dream." In Spinning the Dream: Assimilation in Australia 1950-1970, edited by Anna Haebich, 273-99. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Press, 2008. Mia, Tjalaminu. "Boorn - Taproot." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 207-22. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Milnes, Peter. From Myths to Policy: Aboriginal Legislation in Western Australia. 2nd ed. Perth, W.A.: Belco Consulting, 2005. National Foundation for Australian Women. "Cummeragunja Reserve (1883 - )." Australian Women's Archives Project Web Site, http://www.womenaustralia.info/biogs/AWE1093b.htm. National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families. "Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families." Sydney, N.S.W.: Commonwealth of Australia, 1997. Nugent, Maria. Botany Bay: Where Histories Meet. Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin, 2005. Perez, Eugene. Kalumburu : The Benedictine Mission and the Aborigines 1908-1975: The History of Kalumburu Mission in North Western Australia. Wyndham: Kalumburu Benedictine Mission, 1977. Pocock, Celmara. "Identifying Social Values in Archival Sources: Change, Continuity and Invention in Tourist Experiences of the Great Barrier Reef." In The Changing Coast, edited by Veloso Gomes, Taveira Pinto and Luciana das Neves, 281-90. Porto: Eurocoast/EUCC, 2002. ———. "Sense Matters: Aesthetic Values of the Great Barrier Reef." International Journal of Heritage Studies 8, no. 4 (2002): 365-81. Price, Kaye. "A View of Tasmanian Aboriginal Housing, Launceston and Hobart, 1970–79." In Settlement: A History of Australian Indigenous Housing, edited by Peter Read, 157-66. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, 2000. Prosser, Phil. "Show Respect." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 135-48. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Read, Peter. "The Stolen Generations the Removal of Aboriginal Children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969." New South Wales Department of Aboriginal Affairs,, http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/publications/StolenGenerations.pdf.

179

Reid, Gordon. 'That Unhappy Race': Queensland and the Aboriginal Problem 1838-1901. Kew, Vic.: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2006. Reynolds, Henry. Fate of a Free People. Ringwood, Vic.: Penguin Books Australia, 1995. ———. Nowhere People. Camberwell, Vic.: Penguin, 2005. Rowley, C. D. The Destruction of Aboriginal Society, Aborigines in Australian Society ; 4. Canberra: Australian National University, 1970. Ryan, Lyndall. The Aboriginal Tasmanians. 2nd ed. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin, 1996. Smedley, Audrey, and Brian D. Smedley. "Race as Biology Is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem Is Real: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives on the Social Construction of Race." American Psychologist 60, no. 1 (2005): 16-26. Stell, Marion K. Eternity: Stories from the Emotional Heart of Australia. Canberra: National Museum of Australia, 2001. Stell, Marion K., Celmara Pocock, and Roy Ballantyne. Essential Australia: Towards a Thematic Framework for the Interpretation of Cultural Heritage Sites in Tourism. Griffith University: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, 2008. Summers, John. "Aborigines and Government in the Twentieth Century." In The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, edited by Eric Richards, 488-512 South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986. ———. "Colonial Race Relations." In The Flinders History of South Australia: Social History, edited by Eric Richards, 283-311. South Australia: Wakefield Press, 1986. Sutton, Mary-Jean. "Re-Examining Total Institutions: A Case Study from Queensland." Archaeology in Oceania 38, no. 2 (2003): 78(11). Tandy, Christine. "The Treatment of Children at Kinchela Training Home for Aboriginal Boys." Intercultural Studies 1, no. 1 (2001): 51-59. Taylor, Cuimara Ben. "A Nyungar Is Battling." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 95-108. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Tonkinson, Myrna. "The New Indigenous Affairs Orthodoxy." Eureka Street 18, no. 18 (2008). Wells, Samantha. "Labour, Control and Protection: The Kahlin Aboriginal Compound, Darwin, 1911-38." In Settlement: A History of Australian Indigenous Housing, edited by Peter Read, 6474. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press [online], 2000. Winch, Joan. "My Mother, My Daughter." In Speaking from the Heart: Stories of Life, Family and Country, edited by Sally Morgan, Tjalaminu Mia and Blaze Kwaymullina, 81-94. North Fremantle, W.A.: Fremantle Arts Centre Press, 2007. Wongutha CAPS. "History: Wongutha Mission Training Farm." http://wonguthacaps.wa.edu.au/about/history/#farm. Wood, Marilyn. "Nineteenth Century Bureaucratic Constructions of Indigenous Identities in New South Wales." In Citizenship and Indigenous Australians : Changing Conceptions and Possibilities, edited by Nicolas Peterson and Will Sanders, 35-. Cambridge ; Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

180