Attitudes to Non-European Immigration

Citation preview

PROBLEMS IN AUSTRALIAN HISTORY

Attitudes to

European Immigration Edited, with an introduction by

A. T. Yarwooc Senior Lecturer in History, University

I

CASSELL AUSTRALIA

of New South

Wales

CASSELL AUSTRALIA LIMITED 30-36 Curzon Street, North Melbourne, Victoria

80 Bay Street, Broadway, New South Wales Copyright

© Cassell Australia

Limited, 1968

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, mcludmg photocopying, recording or by any information

storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. First published 1968

1974 SBN $04.93920.X

Reprinted 1972,

Printed and bound by Times Printers Sdn Bhd

422 Thomson Road, Singapore, II 577~

Contents Introduction

1

v The Early Recruitment of Coloured Labour for New South Wales (H) COOLIE LABOUR-THE FIRST STAGE (b) 'SIR JAMES STEPHEN ON A WHITE AUSTRALIA' Documents

g 11-18

2. Anti-Chinese Movements--The First Phase CHINESE ON THE GOLDFIELDS Documents

19 23-39

1.

3. Coloured Labour Experiments in Queensland la) THE INDIAN COOLIE LABOUR ISSUE (b) KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND

(c) KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND [2] (d) KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND [3] (G) KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND [4] Documents 4. Racial Homogeneity Becomes a National Policy (H) GROWTH OF THE wH1T18 A U S T R L I A CONCEPT (b) CHINESE COMPETITION IN DIVERSE OCCUPATIONS ac) THE LATE COLONIAL PERIOD

Documents

7

40 48

50 53 57 60-69

70

77 80 82-101

5. Attitudes and Policies in the 20th Century (a) THE EARLY COMMONWEALTH PERIOD (b) 'JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA' (c) SINCE 'WORLD WAR.1 Documents 6. The Current Debate wH1T}8 AUSTRALIA-REFORM? Documents

102

107 112 117-123

124

130-144

Basic Secondary Sources

145

Index

147

AC KNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank in general terms the many authors and publishers from whose work I have selected the extracts that make up a large part of this volume. Individual acknowledgments appear at

relevant points in the book, though a special reference should be made here to the kindness of the New South Wales State Archivist

in granting permission for the reproduction of archival material used in Section 4.

The staffs of the Mitchell Library and the New South Wales Public Library have again placed me in their debt. To my colleague, Dr. Heather Radi, I offer warm thanks for reading the manuscript and giving invaluable criticism. Thanks are due also to Mrs. Lyndsey .Jennings for her services as a typist. Finally I wish to express my gratitude to Professor Frank Crowley and my other colleagues at the University of New South

Wales for their support and encouragement. The book I dedicate to my wife.

Alexander T. Yarwood University of New South Wales January, 1968

Introduction This book was first conceived as a collection of readings traversing the main phases of the history of Australian attitudes to non-

European immigration. It was soon seen that 'documentS sere to be an indispensable complement to the readings. They offer

vivid and undiluted samples of public opinion, and they can portray at the same time the continuity and the discontinuity of

views expressed in debate on a great national issue. What has emerged is a compromise, embracing historical interpretations that combine to form as near as may be a continuous narrative, and docurnen§ that illustrate the historical process and bear witness to the cornrnunity's attitudes over a period of 120 years. The r e a d i e r , as well as performing introductory roles, will, it is hoped, be accepted as valuable in themselves. But the student

should be aware of the sharp dillEerenccs of interpretation amongst the historians who seek to explain the genesis and growth of the movement that culminated in the 'White Australia' policy. Was the impulse mainly economic, springing from a l a b o r oriented desire to conserve high living standards and trade union solidarity? "Tas it fear and scorn of the unfamiliar and the bizarre, as

manifested in the small boys' assaults on the Chinese? (Section 4J document i) . Was it rather a primordial instinct for race purity, brought First into vigorous play on many gold Fields by the spectacle of a Chinese majority and by a general awareness of the vast human reservoir from which these men came? How important was the Australian's sense of remoteness from Britain a n d the source of his racial stock as a factor in the creation of barriers against non-European immigration? To what extent was the policy of exclusion provoked by the early and continuing absence of females amongst non-European arrivals? Syrians were

soon exempted from the disabilities suffered by other Asian migrants, largely because they alone saw Australia from the first as a home in which to settle and raise families. This fact, with its economic and social implications, was reinforced by the Syrian's

2

INTRODUCTION

al-Iinities with the host population in religion and physical appearance* Finally, was the rapid hardening and formalizing of race consciousness in the 80's and 90's a natural growth or an artificial product of the politicians' vote-catching play upon latent prejudices? At least one New South Wales politician, George Dibbs, seems to have trimmed his sails to the prevailing wind (Section 4,

document iv.c). Limitations of space prevent an examination of this issue, but it can be studied in the controversial articles by

B. E. Mansfield, K. M. Dallas and N. B. Nairn published in the Australian Quarterly see Basic Secondary Sources, p. 145). "That of the impact of the 'YVhite Australia' policy on economic development, political and social institutions, and on the international relations of this country? Even while censuring his ancestors for their racial intolerance, the historian of today is hard pressed to refute the basic premises of the more enlightened Australian statesmen of the nineteenth century. Freedom from

racial divisions, in which differences of language, religion and custom were identified with skin eolour, made for a relatively harmonious evolution of social and political institutions. Relations with Japan, if not cordial, were a t least free from the dip-

lomatic crises that vexed Washington and Tokyo as a consequence of the maltreatment of the Japanese minority in California.

(See

Sections 5, 6 and Yarwood, A. T. op. cit., Co, 5.) The task for the Australian statesman of 1968 is to assess the degree to which changes since 1901 may warrant a major readjustment towards the question of non-European immigration. lilfithin Australia, the consolidation of the welfare state and the mellowing of race prejudice may be regarded as grounds for offering a more

generous review of entry requirements than that announced by the Minister for Immigration in March 1966 (Section 6, document iv). The enhanced international stature of the newly independent non-European nations and their sensitiveness to reminders of past injustices may be urged as expedient reasons for such a revision of policy. The Immigration Reform Group contends also that a change is needed 'because we are being deprived of the oppor~ tunities for mutual enrichment and understanding which a less

inhibited contact would open up' (Quoted in Section 6, narrative). Against these arguments must be set the cautionary examples of friction in multi-racial societies referred to by the late Sir john Latham (Section 6, document ii). e \'Harwood, A.T. Asian Migration t o Australia. T h e Background to Excision

1896-/923, Ch. 8, Melbourne, 1964.

INTRODUCTION

3

The reader, having been warned of disagreements amongst the experts on matters of interpretation, should also be told of the inadequacies of the published research material in some fields covered by this volume. Following the appearance of Myra lAlillard's History of the White Australia Policy in 1923, no major study has considered the relationship between the exclusionist movement of the last quarter of the 19th century and the great political movements of that period. That is to say, the emergence of the industrial and political wings of labour, the founding of political parties possessing a durable institutional relationship with groups in the community; and the growth of intercolonial co-operation and national sentiment which produced the federa-

tion of the Australian colonies in 1901. An analysis of this relationship must take account of the latter phase of colonial agitation against the Chinese, when they moved from the gold fields to engage in other ernployrnents. The resulting friction is referred to in Section 4, but here too the published fruits of research have been insufficient to sustain firm conclusions. Interdisciplinary studies, enabling the historian to employ the techniques or draw on the research of the sociologist, may help to cast a light on the consolidation of the colnmunity's antipathy to colored immigration. How much influence did the ideas of the . Social Darwinists exert n Australia? Evolutionary theory, with its notion of the survival of the fittest, was employed by Herbert Spencer to give a pseudo-scientific endorsement to the comfortable 1

old assumptions of the EuropeanS intrinsic superiority over other forms of human life. But the research has yet to be performed that will clarify the relationship between this dogma and the demand in Australia for the entire exclusion of non-European immigrants. I n our understanding of anti-Chinese movements on the gold

fields, we have been greatly assisted by recent scholarly work. thoritative and balanced account Geoffrey Serle has written a in The Gaiam A 6 . A History of Ike Colony Q; Victoria. /851/861, which conch

les;

'In view of the huge inHux of 1857, it is diilicult to deny that restrictions were justified. And though the legislation of 1855

might be regarded as premature, later events went jar to vindicate it. International events and the local employment crisis had exacerbated an already difficult situation] (p. 335) . Geoffrey Serle's argument corroborates a point made by Professor Manning Clark in Select Documents in Australian History

..

1851-1900, p. 68: 'One of the most powerful reasons for the opposition .

[to the

4

Chinese]

INTRODUCTION

. . . was stated quite frankly by the Police Magistrate at . . . "the principal grievance was the great diminution

Sandhurst

in the yield of gold, and, moreover, that the influx of such a number of Chinamen will lower the price of l a b o r " . . .' On the situation in the New South Wales fields, D. L. Carrington's article 'Riots at Lambing Flat, 1860-l861', while sternly critical of the

prevailing intolerance, concludes: 'Fear of numbers was perhaps the strongest of the factors which helped provoke anti-Chinese action. It was well grounded .' He estimates that sixty percent of the 20,365 persons described by the census of 1861 as mining for gold were Chinese, who outnumbered European diggers on most of the major fields. (R.A.H.S. journal, vol. 46, October 1960,

..

p. 241.) A word about the documents. Abundant illustration is given of the way in which the question of non-European immigration provoked, from the beginning, the most serious soul searching by col Nial officials and by transplanted Englishmen as to the kind

of society they were fashi oning in Australia. Granted this element of consistency, we must notice the contrasting reactions of the I850's and the 1890's to the problem of colored immigration. The first period sees a pragmatic and limited response to the specific challenge of a Chinese influx. (See Section 2, and especially editors note to document iv.) The second is marked by a doctrinaire approach which produces at length the "White Australia' policy

(Section 4). exposition E m The First document shows a pastoralist virtues of the docile and exploitable coolie, in an early challenge to already emerging ideals (Section 1, document i). A Colonial Office still moved by the humanitarian temper old the decade that abolished slavery and

produced the Molesworth Committee's

Report on Transportation gave the first emphatic negative, which was endorsed by Governors Bourke and Gipps. Soon after, the proposal to recruit indentured colored l a b o r was revived under the stimulus of the l a b o r shortage in the pastoral industry, severely hit by the cessation of convict transportation. The firmly worded Report by the Broughton Committee (Section 1, document iii) constitutes the First statement by a. representative group of Australian colonists of the prime importance of fostering race

homogeneity. Here may be identified the anxiety to recreate British institutions, the concern to preserve the dignity of manual l a b o r and to avoid the character eroding evils of slavery or any near approach thereto, that were to form the solid core of the case against imported coolie l a b o r .

INTRODUCTION

5

The Broughton Committees relief at the abolition of convict transportation and its rejection of the pastoralists' suggested alternative gives substance to a point powerfully made by Bede Nairn's article in the Australian Quarterly (vol. x v i i i , September 1956, pp. 19-21). I-Ie sees the anti-coolie and anti-transportation movements of the I840's as springing from like sources: the revulsion against convictism created a legacy of distrust and

antagonism that was readily turned against bonded immigrants of any c o l o r or nationality. This antipathy was soon powerful enough to command the allegiances of workers, employers and governments in the more highly populated temperate regionsof Australia. In Queensland, on the other hand, tropical agriculture became identified with a plantation system based on coolie l a b o r , I t seems likely, as Moles and Molesworth argue (Section 3, narrative), that the availability

of such l a b o r was a precondition for capital investment during the pioneering stages of the sugar industry. Belief in the incapacity of white men for tropical field work combined with production economies to ensure a widespread acceptance of the necessity for colored indentured labour until the last two decades of the 19th century. Federation implied the imposition on Queensland of the majority view of (climatically) temperate Australia. At the same time, federal tariffs offered a protected Australia-wide market for

a crop that was produced increasingly by small farmers with a white l a b o r force, seduced no longer by the appeal of the mines. (For a discussion of this question see, in addition to Section 3, the articles by' Alan Birch cited in the Basic Secondary Sources, p. 145). During the crucial formative years from 1850-1900 Australian colonists saw in the transportation system and the aberration of the Queensland plantations, examples of the social evils inherent

in attempts to produce wealth through the exploitation of a semiservile l a b o r force. They saw too, in the anti-Chinese riots of the gold fields (on which Western Australia based its outright exclusion of the Chinese from gold mining) and the demonstrations by city dwellers against the urbanized Chinese, p e r u aside

illustrations of the impolicy of allowing the growth of a colored minority. To these home grown examples was added, from about 1880 onwards, an impressive citation of the problems faced by euoh m u l t i racial societies as t h e United States of Aiiiciica, Natal,

Fiji, and the 'West Indies, where short sighted policies dictated by laissez faire and economic expediency had bequeathed intolerable agonies to succeeding generations. A consistent theme running through the documents printed

6

INTRODUCTION

in Sections 4 to 6 is the warning that Australia. must avoid these perils. The potency of this warning, if somewhat diminished by the growth of tolerance in Australia and by the undermining of the myth of white superiority at the hands of distinguished nonwhite jurists, singers, conductors, scholars, administrators, and generals, is not yet spent. Sir John Lathaln's conservative stand in 1961 (Section 6, document ii) draws support from the sad irony

of mid 20th Century Britain, centre of a multi-racial Common wealth, long the exponent of unfettered migration, forced by recent outbreaks of racial antagonism to retreat from her traditional liberalism. Yet the last word belongs to the former Australian Minister for Immigration, who, in announcing a policy change in March 1966, made a statement that would have appeared treasonable to the men of 1901. 'Both the [immigration] policy and the rules and procedures by which it is etiected cannot remain static and must be constantly reviewed' (Section 6, document iv).

_

A. T. Yarwood University of New South Wales. March, 1967.

The Early Recruitrzaertt

of Coloured Labour for New South Wales (al

COOLIE LABOUR

THE FIRST STAGE

This section is introduced by an extract from Worrssolz SIR STEPHEN ROBERTS' chapt@ 'History of the Contacts between -1.> Australia the Orient and Australia', in 5. Clunies-Ross the Far East, Sydney, 1935, pIg ' . I t is reprinted. with the kind permission of the author and the publishers, Angus So Robertson Ltd. in conjunction with the Australian Institute of International Affairs. Professor Roberts begins by noticing some of the abortive early proposals for introducing a colored l a b o r force to New South Wales, ranging from J. M. Matra's pre-settlement plan of 1783 to E. G. V\1akeField's suggestion in his Letter from Sydney of 1829.

The question next arose as a direct result of the vast squatting expansion of the thirties. By 1840, the sheepmcn had spread over half a continent, from Mount Remarkable north of Adelaide to the fringe of the Darling Downs, and the distressed squatters were exploring every possible avenue for l a b o r supplies. At that time the sheep were shepherded and yarded in small flocks, and needed at least two shepherds and one hutkeeper for every thousand animals. About 1834, then, the squatters eonmlenccd their twenty years' light for cheap l a b o r . After the report of a Committee of Council in 1837 in favour of Asiatic coolie-labour, their agitation

took the form of opposing the townsmen and demanding irnmigra~ son from Asia or the Pacific. It so happened that, just as this time, the British were hammer-

ing a way into the Orient. By the eighteenth century, they had

8

THE EARLY RECRUITMENT

OF COLOURED

LABOUR

obtained control of most of China's foreign trade, and, in 1793, Lord Macartney was sent on a mission to the emperor Chien-lung to demand further trade privileges a t Canton. Macartney made a good impression on the Chinese, but unfortunately Lord Amherst acted in a singularly unitnaginative fashion at Peking in 1816, and

Anglo-Chinese relationships became strained. The position was further complicated when the East India Company lost its trading

monopoly in 1833 and the Company's agents were replaced by official British Commissioners. The result of constant friction was the unfortunate Opium War of 1842, which led to the opening of Five Treaty Ports, the cession of Hong Kong, and the appointment of British consuls in China. ___.

__

.___

These latter events were taking place just when the Australian ' and it was natural squatters were scouring the Earth for la :

that the opening of China should be linked on to Australia's demands for labour and for trade. Even before the Opium War,

a former Indian planter named john Mackay made two unsuccessful attempts to introduce Chinese coolies, and Captain King, of the Australian Agricultural Company, was conducting a long correspondence with China on the matter. The abolition of convict-assignment in 1840 hastened such efforts and, in September 1842-almost a t the moment when news of the signing of the

Treaty of Nanking reached Sydney-XVilliam Charles Wentworth formed a Coolie Association to tap the Asiatic labor-reserves. But there was much feeling in the colony against Cantonese coolies and, largely owing to the opposition of the Governor (Sir George Gipps) and the town-workers, it was felt that they would be accepted only as a temporary relief for the appalling l a b o r shortage. The attitude of the British Government was not clear.

Downing Street had previously wanted Chinese for the Port Essington settlement and, even in 1844, Lord Stanley gave orders to encourage the immigration of coolies in the far north. Encouraged by this, the squatters thought that no objections could be raised to Chinese shepherds in the south and arranged with local headmen to send coolies in large numbers, on live-yearly indentures. The Foreign Office a t once expressed grave concern at such happenings in the newly-opened Treaty Ports, but Earl

Grey could no nothing beyond expressing his disapproval, in turn, to the Governor at Sydney, because no specific Act or regulation made such trade illegal.

So the coolies began to trickle into Australia. The l i s t shipment came from Arnoy in the Nimrod late in 1848, and consisted of a

hundred coolies and twenty-one boys. After this, the trailic soon

SECTION ONE READINGS

g

grew, but the recruiters usually worked iron ports like Swatow, outside British consular control. In the early fifties, thousands of coolies were coming in every year. V\7e have no complete records, but we know, in nine months of 1854, 2,100 came in from two consular ports alone, and these were but a minority of the total number. But the movement was unsuccessful from the squatters` point of view- The climate of Port Phillip was unsuitable; in New

South Wales, the coolies proved unreliable and absconded from the runs at the first opportunity; did only in Moreton Bay (later Queensland) was there an degree of success. The next phase came w ten the Chinese caught the gold-fever and flocked into the diggings, where they became expert 'tilers', working the dumps and claims passed over by Europeans. Up to this time, the Chinese had entered Australia under contracts or indentures, now, they started coming in as ordinary immigrants, paying their own passages or binding themselves to entrepreneurs of their own nationality. The evil conditions on the immigrantships from Hong Kong soon became notorious and, coinciding as they did with Henry Parkes's attacks on Chinese immigration as 'a social and economic menace', led to the appointment of a Select Committee of the New South Wales Council in 1854.

(b) 'SIR JAMES STEPHEN ON A 'WHITE AUSTRALIA' The following extract is taken from PROFESSOR PAUL KNAPLUND'S article 'Sir James Stephen on a Vtfhite Australia', Victorian

Historical Magazine, vol. 12, June 1928, pp. 240-42. It is republished with the kind permission of Mrs. Knaplund and the editor. Professor Knaplund defends _James Stephen, Permanent Under-

Secretary for the Colonies, 183647, from some unfair criticism by the Colonial Reformers. Stephen thought the colonists should manage their own aiiairs as far as possible, but:

He also believed that the British Government should act as the

protector of the l a b o r i n g classes in the colonies against the selfish schemes of the wealthier classes found there. These ideas were foremost among the considerations which caused him to oppose all surgessons for the introduction of coolie labour to Australia, or New Holland, as he usually called that colttirlent. Australia must be kept as a white man's country, Stephen main-

tained. He, therefore, looked with disfavour upon the establish-

10

THE

EARLY RECRUITMENT

OF COLOURED

LABOUR

men of a colony at Port Essington, deezning the place unsuited for settlement by Europeans; and, when Sir George Gipps, in his despatch of 17 July 1841, to Lord John Russell, reported that some employers of l a b o r in New South Wales desired to introduce coolies from India, Stephen wrote: 'To expedite augmenta-

tion of wealth in New South Wales by introducing the black race there from India would, in my mind, be one of the most unreasonable preferences of the present to the future, which it would be possible to make. There is not on the globe a social interest more momentous, if we look forward for five or six generations, than that of reserving the continent of New Holland as a place where the English race shall be spread from sea to sea unmixed with any

lower caste. As we now regret the folly" of our ancestors in colonizing North America from Africa, so should our posterity have to censure us if we should colonize Australia from India.' Two years later, Gipps forwarded a memorial to the Queen from working men in New South W'ales against the importation of coolie l a b o r , and Stephen was of the opinion that they 'had stated with great force and clearness [many] unanswerable objections to the introduction of coolies among them'. The subsequent petition from employers of l a b o r in favour of the importation of coolies met with stout resistance from Stephen. In a lengthy minute of 12 September 1843, addressed to Lord Stanley, Stephen said: 'It being the most arduous, if not the first, duty of a Government to consult for the permanent interest of society as opposed to the immediate interests of the most active and powerful of its members, and to watch over the welfare of the many rather than the present advantage of the few, and to protect those whose only property is in the power of l a b o r against the rapacity of the rich, it is, in my mind, the evident duty of the British Government to

oppose the application of any part of the revenue of New South Vtlales to the introduction of coolies. They would debase by their intermixture the noble European race. They would introduce caste with all its evils. They would bring with them the idolatry and debasing habits of their country- They would beat down the

wages of the poor l a b o r i n g Europeans until the poor became wholly dependent on the rich-the opposite state of society, namely, the dependence of the rich on the poor, being the happiest state of society wherever it exists. They would cut off the resource for many of' our own distressed people. To introduce them [i.e.,

the coolies] at the public expense would be to countenance and alarm the f a v o r i t e theory of all colonies that the first settlers

in a new country become the proprietors of it all; and that the

SECTION ONE DOCUMENTS

11

affairs of it are to be conducted for their benefit rather tI1 n for the benefit of the metropolitan state. For these and similar reasons. my opinion is that this is a proposal to be negatived and discountenancecL'

To this Lord Stanley remarked : 'I entirely concur.

7

I Documents (i) M EM ORANDA, ON THE INTRODUCTION LABOURERS

OF INDIAN

Submitted to the Governor of New South 'Wales in October 1836

and May 1837 by john Mackay. [Reprinted from N.S.IW. Legislative Council, V. if P., 18244837, pp. 581-3.] The first memorandum acknowledged the Governor's reply to a previous request and assured him that 'many, if not all the wealthy colonists of respectability' would be willing to pay half the costs of hiring and transporting Indian coolies from Calcutta, ranging from upwards of £11 stg. for males and £8 stg. for females. It was thought the government would defray half of the expenses.

The May 1837 memorandum extolled the virtues of the coolies in the following terms: In their own country they have but little rice, and eat snakes, lizards, rats, mice, etc. Their clothing is simple and scanty, and they eat only

once, rarely twice, in twenty-four hours. Their habitations are equally simple and confined; any did place

twenty feet square and eight feet high would suffice for twenty men. They are unacquainted with the luxury of a bed beyond a dry floor, upon which they repose in their blankets in the cold weather, and a remnant of thin cotton cloth in the summer season. For any kind of l a b o r requiring great muscular strength, they are not equal to stout Europeans, but since my arrival in this country I have seen many Europeans earning three shillings per diem, the result of whose l a b o r , individually, would not equal that of an industrious 'Dhangar' receiving only one-third of the E u r o p e a s pay, food, and everything included. For

any agricultural purpose, excepting the plough, I consider them fully equal to Europeans, especially in using the hoe, and grubbing roots, weeding, etc. From their patient disposition and tractable habits, I feel

12

THE EARLY RECRUITMENT OF COLOURED LABOUR

equally certain of their proving (with a little care in making them . understand the business) excellent shepherds. I have already said that their food is simple. The beef rejected here by the lowest European would be very welcome to them, and maize Hour they are particularly fond of, they sec but little of it in their own country, the grinding alone costing more than coarse rice, which, with

a little salt, chillies and vegetables, form their best food. With the laborers sent to the Mauritius, females are in the proportion of one in ten. In support, Mackey quoted a Mauritius planter's letter which described their experiment with Indians as a 'complete success'

...

'a cargo is at this moment coming up the h a r b o r , and two thousand men more are on their passage. They are quiet, docile, and industrious', and their total cost over a five years' indenture would average out at five shillings a week, 'which you will allow is cheap l a b o r in any country

(ii) LORD GLENELG TO SIR GEORGE GIPPS It is a tribute to the good sense of the officials concerned and a reflection of the humanitarian temper of the times that these proposals were not implemented. Governor Bourke, in transmitting

the lukewarm approval of his Council's Select Committee, commented' 'The attempt would I fear prove a sacrifice of permanent advantage to temporary expedient' [H.R.A. I , 19; 83.1 This letter crossed a despatch in which the Secretary of State for the Colonies told the newly arrived Governor Gipps: . . 'I cannot but apprehend that the iNtroduction into the Colony of a considerable body of Indian labourers, as proposed in the Memorandum referred to, would have a prejudicial effect both on the interests of the Colony and on British Emigration. Its tendency would probably be to the permanent creation in the Colony of a distinct class of persons

.

separated by origin and habits from the rest of the l a b o r i n g population,

subject to restrictions not generally imposed, and regarded as of an inferior and servile description. Such a system could scarcely fail to be injurious to the parties themselves, and, by bringing Agricultural Labour into disrepute, to discourage the immigration from this Country of Agricultural I..abourers.' 1I-I.R.A. l , 19; 202-3; 14: December 1837] (iii) REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, 1841.

[N.S.W. Legislative Council, V. inuO P., 1841.] By 1841 the Legislative Council Committee had changed its mind about introducing c o l o r e d l a b o r ,

in spite of the unanimous

demand by pastoralist witnesses, amongst them john Mackay, john Lord, Charles Campbell, Edward Hamilton, Stewart Rorie, William Lawson, Terence Aubrey Murray, Captain Phillip Parker King, and

13

SECTION ONE DOCUMENTS

George Cox. These shipmen predicted the continued depression of their industry in the absence of reliable and cheap l a b o r such as the Indian coolie, now that convict transportation to New South sales had ended. *john Lord who had employed 17 coolies and a Sirdar at his \Villiam's River farm for three and a half years, compared the annual costs of various types 0? `1a"Eour as f'O'IIIows: W

Rations Clothing Wages Passage from India

Totals per annum [Evidence, p. 11.]

Free man

Prisoner

f s. d. 16 18 0

£ S. d. 13 14 4 s 3 U

.-.

25 0 0

2

| _ -

41 18

0

16 17

C OO zI e d 4 9 1 8 6 0

£

4

18

S6100

8

0

0

All the witnesses agreed that apart from the problem of costs, their main concern arose from the disinclination of British immigrants to take on the occupation of shepherding (on which the industry remained based until the era of fences and boundary riders began in the fifties) . This distaste they attributed to the reaction of vigorous Englishmen to the 'sedentary employments and monotonous life of a shepherds They would have hit closer to the mark if they had acknowledged the stigma that clung from its long associate son with the system of assigned l a b o r . Edward Hamilton of Cassilis echoed the familiar complaint of the colonial employer' 'It is impossible to over-rate the evil influence of a general scarcity of l a b o r ; the insolence and insubordination

of the lower orders in this Colony arise entirely from it." [Evidence, p. l 5.] But the Committee, headed by Bishop `W. G. Broughton, was unmoved. VVhi1e regretting the labour deficiency suffered by the colony's great export industry, as a consequence of the cessation of convict transportation, it rejoiced in the opportunity of supplying the need from 'purer and better sotlrces'. [Report, p. i Not, the Report 50011 makes clear, from Calcutta. [Report, p. 'l.1

. . . During

the preceding session the subject

somewhat incident-

ally under the observation of this Committee; and in their last Report they stated their opinion to be favorable, notwithstanding many objec-

tions of considerable weight, to the employment of those people for a limited period, by the Colonists who might be willing to introduce them at their own charge, and upon condition that provision should be made for their return to their native country, at the expiration of their covenanted terms of service. Were it possible to obtain full security that this expressed condition would be fulfilled, your Committee, under the peculiar circumstances of the colony at this time, might still be willing to abide by their previous opinion, but they cannot conceal that the

14

THE EARLY RECRUITMENT OF COLOURED LABOUR

more attentively they have reflected on the means of establishing any system for ensuring the removal of the coolies from the colony, after the expiration of a limited period of service, the more impracticable, and

hopeless, has such a measure appeared to be. In reality they have arrived at a conviction, that if this race of people were to be once introduced and extensively employed, their removal could not be effected i n opposition to their O`Wl1 feelings of interest, and the iniiueuce of proprietors unwilling to dispense with the services of dependants to whom they had become habituated. To treat this measure fairly, therefore, it must be

viewed in connection with its certain consequence of establishing here in perpetuity a race of different origin, color, and habits from the European, and necessarily doomed to occupy a station of inferiority. That this is the natural consequence of the measure it is not unfair to conclude, because the expressed expectation is that the coolie, though

equaling, if not surpassing the European in the employment of a shepherd, will yet be satisfied to undertake it at a permanently lower rate of remuneration. Without this attendant recommendation of com-

parative cheapness, no one, it is acknowledged, would urge the introduce

son of coolie laborers. Yet such a depression of wages below their natural level, as the advocates for the introduction of coolies anticipate, could not be maintained if the labourer and his employer stood in the genuine relation to one another of master and servant, nor unless the coolie, though nominally free, were by the force of circumstances deprived to some extent, of the privileges of a free agent. . . . Neither can it be expected that Indian immigration, if once cornrnenced, would be limited to that description of servants which is now principally contemplated. Other classes or castes, capable of performing every kind of work, and no less accustomed than the coolies to a low rate of wages, would speedily be led to settle here, and the European workman must in the same proportion curtail his pretensions as he would find himself more and more pressed by rivals ready to take any employment out of his hands upon which he would not submit to an abatement. The ultimate settlement of the scale of wages would in all probability be at a medium height, beneath the existing rate, but certainly much above that

point of depression at which it has been too hastily assumed the remuneration of the coolie would be fixed. This, therefore, being the view of the case which is sanctioned by reasonable calculation, the true question for consideration is, whether for the sake of a n uncertain and at the best, a transient relief, it would really be worth while to introduce into our social system a new element which could not fail to deteriorate, or it may even be said, to cleprave its constitution. The expectation of introducing coolies for a time to be limited, and of dismissing them when the present necessity ceases to exist, appears to your Committee to

be perfectly visionary. Not only, if once admitted, must they permanently remain, but there will be a growing necessity for their introduction i n

greater numbers, because it is evident .that the apprehension of such rivalry will check the readiness of European laborers to embark for this colony, and even such of that class as may arrive, it is admitted, will have

15

SECTION ONE DOCUMENTS

a tendency to sink down into the state of employers of coolies, rather than to persevere in that course of strenuous exertion to which they were bred, and for the sake of which their introduction to the colony was

principally to be desired. Whatever defects may be chargeable upon the state of society here, it is a t present so unmixed in its composition as to promise to supply materials for the fabrication of a social and political state corresponding with that of the country from which it derives its origin. Your Committee therefore would not willingly be the instruments of recommending any rncasure likely to interfere with what appears at present to be the natural tendency of events. Their deliberate conclusion upon this subject is that the proper source from which relief should be sought for the present difficulties of the colony is in a more extended emigration from the United Kingdom; that for its promotion the most energetic measures should be taken, and that no time should be lost in

the adoption of such measures.

... w.

G. AUSTRALIA,

Chairman. Council Chamber,

27 July 1841.

(iv) REPORT FROM THE SELECT COMIc-IITTEE ON ASIATIC LABOUR, N.S.W. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. [V. ds" P., 1854, vol. IL] This Committee, with Henry Park's as Chairman, took evidence on the chartering and victualing of ships employed in bringing coolies

to N.S.W'. It looked into the method of recruitment, and considered the necessity of setting up safeguards both to protect the colony from 'malignant a n d infectious diseases' and to secure 'justice to the

friendless immigrant. Captain Robert Towns, a large scale shipowner an

resort',

had been the main promoter in a movement that had brought i n

some 2,400 Chinese and 86 Intilians, the latter being engaged in the mitl~1S40's 'under the pretext of domestic servants', in order .to evade the current restrictions imposed by the Indian Government. Towns showed a decided preference for the Indian coolies as pastoral workers: reports of the Chinese were, he said, generally unsatisfactorv, though he himself relied exclusively on this class of labour on his wharves, paying them from 20,f~ to 40/~ per month, with rations. During the course of the hearings, Towns had disappointing news of the five vessels which he had hoped would return from India with u p to 1,500 coolies. The Indian Emigration Act had been tightened

up, apparently in consequence of his own 'manoeuvringi Three ships had been sold, and one had returned with a general cargo. He told the Committee that a petition had gone forward from a number of 'respectable settlers in the Northern District to move the Home

Secretary to induce the Bengal Government to relax the law', so as

16

THE EARLY RECRUITMENT OF COLOURED LABOUR to permit emigration on the same terms as applied to Mauritius and British Guiana. [Evidence, pp. 11-15.] George Sandeman, pastoralist of Moreton Bay, had employed Indian and Chinese coolies for ten years. A Northern Colony should be formed, he told the Committee, based on colored labour, without which 'it is perfectly futile to expect that the natural resources of the inter-tropical parts of this country can ever be properly developed'. He was thinking not only of tropical crops such as cotton, but also of grazing, for 'while the employment of shepherding is unsuited and irksome to the more active mind of the European, it is peculiarly adapted to the comparatively listless and passive disposition of the native of the East'. With coolies, the employer did not face the problem of immigrant shepherds whose families required lodging and rations, and whose children nagged the conscience

111

the matter of the provision of education.

Sandeman having explained that coolie l a b o r would be confined to menial tasks, with the more skilled work reserved for 'white 1nechanics', the following exchange took place: 70. Bo) the Chairman: Do you not think that in any state of society, looking to the feelings and the variety of motives which make up the human intelligence, the association of men upon terms of equality is more likely to produce a better state of public feeling, than a state of circumstances which forces one class of society to regard another as inferior? Do you not think it more in accordance with the spirit of the Christian religion?-I cannot dissent from that view of the subject upon the broad grounds of what I understand as primitive Christianity, but at the same time I must say that I see nothing in the introduction of this class of l a b o r to warrant a deduction either contrary to Christianity, or opposed to that full measure of freedom or legitimate degree of equality conferred by, and that may be enjoyed to the utmost under the British Constitution. Have you not noticed during your residence in this country, tha t the mere holding of convict servants has had a hardening and bad effect upon the character of employers in some instances?-I am not prepared to say that I have. Sl. Do you not think from your knowledge of the human heart, that »=§ssnllx_gon can command and do what you choose if you have with, it will have a ba effect upon your own character as well as upon L interests?-I think that would depend upon the disposition, prim»

80.

couples, and education of the individual. 82.

But, generally, would not that be

the effect?-Generally, with

people of the uneducated class it might have that effect and no doubt some uneducated people have had convict servants. 83.

You are aware that its deadening influence upon all around it has

been held forth as one of the great evils of slavery, greater even than its inherent evil?-I have heard so. [Evidence, p. 9.1 A good deal of well merited criticism has been leveled at the

SECTION ONE DOCUMENTS

17

British governors of India for permitting the organized, large scale recruitment of indentured Indian coolies in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Upon the abolition of slavery in the British Empire, employers sought in India an alternative source of cheap, reliable

l a b o r for plantations in the West Indies, in Fiji, Natal, and Mauritius. Several thousands were imported to build the railways in East Africa. In each case, communities were established which today provoke apparently irreconcilable problems of race convict. But this trailic, though pregnant with evil in its immediate and long term consequences, had at least the virtue of offering some official safeguards for the laborer against fraudulent recruiters,

inhuman conditions of shipment, and improper treatment by the colonial employer; Such mitigating circumstances did not apply in

the case of the traffic from China, as is shown by the following extract from the Committee's Report:

. . . One witness, a gentleman of superior education and intelligence, who has resided in the English settlement of China for ten years, in answer to questions as to the means employed for obtaining these people, says the principal in the transaction 'employs an agent in China to procure labourers, this agent again employs Chinese brokers, or procurers, and' gives them so much a head for aI1 who will pass muster. A tacit sanction is thus given to what I think is a great deal like kidnapping. I state this from the knowledge I possess as editor of a newspaper, and from the various letters which come before me in that capacity, and also from the statements contained in the Blue Books to

.

which I have referred." . . Captain Towns also says, 'There are no restrictions at all with respect to them', as to their deportation in China, though he has always given strict instructions for their proper accommodation on board his ships On this head the evidence of the Immigration Agent, Captain Browne, goes to show that, generally, the dietary scale of the vessels was reasonably adapted to the wants of the immigrants, both in kind and quantity,

with the exception that there was a total absence of 'medical comforts' for times of sickness. The mortality during the voyage of one ship, the General Pain-let, was very great, out of 333 men embarked in China only 264 arrived in the Colony, and many of those who reached our shores alive were in a helpless state of sickness, and several subsequently died in the hospital. It appears that the commander of this vessel, the late Mr T. B. Simpson, behaved with much humanity to his sick passengers, dividing amongst them the whole of his cabin stores, but neither wines nor articles of food, of a nourishing or restorative quality, such as are necessary to combat disease, were put on board for their use. As to the usual fittings of emigrant ships, neither berths nor bedding have been provided. The men slept on the lower deck, with no other convenience than their ordinary mats and clothing, and a bare batten nailed down to enable them to steady themselves with their feet during the lurches of the ship in rough weather. In the case o f the General Palmer, i t is

stated that, for want of the common necessity of a water closet, several

18

THE EARLY RECRUITMENT OF COLOURED LABOUR

of the sick men dropped from the chains into the sea, from sheer physical exhaustion. The agreements under which Chinese l a b o r e r s have been brought to the Colony are not inequitable in point of form, but there seems strong reason to doubt whether the nature of them can have been comprehended by the emigrants. Captain Browne, who visited all the ships on arrival, gives it as his opinion that the servant did not clearly understand his position as a party to the contract, and this opinion derives confirmation from the testimony of other witnesses. . relief that the Committee recorded its opinion 'that, -. .~ . . | - -

with the prospect of a continuous stream of population from the mother country, all ideas of a renewal of Asiatic immigration, at private expense, will be abandoned. It is admitted on all hands that the experiment of

Chinese has disappointed the expectations of those who at one time strongly advocated their introduction, and, with respect to the coolies of India, . 'ices have been received that, owing to the restrictions of the law of India, they cannot be obtained'. No action was recommended.

[Report, pp.t4-5.] Legislative Council Chambers, Sydney. November 27, 1854.

Henry Park's Chairman.

Anti-Chinese MoveThe First Phase merits CHINESE ON THE GOLDFIELDS "iii extract is from JOHN RORKE'S 'White Australia-Origins', Current A§ailfs_ Bulletin_,_=. 20, pp. 170-4, September 1957. It is reproduced with the kind permission of the author and the Department of Adult Education in the University of Sydney.

The migration of Chinese to the goldfields was largely unsought and unorganized. Vlfith remarkable naiveté, the wealth of the Australian finds was advertised in Hong Kong by agents who were

recruiting l a b o r to replace Australians who had left their work for the diggings- Naturally, of the large numbers who came, most of those under contract broke it, and, with those who were not, went straight to the goldfields. By 1859, there were 42,000 of them in Victoria. This gave a proportion of about 1 in 12-14 of the European population. As virtually all of them were men this gave a high and frightening ratio to white male adults. This, their

heavy concentration in specific centres, the rapidity of their arrival and the knowledge of the vast reservoir from which further migration could come gave first rise to the alarmed vision of a submerged white race. In this period, the 'econolnic' opposition to the Chinese was of a general character. Because of the special nature of the work and its rewards on alluvial Fields, and because the Chinese very often did no more than rework diggings abandoned by Europeans, not much Weight can be placed on the miners' 'bread out of our Wives' a n d

chllclren's mouths' protests made currently against

them. The major economic resentment seems to have been generated when the extent of Chinese winnings became known. It was intensified as these were, in large measure, exported back to

China. When it became obvious that the Chinese intended to

20

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

follow their wealth when ready, there comes the first significant social criticism of them which has nationalist overtones. overtones. This 'direction' amounted to a betrayal of the pioneer spirit. They had no intention of becoming permanent residentsresidents in Australia and helping with the great those great task of development. The fact that those leveling number who would have included a large number leveling the criticism would had themselves only very recently arrived §rotn from Europe Europe and America, also in search of gold, does not diminish signifi cance diminish its significance -perhaps the contrary. contrary.

In reached its 1859 number of Chinese reached the number In 1854, well before the maximum in Victoria, a meeting of Bendigo diggers proclaimed fields The projected its intention of driving the Chinese from the fields. attack was prevented Commission was Royal Commission action. A Royal prevented by official action.

appointed, and legislation brought down down in 1855 on its recommendations, to restrict Chinese entry. The number of Chinese itnmgrants was. not to exceed one for every 10 tons of shipping immigrants was which paid to A per capita fee of £10 was to be paid brought them. JA which brought Victorian records registered and records Immigrants were to be registered Customs. Immigrants Victorian Customs. kept of their domicile. kept 0-f this was to inspire ships' masters masters to land The main effect of their passengers passengers in South Australia and N.S.W. N.S.\V. whence they made their which the movement which Vietoria-a movement goldfields in Victoria-a their way to the goldfields Government was powerless to check. Fourteen thousand Chinese Fourteen thousand landed at Guichen Bay in South Australia Australia in the first half of 1857.

European miners on the Buckland River 'field field in Victoria reacted violently camps were sacked and burned. violently in the same year. Chinese carps were leaders were occupants fled. Police suppressed the riot. The leaders Their occupants arrested and committed for trial. They were acquitted by a jury were acquitted

which also had strong feelings on the question. Government did what was possible in the Victorian Government The Victorian administrative framework of the time and asked N.S.W. N.S.\-V. and South Australia to pass restrictive restrictive measures like its own. South Australia passed an appropriate Bill in 1858 but N.S.W. NSNV. ignored prompted anti-Chinese riots on its own territory prompted the request until anti-Chinese it to think near Young had discoveries of gold near think differently. Rich discoveries attracted m a n y miners miners from Victoria-both Chinese Chinese and Euromany pean-and old grievances and resentments re transplanted. were resentments me There There were two serious riots with events closely following the patterns in Victoria. The Government Government was petitioned by the miners and they were ignored. The Europeans grouped and The Europeans

attacked the Chinese. These acts of violence occurred within a few months of each other and on both occasions military force was

SECTION Two READINGS

21

needed to restore order. The Government's Chinese Immigration Restriction Act followed quickly in 1861. Among other features this specifically denied to Chinese the right of citizenship, a provision which was to become a leading principle in the later Commonwealth legislation. They were completely disfranchised; These legislative measures, with others later of increasingly restrictive character, were the precedents on which the Commonwealth was to act, but they did not remain permanent additions to the Statute Books of the three Colonies which passed them. At the time N.S.VV. was introducing its restrictive Bill, South

Australia was already repealing its own as no longer necessary. Victoria's repeal followed in 1865 and that of N.S.W. only two years later. This was done, it seems, without widespread popular opposition and can fairly be taken as evidence that neither the people nor the Parties were committed in a moral or political sense to Chinese exclusion. These Acts appear now as more the reactions of governments faced with actual social disorder than expressions of developed attitudes or policies. The Acts themselves appear to have been fairly effective, but, more important,

the Chinese population was melting away proportionately as the alluvial gold fields were being exhausted. Discoveries of gold in Queensland in the '70's brought another

large-scale Chinese immigration and with it another series of sharply restrictive measures which were to introduce a new and important aspect into the development of 'White Australia and radical nationalism-the 'Imperial connection'. The rush of Chinese to the Palmer River diggings near Cooktown was so considerable that by 1877 they outnumbered Europeans on the Held by 17,000 to 1,'1000. In that year a n Act was brought down tightening the restrictions imposed Br two previous measures in

1874 and 1876, only the first of which received Royal Assent. It was- amended in 1878 in a way that made it virtually pointless for Chinese to consider mining. They were excluded from any Queensland gold field until three years had elapsed after it had

been proclaimed as such. The Acts and declining gold production reduced the Chinese in Queensland to about 11,200 in 1881. But it was the Act of 1876 which had international repercussions. Governor Cairns had reserved Assent to the Bill because he felt it might compromise the reciprocal rights agreed to by Britain and China under the Treaty of Tientsin. "Then the Bill was referred to lIVes tminster, Royal Assent was refused. This 'Imperial interference' was widely and bitterly resented, and despite the fact that the more severe restrictions of the following year's Act-even

22

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

more overtly anti-Chinese than its predecessor-did receive Assent, it augmented the antiélrnperialist sentiments which were a growing feature of an articulate Australian nationalism-increasingly seeking isolation from Old World involvements and power~ balances as a condition of the fulfillment of Australia's democratic destiny. ._ This remittance of gold, perhaps more than the miners' girgument, extended interest in the 'Chinese problem' from the white miners who worked near them to the Colonial authorities and business interests who badly needed capital for domestic investment and deplored the prospect of Ioca11y»made money being spent elsewhere. But the kind of 'economic threat' to white W

.*

individuals, as feared in the- earlier indentures- system, was not

serious a t this stage. It was not until the Chinese left the exhausted diggings- to take up other occupations that this now traditional argument was pressed on better grounds against them. The resentrnent on all grounds, however, was strong enough to prompt a

very mixed bag of European miners to proclaim their objection to the presence of an exclusive and, in their opinion, an inferior people. Their success would, no doubt, have emphasized that inferiority.

The opposition on other social and political grounds came out clearly in this period also. Among the very first complaints about the Chinese-one which was to be restated with increasing bitterness u p to the time of Federation and beyond-was that they were alien and servile. None seemed to have the slightest interest in establishing himself as a citizen and many were in various forms of servitude to masters in China. This servility of the Chinese was to be one of the strongest grounds for denunciation in the later

years of radical nationalism, when the merest contemplation of it aroused The Bulletin and William Lane's Boomerang to a sort of vehement horror. In the '50's, when there was no distinct nationalism of this kind-tllougll it had established and influential prophets in men like Dur more Lang and Deniehy-and the radical democracy of Australian governments had not really begun to emerge, it was still a weighty charge against the Chinese. Constitutions had just been granted and parliamentary institutions were beginning to function in a responsible way. There was agitation about the extent of the franchise with keen interest in the struggle in which either Conservative or Radical democracy would prevail. Working for one's own profit on the gold fields was giving to thousands of men, including those fresh from the

political struggles in Europe, their first experience of independ-

SECTION Two DOCUMENTS

23

once both from personal employment and political coercion. The social and political impossibility' of the Chinese in the existing community, let alone in the Utopia which a later generation was to formulate for itself, must have appeared as a very real thing to the popular movements and spirit of the time. Accompanying and supporting this sort of feeling were the more usual moral and racial objections. The Chinese persisted in wearing a n exotic dress, they carried on a guiltless indulgence in narcotics, encl, more keenly felt, associations with white women

for which they were prepared to pay in money and organization. The imagination and ire of the European mining population, itself almost wholly male, were easily aroused. And there was no doubt in European opinion of the extent and profundity of Chinese sexual viciousness. In these circumstances came the 'threat' of 'racial contamination' and with it the contention that so persistent is the Chinese 'racial strain' that its characteristics remain for generations. It was well known, the argument ran, that this 'piebald issue', to use 'William Lalle's favourite and highly-charged inaccuracy, invariably exhibited the worst traits of both parents-the wages of the sin of miscegenation. All these criticisms and objections and the fears and feelings from which they spring were present in the concept of 'White Australia' from the beginning. But at this time of Australia's first contact with immigrant Chinese they tend to be socially uncohering and politically unattached. They were not part of a political

policy or content of a national ethos.

2 Documents (il

REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE IMMIGRATION

ON CHINESE

[Victoria Legislative Council, V. if P., 1856-7, D19, pp. 853-4t.] Thursday, 4th June, 1857. CHINESE IMMIGRATION.-The Honorable J, P. Fawkner moved, in accord~ once with notice, that a Select Committee of seven members be appointed to frame a Bill to control the flood of Chinese immigra-

:ion setting in to this Colony, and effectually prevent the Gold

24

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

Fields of Australia Felix from becoming the property of the Emperor of China and of the Mongolian and Tamar hordes of Asia. Question-put and passed.

Your Committee having obtained evidence upon the question of Chinese Immigration, and their residence in this Province, from every available source, have arrived at the opinion that it possesses features having no parallel in any part of the British dominions. 2. Your Committee are of opinion that the Chinese migrate to this country exclusively to mine for gold and to trade among themselves, that

their numbers exceed forty thousand (40,000) , of which there are not more than [our or five females, and those are of an inferior class. From the evidence adduced it appears that when the Chinese are located in other countries in large numbers they for the most part have the opp or» tunity of intermarrying with native Asiatics-a practice which is largely followed. In this country there is no Asiatic or other race with whom it

is desirable

they should intermarry, an d thus large masses of men

congregate together on the various gold fields, producing, as a necessary consequence, great social evils, immorality and crime, and bringing about results highly detrimental to the habits of the rising generation.

8. Your Committee have ascertained that the immigrant Chinese are composed principally, if not exclusively, of natives of Quang Tung, or that part of China of which Canton is the capital, with which the British nation is at present in open hostility. These immigrants are not of that class commonly known as coolies, but comprise men from the country districts as well as from towns, cultivators, traders, and mechanics. Their passage to this country is paid in part by themselves and partly by advances from the native bankers, or head men of their village, their relations and friends becoming security for the repayment of same. 4. As far as your Committee have been able to ascertain, they find that the Chinese hitherto have in no one instance applied themselves to the cultivation of the land, nor indeed to any of the industrial pursuits

of the Colony, save that of digging for gold; their object being to acquire: a sufficiency of means wherewith to return to their own country.

5. The advantages derived from the trade which the presence of such a vast population necessarily brings with it, your Committee feels assured affords no adequate compensation to the country for the large and increasing quantity of gold, amounting within one year to about 120,000 ounces, valued a t half a million sterling, which they are annually abstracting from the natural wealth and resources of the country. 6. Your Committee have ascertained that the majority of the Chinese

are amenable tothe laws of the country, and, under a proper system of registration and management, through the agency of headmen of their

own race, selected by themselves, order to some extent may be kept amongst them. 7. The fiscal regulations for the collection of rates or taxes imposed

by the Government, provided they are clearly and distinctly defined and

SECTION Two DOCUMENTS

25

enforced with justice and firmness, your Committee see no difficulty in carrying out. 8. That crimes of great magnitude have been committed by these people is evidenced in the records of the Supreme Court. Serious collisions between them and the European population are becoming more frequent and dangerous. The Committee, nevertheless, think that those collisions may be lessened in some degree by a well-defined and

more stringent exercise of authority on the part of the Executive Government. 9. Your Committee are not insensible to the importance of the efforts

which are being made by some members of this community to impart the advantages of Christian instruction to many of the Chinese race

now located in the Colony, and they wish to express their sense of the high value they entertain of such efforts; nevertheless, they cannot ignore the fact that ninety-nine-hundredths of their race are pagans, and addicted to vices of a greatly immoral character. They feel hound to state that the presence of such a large number of their class in the midst of our great centres of population must necessarily have a most perniciotts effect upon that portion of the rising generation with which they most frequently come in contact. 10. Your Committee having given great attention to the important questions referred to them by the House, after careful deliberation, are unanimously of opinion that it is absolutely necessary to place some restrictions upon the iniiux of Chinese into this country, without which there is every probability of their coming in such vast numbers as to be wholly beyond the control of the Government, prejudicially affecting the welfare and future destinies of this community in an alarming and dangerous degree. . ...... II. The Bill on this subject which has been brought up from the Assembly and referred to us has been carefully examined in all its clauses, and your Committee are of opinion that it is adapted, with the alterations and additions. suggested belove, to meet the objects intended ._.,

to be effected by it, and is in accordance with the spirit of the recom-

mendations embodied in this Report. _John P. Fawner,

Chairman. Minnies of Evidence The reader will notice a striking disharmony between some aspects of the Committee's Report and the following typical references to the social characteristics of the Victorian Chinese. Mr. Charles Hope Nicholson, Inspector of detective police. 117. By the Chairman.-Have you anything further to suggest upon any point that you have not been asked upon?-I have seen the Chinese on the gold fields, and also in town; and I have always observed that they were a remarkably quiet people. With the exception of their

peculiarities, such as gambling and opium smoking, they are a very

26

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

inoffensive people. mm of conspiracy have come under my noticethey give less trouble cases where they have prosecuted each otherto the police in the Colony than any other portion of the population.

They generally live well and comfortably. M % settled line of policy towards them were adopted by the Government, and if the present

uncertainty as to their prospects was exchanged for a distinct understanding as to the position they will be allowed to occupy and the priviliges they are to enjoy, I am confident they would become more settled and perhaps more useful in the colony.

Mr. Walter Randall, detective of Melbourne. 347. By the Chairman.-Can you tell the Committee whether the Chinese have increased in numbers much in your time?--They have very much indeed. 348. Have you ever found them troublesome to you in your duty?No, quite the reverse, considering the great population in the country. I think I have never known twenty Chinamen convicted of felony since I have been here.

. ..

Mr. Samuel Irwin, newspaper proprietor of Ballarat.

406. By the Chairman.-Are those Chinamen married to English, Irish, Scotch, or Welsh women?-I believe the majority of them are married to Scotch women, at least, they put down 'Church of Scotlandl There were some from Van Dielnen's Land, two sisters, I know, are natives of Van Diemen's Land. I believe these two sisters were bought for £500. However, the sisters say the Chinese make good husbands; and, in fact, taking the average of European husbands, quieter and

better than they would get in their own rank. 407. What is their character for sobriety in your neighbourhood?They are very sober. 408. Are their numbers on the gold field considered to interfere with the European population?-A great many say they do interfere, but a large portion of them confine their operations to old ground

formerly worked.

412. By Mr. Urquhart.-Do you find, when there is a number of them together, that they take a more independent position than otherwise, when there are only two or three of them, and that they are prepared in consequence to defend their rights?-yes; but the fact is, they arc so much annoyed and irritated, especially by boys pelting them with stones, you cannot wonder at it that they defend themselves. I have

myself repeatedly got into rows for making them leave off peeing the Chinamen. 413. Are there no persons to protect the Chinese?-Yes, some policemen, but the villages are so scattered, they cannot be always there, and the other police care little about them; in fact, they look upon the Chinese as not belonging to their department.

SECTION TWO DOCUMENTS

27

Rev. William Young, missionary to the Chinese [London Missionary

Society] 448. By MT. Guthridge.-W'I1at progress have you made in Christianising them, which, I suppose, is your object?-The native agents and myself have disseminated Scriptural knowledge very widely among them. We have been always well received, or, I may say, almost always, on very few occasions have we been opposed, and there are some at present

who are seriously making inquiries after the truth. 449. Have you baptised any?-Not in Victoria, but I have baptised

one in Sydney_... Mr. Levin Joseph, merchant of Melbourne [ex-Cbina], who emphasized the benefit derived by the Commercial community from Chinese as consumers and producers. 545. By the Cha£;rman.~Doubtless you have an opinion I regards the policy of admitting those people into this country without restriction, if so, will you state what it is?-I have, my opinion may sound excessively strong., but it is that they should be admitted unrestrictedly.

546. Then you do not fear that any evils i t % social or political nature will arise from it?-None; from my intercourse with the Chinese, and I have seen them out of their own country, in Singapore and Batavia, and I have found, with the exception of Singapore and Batavia, that they do not colonize anywhere else, and their missions and objects

are particularly peaceable. From the little observation I have had of the people here, I am led to the conclusion of their peacefulness and utter harmlessness. 547. Do you not consider them an inferior class to Europeans?-Yes;

I do. 548. Do you think there would be no evil arising from allowing this country to be peopled by an inferior class?»-In all probability the result would be some improvement to themselves. It is, perhaps, difficult to define their inferiority. . . .

(ii)

ANTI-CHINESE RIOTS AT BUCKLAND RIVER, 1857, AND LAMBING FLAT, 1861.

Reprinted from William Westgarth's classic, The Colony of Victoria, its I-Iistory, Commerce and Gold Mining, (Sampson Low) London, 1864, pp. 185-8.

,

. . There are

popular prejudices which, in a society like that of the

Colony, are sometimes all the more irrepressible and injurious with the political and social importance of the masses that hold these prejudices. The antipathy of the mining population to the Chinese is a case in point. The presence of large numbers of this race in the colony is at best a very doubtful benefit, notwithstanding that they eat rice and increase trade, and that a trader should respect all customers. The Government, agreeing in the doubts of the case, had checked the large and threatening

immigration by means of heavy fines, or head money imposed on the

ANTI~CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE 28 ships that brought the Chinese: and in this procedure had been followed

by SOuth Australia and New South Wales. Nevertheless, the we11~known dusky faces peered forth in thousands over each of the chief gold fields, and, as the angy and impatient miners alleged, were perpetually in their way, gleaming up everything in their wake upon the diggings. An outbreak somewhere seemed inevitable, and it took place at last upon the Buckland river gold field, on the 4th July, 1857. The occasion was an anti-Chinese demonstration, got up by a public meeting of the colonists of the district, with the view of protesting against the 'Chinese inroad' amongst the Europeans. Many prominent residents took part in the business, and resolutions were passed to the effect that this swarming of the Chinese amongst the colonists was an intolerable nuisance that must result in the one or the other race quitting the locality. Debasing practices were alluded to., as prevailing among the Chinamen, as well as the prospect of their 'using up' all the

gold fields. The Government were condemned for having allowed so many of them to come into the country; and the resolutions concluded with an intimation that if the Government would not rid them of the Chinamen, the Bucklanders might do that for themselves. These resolutions were no sooner passed, and the meeting thereupon dissolved, than a cry was raised for immediate action. A party of miners, at first small, but gradually expanding as it moved along, started at once for the Chinese quarter of the diggings. Here all was speedily confusion, dismay, and rout. Bedding and other baggage were hastily strapped up, and mounted on the backs of the flying Chinamen. Twice they faced about upon the comparative handful of their enemy. One small but active fellow was observed to be conspicuously energetic in his efforts to rally his countrymen. He was a hero, and deserved a crown even at the hands of his cowardly assailants. But all was to no purpose, A vanguard

of a dozen or so of the white barbarians, once and again, set the whole mass on the move, and the line of flight, strewn with all sorts of castaway eiiects, resembled the route of a defeated army. It is only just to the general body of the Buckland miners to state that

a number of them strove most creditably to protect the Chinamen from this disgraceful attack, more especially as they saw that many of the poor timid creatures were shamefully handled, while scandalous robberies were being committed upon their property. A great deal of bedding was thrown into the river, which was then running in a full stream, and all the Chinese tents, as well as a recently-erected joss-house, were committed to the flames. The Government took prompt measures to protect the Chinamen, and 1 them for their losses. There has been no further outbreak to recompense - .

of this kind in Victoria, but New South Wales was subsequently the scene of one still more violent and disgraceful than that of the sister Colony. This outbreak began in February, 1861, a t the gold diggings of Lambing Flat, near Yass- There had been a somewhat general combination among the European colonists for the purpose of expelling the

Chinese. The miners had formed a league for self-protection (against

SECTION Two DOCUMENTS

29

the Government, we presume) , and in the excitement and eccentricities of the occasion had petitioned the Government with the miscellaneous

programme of expulsion of the Chinese, abolition of the gold export duty, protection to native industry, and 'promulgation of the Word of

. For this time, however, the commotion was allayed without much transgression. Two hundred military with several pieces of artillery were sent up, the Chief Secretary himself proceeding to the spot in advance, and warning the miners that law and order must be enforced. The Chinese returned, and all seemed quiet again for an interval of four months, when a second and much more dreadful outbreak occurred on the same ground. This was on Sunday, the 30th of June, 1861. A large body of miners attacked the Chinese, and drove them off the diggings with the greatest violence and brutality. They attacked them with arms, taking a savage delight in cutting off or tearing away their tails, and burning and destroying their property. The police having quickly mustered, they secured some of the most riotous; but on the following Sunday the police camp was assailed by a great mob, who were bent on rescuing their comrades. The mob, however, were beaten off, although not without some loss of life and many wounds on both sides. The police, owing to the smallness of their numbers, were compelled for time to retreat, 161 reinforced by the military, who were once . . . held, when the outbreak was eiieetually quell Happily, these disgraceful proceedings have not been repeated. ..

Pa

el.

,

(iii)

'RIOT AT LAMBING FLAT'

Sydney Morning Herald, 20 July 1861. Since the departure of the troops from Lambing Flat i t has been evident to many persons resident there, that the strong feeling against the Chinese that had previously broken out i n disorder had anything but

subsided; and our Special Correspondent, who had been sent up purposely to watch the course of events, has over and over again pressed upon the public, through our columns, the necessity for largely increasing the police force on the Burrangong gold Fields, if it was intended to prevent the recurrence of scenes of brutality and violence, such as it had been his misfortune to have previously recorded. . - .

After describing an abortive minor attack on the Chinese, the Special Correspondent gives a graphic account of the mob's fury

on 30 June. At last the storm, which had been so long seen, by all but those who should have been the most attentive in their examination of the social horizon, to be impending, broke with a violence that at once woke up the sleepers from their pleasant dreams. On Sunday, the 30th June, the residents of Tipperary Gully were aroused by the cries of 'Roll 11p,' and in the course of a very short time upward of a thousand men, armed

with bludgeons and pickhandles, no firearms as yet appearing, were

30

ANTLCHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

assembled round the 'No Chinese' standard. Forming themselves in a rude kind of order of march, and with a band of music, which appears to have been thoughtfully provided for the occasion by the leaders of the

movement, at their head, shouting, yelling, and singing, the crowd of

rioters took the road to Lambing Flat, a distance of some four or five miles. Arrived there, every Chinese resident in the township on whom

hands could be laid was attacked and maltreated, the chief object of ambition being to secure the long tails of hair with which the Chinese are accustomed to ornament their heads. The main body was here joined

by numerous others, who came flocking in from all quarters, until the number assembled amounted to at least 3,000 persons. Finding themselves

so strong, and being determined to make a clean sweep of the Mongolians now that they were about it, they now turned their attention to the Chinese camp, situated 011 the spot and within the area allocated to

them by the Commissioner in accordance with the regulations previously made, and apparently agreed to by the diggers. This was at once attacked and carried, the Chinese being driven off, under circumstances of great barbarity in some cases, and in all cases without being permitted to take

with them any portion of their property. It has been said also that many of them were robbed of various amounts of gold and cash, and that, mixed up with the crowd of rioters were numbers of women and children all actively engaged in plundering the property of the runaways of everything valuable, or convertible, prior to carrying the remainder to the enormous fires that were kept up with such kind of fuel. In the

meantime the band, placed in a conspicuous position, enlivened the scene by playing spirit~stit*ring airs, to an accompaniment of yells and shouts that would have done credit to a New Zealand war dance. Excited with their triumph, heated with their violence towards unresisting captives, and possibly thirsting* for the plunder, of which this last attack had given them a taste, a wild and savage yell of joy was raised, when some one suggested Back Greek as the next spot to visit. Shouting, firing (for guns were now pretty generally produced) , singing, laughing, and

cheering, the body of rioters moved oft towards Back Creek, a locality about six miles from where they then were, and where it was known that there were several hundreds of Chinese a t work. Information of the projected attack was, however, taken over to the Chinese in this locality,

who, hastily packing up the most valuable and portable portions of their property, hurriedly made of? from the spot. The rioters were not long behind them, and on coming up, a savage yell of disappointment rose up from the mob when they found that their prey had escaped. The tents, goods, 8cc., left behind were fired, after having been carefully looked over for plunder, and such articles as would not burn were destroyed

by being broken with axes. Whilst this had been going on, a number of rioters, who were mounted on horseback, galloped forward on the track of the retreating Mongols, overtook them, not much more than a mile away, headed them, and rounded them up in the same way as a shepherd-

dog would do a flock of sheep. Information of the surround was sent off to

those behind, who, eager for their prey, were already on the road.

31

SECTION TWO DOCUMENTS

Here ensued a scene such as, thank heaven! it seldom falls to the lot of a British journalist to record. Unarmed, defenceless, and unresisting Chinese were struck down in the most brutal manner by bludgeons provided for the occasion, and by pick handles. The previous excitement had done its work, and now the wretched Mongols were openly and unblushingly searched for valuables, and robbery was committed without the slightest attempt at concealment. Very few of the poor creatures here attacked escaped with their pigtails, none of them without injury of some kind, whilst every article of the property they had endeavored to take with them was plundered of all that was valuable, and then burnt. Some of the acts of barbarism said to have been committed here were such, that Englishmen can scarce be brought to credit that their countrymen could be guilty of them-for who amongst the British people could

ever believe that men of their own country-Britons,

would take the

Chinese pigtails with the scalp attached. That.this was done in more than one instance there can be no doubt, since the possessors of these trophies made rio concealment of them, but rather prided themselves on

their possession.

Liv)

PETITION BY ROCKY RIVER MINERS

[To N.S.VV- Legislative Assembly, printed in V. Tb' P., 1858, pp. 947-8.] The Petition of the undersigned Miners and other Residents of the Rocky River Gold Fields, in Public Meeting assembledRESPECTFULLY

SH1§WETH:

That your Petitioners duly appreciate the Act lately passed by your Honorable Immigrant persuaded preventing

House imposing a tax of ten pounds on each Chinese as an important step in the right direction, but are fully that such a measure will be totally inoperative, either in the immigration of the Chinese, or in benefiting the financial

resources of the Colony.

That Petitioners having better means of knowing the CoilS arising from an overwhelming immigration of Chinese than your Honorable House can possibly have, are fully persuaded that it will further the best interests of the Colony to put a complete stop to their immigration to Australia, and we shall never rest satisfied until such measures be adopted as shall totally prevent their further introduction to the Colony. That Petitioners would strongly urge on your Honorable House the expediency of the 'Chinese Immigration Bill' coming into operation a t once, as before the first of January, 1859, (when it is proposed the Act shall come into force,) 20,000 Chinese will certainly be added to the population of this country, but should your Honorable House not agree to the above suggestion, then Petitioners mbst respectfully request that a sutiicient police force shall be appointed on the Gold Fields for the protection of life and property, so that in the event of a Collision between the Chinese and the Christian population, your Petitioners may

not be subjected to loss of time in the support of law and order.

32

ANTI-CHINES18 MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

That your Petitioners solemnly declare that should your Honorable House either not put a stop to the further immigration of Chinese, or grant them the protection they have a right to expect, then they shall arm themselves for their own defence, and establish a Committee of

Vigilance it aid of the civil power, as they are determined that the atrocities committed at Sarawak shall not be repeated in this Colony. That Petitioners would deeply regret being compelled to adopt this extreme course, but believe they have no other alternative, as they are determined, at all hazards, to maintain British §upremacl in this Colony.,

and keep the Mongolians within proper bounds. That 'Petitioners regard with apprehension and alarm the daily arrival OI] the Australian shores of hundreds of Chinese, who inunediately. repair to the Gold Fields, and whose mode of 'working is most injurious to Petitioners, as well as destructive to the production Of the auriferous M

.4

a.

-`

deposits, by their careless and reckless mode of operation, which in some

instances, by filling shafts with water and tailings, prevent large portions of ground from being properly worked, and in other cases they frequently monopolize the whole ground to themselves. That Petitioners consider the Chinese a very ineligible class of immigrants, and not peaceably disposed, as has been represented, many cases having occurred on this and other Gold Fields requiring the police authorities to disarm them, to prevent further bloodshed. Also, that their general filthy habits are repulsive to the feelings of the Christian population. Further, they, as heathens, systematically desecrate the Sabbath Day, not only by purchasing their weekly supplies, but also by gambling, which is carried on by them to a great extent. That already on the Rocky River the Chinese outnumber tlle Chris-

tian population by a very large majority, and their numbers are increasing by new arrivals every day, and at the present rate of progression, Petitioners

believe in less than one month the relative numbers of

Chinese to whites will be in proportion of six to one. In several instances

of late they have exhibited unmistakeable symptoms of hostility towards your Petitioners, and it is presumed that as their strength and numbers so will their hostile feelings increase. Your Petitioners therefore pray that your Honorable House will take these premises into your most serious consideration, and put a stop, as soon as practicable, to all Chinese immigration, and in the meantime grant us such an adequate police force as will obviate the necessity of our arming ourselves for the support of law and order. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. [Here follow 413 Signatures]

The Chinese Immigration Restriction Bill of 1858, to which the above petition misleadingly refers as an 'Act', was rejected by the New South Wales Legislative Council. By 1861 the growth of Chinese numbers and the outbreak of dangerous tumults on the

goldfields overcame the opposition of the upper house. However.

SECTION Two DOCUMENTS

33

with the rapid decline of alluvial mining and the dwindling of the Chinese millorities, the legislatures of South Australia, Victoria and New 'South Wnlefa repealed their a n t i Chlneee laws

in

1851 1869 65

and 1867. The implications of this repeal have yet to be fully examined, but it may be conjectured that it owed much to the appeal of liberal doctrine and to a disinclination to embarrass British diplomacy in China.

M

'THE ANTI-CHINESE BILL'

[Sgminey Morning Hamid, 15 April ]858.] To the Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald.

SIR

...

I see that our Government has introduced a law admirably calculated to create for this country and for Australasia an enmity of which no man can sec the end. I allude to the bill for imposing a tax on immigrants from China. I have read the debate with regret and shame. I did think that the Assembly contained men who would have risked some vulgar popularity to denounce it as a flagrant iniquity, a mean exercise of power, a pitiful extortion, degrading to the colony. None can believe that the tax is expedierlt,--none says it is just. To take money from people without giving them anything for it, is not honest-to take it on pretences which none believe, is a n imposition. 'Why not give the bill its proper name, and describe it as an act to obtain money from a people who can make no noise about it?

Such a law to repel French, German, Russian, or foreigners of any other nation, is not attempted, because it is known that no other than the Chinese would submit to it. Shall it be said that we sanction a shameful act solely because it is safe. But it seems to be forgotten that a day may come when the Chinese, on great provocation, may undertake a war which other nations would undertake on very little provocation. Much as some of our wise legis-

lators despise Chinamen, it is known to some that they are by no means a despicable people. Little inquiry shows that they arc obedient to law, industrious, and temperate, friendly to friends, not hostile to strangers, ingenious, teachable, and, as a people, educated beyond our own, for I believe it is a fact that all can read and write. Now, this people, whom we rather inconsistently profess both to despise and to fear, want only one man to enable them to resent our

insolence and injustice. They want nothing but an Emperor with an Englishlnan's head on his shoulders to make them the greatest nation on . the face of the earth. It is yet to be hoped that this country will not incur the odium of sanctioning a law which must soon be known only as a stain, a degrada-

..

tion and a danger to us. The Assembly has acted wisely in requiring time to deliberate upon it. Let us hope that common sense and common justice are still stronger than ignorant prejudices, cowardly fears, and

shameless cupidity. The Assembly will very properly resent the bill as an

34:

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE

FIRST PHASE

insult to themselves, when they remonstrate against the Victorian legisla-

tion on the same subject. China as a friend, may do us much good, as an enemy she might soon learn how to do us much harm. I am, Sir, your most obedient, NEW SOUTH WALES.

(vi) CHINESE IMMIGRATION-PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Extracts from the Sydney Morning Herald report of 21 May 1858 of the debate in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly on the Chinese Immigration Restriction Bill, which was rejected by the Legislative Council.

..

He knew an argument was used with regard MR. MARTIN said . to the gold-fields, that the Chinese worked more continuously, and kept

themselves together in large numbers, and took greater pains, and were

more likely to develop that branch of our resources than our own people. It did appear to him that there were much higher considerations than these. (Hear, hear.) They had not come to the colony to settle

with a view that the present individuals should accumulate the largest amount of money in the smallest time, nor did that operate with the mind of the Legislature. They came here, not only to develop the resources of the colony, but also to establish an Anglo-Saxon population. (Cheers.) Suppose that ten thousand Chinese did more good in getting money than their having the same number of Europeans- Suppose it could be proved to demonstration, that by inviting those people they could make a larger amount of money, would it be an argument why they should invite them to come? (No, no.) He said it was no argument, and the first interest to be looked to, was to settle an Anglo-Saxon population (cheers), or if they liked it better, an European population,

and a Christian population- (cheers) -a population .of similar language and ideas, and who had a numbcrof ideas in common-a population capable of understanding Constitutional Government (hear, hear): a population whose ideas were similar to their own (cheers). He sub-

mitted that the Chinese had no ideas in common with ourselves-except the mere physical animal enjoyment common to all mankind? (Hear, hear.) He did regret that in that point of view so serious an evil should be allowed, as having half the population of an inferior race. DR. Bowman said, however in effieienlly he might be able to express his sentiments, he always would oppose what he thought unfair and ulireasoiiable, and he contended that the imposition of a tax upon Chinarncn, which was not imposed upon other people, was unfair and . He believed the proposed tax was particularly unjust, un-English. because the Chinese were not only industrious and submissive, but they were developing the resources of the country in proportion to their labours. (Hear, hear.) Then, there was also another reason why the Chinese should not be excluded. China, he believed, contained a popula-

..

tion of about 300,000,000, and it was the wish. of every hon. member that

35

SECTION TWO DOCUMENTS

these 300,000,000 should be Christianised that they should have European wants which would beget a trade, advantageous to England particularly -perhaps to the world. Now he thought the best way to Christianise the Chinese would be to get some of them into a Christian country where, having observed the habits of the people, and seen the advantage of practising them, they might go back into their own country and report what they had seen. He believed this was far before any missionary attempts, and would be the very best way of converting the Chinese to Christianity-awakening them to European desires, and opening a wide channel for British trade. Extracts from the Sydney Morning Herald report on 24 October 1861 of the debate in the New South Wales Legislative Council on

the Chinese Immigration Restriction and .Regulation Bill. This bill was passed by the Council and received Royal Assent. For details of its provisions and of the Secretary of State's views, see document (viii). MR. CAMPBELL had not, as yet, said much in reference to the bill now before the House but B Q the hon nlemher npbnsne Mr Darnall had moved an amendment on the third reading, he would state some of his reasons for opposing that amendment, and for voting in favour of the He considered that these Chinese were a most undesirable class of

persons to be here introduced, for like all other nations of Shernetic

origin, they shewed a natural indisposition to amalgamate with the faphetian race, and so remained strangers amongst us. They came to this country without their -women, and that too was a most objectionable

circumstance. They could scarcely be looked upon as immigrants coming here to benefit their condition and to assist in promoting the general advancement of the colony, for they came here, most of them, merely to dig for gold for countrymen left behind them

in

C`h1na to whom the

gold they produced was by them constantly remitted. He did not see what he could possibly do but vote in favour of a bill which imposed salutary restrictions upon this most undesirable species of immigration. There were a great many more of them even now in the country than he at all liked to see, and a very large number in the immediate neigh-

bourhood of his own residence. Although they did not appear to have any of their countrywomen with them he regretted to say that they were changing the appearance of many of the children in that quarter, most of whom seemed to he getting a disagreeable Mongolian squint. (Loud laughter.) It was all very well, of course, for those who admired that sort of thing, but he did not like that or any other of the characteristics of the race. I-Ie preferred his own, the Japhetian race, and did not desire to see any such an admixture as he had referred to. . . looked upon the Chinese as MR. PLUNKETT . most undesirable class of immigrants, as being not likely to add to that class of the population which it was desirable to increase. On the contrary, their presence

.

a.

_.

must be attended with great mischief. Granting that the Chinese did

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE

36

FIRST PHASE

increase the revenue and the yield of gold, the social evils that arose from the presence of that peculiar race more than counterbalanced those benefits. Years ago, the question of transportation was decided, and no doubt transportation did much to advance the colony; but the colony having become free, the continuance of that system was found to be

undesirable, though it was admitted that by still receiving convicts certain advantages would be derived. All the great statesmen of England had been in favour of the continuance of transportation; and if we were now to take their advice we should probably renew the system. He thought the social aspect of this question ought to weigh far more than the commercial advantages which the retention of the Chinese might confer. He had lately been in Victoria, and had heard nothing but as to the advantages which had resulted from the working of the Chinese law; excepting that there being no such law in this colony the Chinese had evaded the tax by going to Victoria through New South Wales. The working of this measure would, no doubt, develop the necessity of the

colonies being united in some federal action. (vii)

T H E SYDNEY MORNING HERALD'S vlE,ws

[Leading Article, 11 February 1861.] The long silence of the Government respecting the proceedings a t Lainbing Flat will be there interpreted one way-assent. The spirit which

shrinks from any unpopular duty is one of the characteristic results of democratic ascendancy. It is in vain to appeal to the principles of justice -to the rights of humanity-the claims of law-the sanctity of public

faith. These are powerless before that cowardly spirit which cringes to the lowest of the people. Could any civilised Government be found that would not vindicate itself by declaring at the outset, and in decided terms, its determination to protect to the utmost of its means defenceless strangers, who have on their side right, humanity, and law. The history of the Lambing Flat is an illustration of the brutal temper which prevails among the migratory bands of diggers. We gladly distinguish then; from a very respectable class, who have given to gold mining

the aspect of a settled industry, and whose conduct has been honest and fair. The Lambing Flat was discovered 'as a gold-field by the Chinese themselves. They were entitled by law to settle there; they obtained and paid for the miner's right; they were put in possession by the

Government. No one pretends they have forfeited that protection which any man who lives under the English Hag has a right to expect. The intruders, if any deserve the name where all have a defined and equal

right, are the white men, for we will not disgrace our country by calling them Englishmen.

The diggers who lead on these outrages compliment several members of the Lower House, as their sure supporters, and perhaps they are not mistaken, but we will still cling to the hope that in spite of party views and party cries there is left in the Assembly enough English feeling to

SECTION Two DOCUMENTS

37

protect the Chinese now in this country against the savage oppression of the vandals-many themselves foreigners-and who have no other right

on our gold-fields than is given by the laws they violate. [Leading Article, 13 April 1861, commenting on the Cowper Government's Chinese Immigration Restriction and Regulation BilL] It is quite possible the time may not be remote when, in sel£-protection, it will be necessary to stop the Chinese immigration altogether. There can be no question that, by the law of nations, we have a right to prevent the intrusion of any people whose residence among us would be inimical to our well-being. But it should never be forgotten by states-

men that small advantages are dearly bought by the sacrifice of great principles, or that one of the most important in modern times is the free ingress and egress of people from all civilised countries, and their equal protection by law so long as they themselves respect the law- The remote dangers of physical deterioration are really too childish to he argued. It is quite a moot question as to what type of the human race may challenge the highest attributes. 'We all naturally prefer our own, and thus the principle of exclusion would be carried to the most oppressive lengths were the right of entrance to be regulated by the impulses of a mob. We are quite sure that no Englishman would be permitted to establish himself in some parts of Ireland, and no Irishman would be allowed in some parts of England to fix his abode. National antipathies seem to be the rule. The more lofty spirit which reverences human nature, respects the laws of Providence, and sees in the intercourse of nations the means for their universal elevation, is limited to but few; and they probably, from the very qualities they possess, but little fitted to command the suffrages of the multitude. The most popular course men can take is'to watch every prejudice-to nourish and foster antipathies-to concentrate upon some unfortunate race or class of men the hatred of the masses, and then to win acclamations by pandering to principles and passions which deform our nature and bring us to the level of brutes and fiends.

...

[Leading Article, 21 September 1861, on the acquittal of the Flat rioters] Lambilag a

The acquittal of the rioters for the murderous attack on the Chinese was expected by everybody. A noble principle embraced in our jury law

_

which requires that twelve men, indifferently taken from their fellowcitizens, shall say, on their oath-guilty, before a criminal shall be coudemned, places it in the power of one man to resist the clearest evidence and to secure impunity to the most atrocious crimes. The result of the trial shows that a large mass of our fellow-men are out of the protection of the law. That their lives, their property, and their substance are at the mercy of the I fob, that all the means a t the

disposal of Government are ineffectual to prevent any atrocity which may be planned openly and carried out in the face of day by the basest

Of mankind.

15:

=~.»

ANTI-CHINESE MOVEMENTS-THE FIRST PHASE

38

We must recall to our readers the facts of the case, as they are symptomatic of our political and social condition. It will prevent any man from blindly trusting his life and peace to the regular action of Government, when he is exposed to the popular dislike. In England there is a general impression that when men do nothing but what the law permits, they will be protected in their calling; that when they are directly authorised, licensed, and instructed to take a certain course by Government, they will be defended; that if they are attacked by armed

mobs, their property destroyed, their persons wounded, their lives e threatened, they may run to the courts as to a sure asylum. colony it is not so. On the contrary, the Chinese have been attacked by armed men, and a series of robberies, outrages, and murderous injuries committed in open day. The attempt to hold in custody two men for those offences was the signal for an assault on the public cilices, gaol, and constabulary, by armed rioters, whose cowardly attempt to shoot down the constables, condemns them and their abettors to lasting infamy.

(viii)

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES GOVERNOR SIR JOHN YOUNG

TO

[Government Archives 4/829.1 'Chinese Immigration 1880-188121

Downing Street, 26 February 1862. SIR,

I have to acknowledge your Despatch of 22nd November last, No.

87, enclosing an Act passed by the Legislature of New South Wales, entitled, 'An Act to :regulate and restrict the Irnrnigrurion of Chinese." By this Act it is provided that no ship shall introduce Chinese into

New South 'Wales i n a greater proportion than I to every 10 tons of her burthen, and that for each Chinese arriving in the Colony, whether by sea or land, a tax of Ten pounds shall be paid- Those already in the Colony are however exempted, on obtaining a certificate from the nearest Clerk of Petty Sessions or Gold Commissioner, before the 28th

Of the present month. It is further provided that no certificates of naturalization shall in future be issued to Chinese. You state that you felt so much doubt as to the policy of this Act that

you were at list disposed to reserve it for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure, but that as similar Acts passed in Victoria, had received Her Majesty's assent, and as your Attorney General did not concur in the objections you took to some of the provisions, you decided not to withhold your assent from the Act, or to delay its coming into operation. The provisions which appeared to you specially objectionable, and to which you called the particular attention of the Attorney General, are those which restrict the number to be brought in any ship and

prohibit naturalization for the future. I perfectly understand and appreciate the sentiments which indisposed you to give your assent to this Act, without previously submitting it for the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. It cannot be denied

SECTION

Two DOCUMENTS

39

that exceptional legislation intended to exclude from any part of Her la-Iajesty's Dominions the subjects of a State a t peace with Her Majesty, is highly objectionable in principle, and that recent transactions with the Chinese Government render it very inopportune to adopt such a measure towards Chinese subjects at this moment. Nevertheless Her Majesty's Government cannot shut their eyes to the exceptional nature of Chinese Immigration, and the vast moral evil which accompanies it. The entire absence of women among the immigrants, their addiction to

the peculiar vices thence arising, their paganism and idolatrous habits must make them, where they bear any considerable proportion to the general population, a misfortune to any Colony situated as are the Australian Colonies. In New South Wales the Chinese Immigrants amount, as I understand, to about 21,000, or about 1 in 16 of the whole population, and they form, of course, a very much larger proportion of the adult males- I a m compelled to admit that strong as are the objections, i n point of principle, to legislation of this description, I could not advise Her Majesty to refuse her assent to a measure which the Legislature of New South Wales consider necessary to protect the Colony against so undeniable an evil. 1 have NEWCASTLE.

Coloured Labour Experimerits in Queensland /'

(H)

THE INDIAN COOLIE LABOUR ISSUE Reprinted, with grateful acknowledgments to the author, I. N. MOLES, and the Society, from the Royal Historical Society of

Queensland journal, vol. v, 1957, pp. 1345-55.

"Then ueensland was separated from New South Vllales in 1859, there were two major problems of immediate concern to the new a critical lack of efficient colony's progress. These were: -need to expand and rationalise an laboué and second, economy which was bound, almost exclusively, to the pastoral industry. An adequate solution to each had urgently to be found before the orderly development of the colony could proceed. It was early recognised that Queensland could not remain dependent upon one product, nor even upon solely pastoral products, and be-ing a country whose territories lay entirely within the tropical or sub-tropical belts, the cultivation of sugar and cotton offered immediate possibilities for swift agricultural development. In the circumstances, the Government had little hesitation in choosing cotton as the crop which would be the most lucrative.

This was a time when civil war appeared imminent in the United States, and England, likely to be deprived of her chief source of raw cotton, encouraged Queensland to expend her energies in the cultivation of this plant. Since early experiments had shown that both climate and soil were adaptable to successful cotton growing, the Queensland Government reacted to English promptings with 1

See Reports of the Queensland Agents-General for Emigration, passim, in

Votes and Proceedings. In the 'sixties and 'seven ties, petitions and arguments in favour of coolie immigration to the colony all stressed the shortage of labour

in Queensland.

SECTION THREE READINGS

41

alacrity, and in 1860 premiums were offered in the form of land orders for the successful sale of cotton. At once, however, the difficulty of obtaining sufficient l a b o r even for the task of clearing the coastal lands interposed a redoubtable obstacle between decision and effective action. In order to compete with American cotton it was realised that the Government would have to encourage the cultivation of far larger tracts of land than was possible at the hands of small farmers-even if it seemed likely (which it did not) that sufliciently large numbers of the latter could be brought to the colony. Thus, the plantation system at once suggested itself as being eminently suitable for cotton production in Queensland.

However, such plantations (being too large) could not be worked, much less cleared, by their owners, neither could the work be done by European l a b o r e r s because sufficient numbers of these were not available-while even had there been an adequate supply, the high rates of wages would have been prohibitive. This was a consideration which assumed vast importance when it was realised that cotton would have to be cultivated in Queensland at a considerably lower cost than in the United States in order to compensate for the heavier freights from Queensland-the more distant country from England. It seemed then that there was no possibility of successful com-

petition with America unless the importation of some form of cheap l a b o r was permitted-at the very least until the coastal areas were cleared and reduced to an easily workable condition. '\A?hilst anxious to encourage European immigration as largely as possible, we are convinced that for the development of the "Central" and "Northern" portions of the territory under Your l8xcellency"s Government, the introduction of coolie labour is indispensable. With the command of that element, we believe that we could successfully compete with the sugargrowing colonies of Mauritius, Java and Manila, and ultimately with the U.S.A. in the growth of cotton.'2 Accordingly agitation commenced both in Queensland and in England for the introduction of coolies from India., . ... the Queensland Assembly received several petitions from various sections of the community, all advocating the use of coolie l a b o r on the cotton fields of Queensland. They pointed out that the ,growth of sugar and cotton would be productive of great benefits to both Queensland and the mother country, and that ...

9

Memorandum from Sir Charles Nicholson and Landed Proprietors, Stock-

holders and others. Q.V.&P. (1861), p. 629.

42

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS IN QUEENSLAND

coolie l a b o r was indispensable. Not only were the coolies 'a race habituated to work a t field l a b o r under a tropical sun', but the petitioners were further of the opinion that the introduction of HIS Asiatic race for the purpose of tropical agriculture would in

no way interfere with the fair claims or prospects of the European immigrant-~on the contrary, it might advance his position by giving increased value to property of every kind. 'The introduction of Asiatic labour would be to Queensland what machinery has been to England, elevating the European l a b o r e r to the rank of a mechanic, and the mechanic to that of an employer, and contributing in a marvelous degree to the well-being of every class of society.'3

The 'Crown Lands' Alienation Act, 1860', which unlocked the coastal lands reserved by the New South l=Vales Government, removed the first obstacle in the way of tropical agriculture, but until the second obstacle (lack of l a b o r ) was also removed, the

third (capital) would not be attracted. It remained then for the Queensland Government, by some means, to provide the l a b o r

necessary for the opening up of agricultural lands. Disregarding the appeals of a number of the residents of Brisbane and Ipswich who were opposed to the idea of coloured l a b o r , the first Parliament of Queensland appointed a Select Committee to investigate the whole question of coolie immigration to Queensland. In issuing its report, Qie Committee advised that the immigration of Europeans should be assisted by public funds, but that 'no restriction should be thrown in the way of planters desirous of procuring Asiatic l a b o r at their own cost and under the proper supervision of the Government. In recognising that both types of immigration could proceed simultaneously, the way was left open for the introduction of coolies.

However, merely to place no hindrance in the way of the introduction of coloured labourers was not to ensure an immediate place for them in the colony's economy. Coolies were the particular

type at that time desired and according to Indian Government regulations they could not be obtained by private individuals of another country unless the Government of that country first regulated their introduction. This proviso, apart from being of particular concern to those who envisaged the unfettered immigration of Indian l a b o r , might easily have given pause to the Queensland Government's apparent willingness to formulate comprehensive regulations--for it was not to be forgotten that "Bowen to Colonial Secretary, 6/l/ISESO; quoting 'A Letter to the Colonists

of Queensland'.

43

SECTION THREE READINGS

the initial arguments for colored l a b o r had rested substantially on the plea that coolies would be introduced privately and without constituting any drain on the public revenue. Nevertheless, the colonial Government responded to the concerted pressure which was being brought to bear upon it, and during the second session of the first Parliament legislation was passed which gave the force of law to any regulations which the Governor might issue for the introduction and protection of labourers from British India.

In accordance with the terms of the act, regulations were issued by the Governor-in-Council on February 11, 1863, legalising all contracts made with coolies after March 1;'* it seemed that the dual problem of finding a plentiful supply of l a b o r and l a b o r suited for work in tropical regions had been finally solved: the squatters would obtain shepherds while the coastal areas would be cleared and cotton and sugar made the staple products of Queensland.

It would seem that the petitioners of Brisbane and Ipswich comprised the- only strong element of opposition to the scheme inside the colony. When the passage of the Coolie Act appeared imminent, they appealed over the head of the Queensland

Government to the Queen herself, praying that the Government of the colony be restrained from permitting the introduction of Indian coolies, and at the same time questioning the legality of framing regulations to the Governor-in-Council. They received no satisfaction. The Duke of Newcastle, Secretary of State for the Colonies, replied that 'no sufficient grounds are shown for depriving Queensland of a supply of Indian labour if the community at large desires to have it . . and as the legislature represents the

.

community, no constitutional principle has

been violated

by

leaving the details to the executive'. This ended the only significant move to prevent the introduction of coolies, though it fore-

shadowed the future opposition to Kanaka labour. 4 The periods of contract were not to exceed three years, and the immigrant was obliged to bind himself LO 'industrial residence' in the colony for a further period of two years after his contract was completed. To prevent a repetition of the Kanaka fiasco in New South Wales, these contracts were made subject to the provisions of the 'Masters and Servants Act, 1861 ', i.e. they were to be enforceable on both employer and coolie. Special agents for Queensland .employers were to he licensed by the Queensland Government and were to be under the control of the Government Emigration Agent of the Indian Presidency in which they were stationed. A scale of wages and rations was to be arranged with the Indian Government. Finally, the possibility of friction between coolies and aborigines may be seen in Clause 43 whereby permission to employ coolies 'was to be given only to persons resident in the settled portions of the colony.

44

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS IN QUEENSLAND

As soon as the Indian Government had given its tentative approval to the regulations promulgated by the Governor of Queensland, it seemed merely* a question OE time before coolies would begin to arrive in the colony. Yet, an eleventh-hour develop~ rent prevented the scheme from being brought to fruition. Even with the permission which the Indian Government had given, in principle, to coolie immigration, certain details had still to be finalised; above all, emigration agents had to be appointed in accordance with Indian regulations. At once a n impasse was reached over the salary of the emigration agent to be appointed.

Not only would the Indian Government refuse to allow the agent to receive payment proportionate to the number of emigrants sent, but it would require that a fixed salary be voted from Queensland Consolidated Revenue before such agent would be

allowed to act at all. The Queensland Government was not willing to make any such provision. By this rejection of Indian terms (the more so in view of the pains which had been taken from §ha'Qu eensland end to legalise coolie labour), the Queensland Government had mange uvred itself into a cut-de-sac which might have brought embarrassing political consequences, That this did not happen was due solely to the fact that public attention in the meantime had been attracted to an experiment with another, more easily obtainable,

and even cheaper class of cheap colored l a b o r . These experiments which arrested the attention of the colonists were made by some South Coast planters and consisted of the trial of Kanakas as labourers for tropical agriculture. The sugar planters who had gone ahead and invested money in different parts .of the colony in the belief that the Act of 1862 would /onward their interests and provide the required l a b o r , now

turned in a body t0'obtain the Kanakas--the crucial factor in their decision being the fact that the services of the Kanakas could be bought at a much cheaper rate than the Indian coolies.

The coolie Act of 1862 was allowed to lapse and was effectively superseded by the passing of the 'Polynesian Labourers' Act, 1868'. Happily for the Queensland Government, the Kanaka had thus led it from a discomforting impasse. For the time being the question of Indian coolie l a b o r in Queensland, if not entirely forgotten, was pushed into the background. Not until 1874, it seems, was it revived again. On April 7 of that year john Murtagh Macrossan presented a petition from certain employers of l a b o r , resident in the Kennedy

SECTION THREE READINGS

45

district of North Queensland, representing the advantages of importing coloured labour to assist in rendering productive vast tracts of agricultural lands in the northern districts 'which from the heat of the climate and other causes could not be successfully cultivated The petitioners prayed that the Act of 1862 for

obtaining coolies from British India, which had already been enacted by the Government and had received Imperial sanction, should a t once be put into active operation by the appointment of an Emigration Agent in accordance with the Indian Government regulations. During the course of the ensuing debate, it became clear what the principal motives were underlying the reactivation of the coolie issue-particularly from the arguments put forward by Fitzgerald* himself. It does not seem that the planters wished merely to supplement the Kanaka l a b o r supply, rather that they were disso tisfied with many aspects of the operation of that system. Fitzgerald first mentioned the language difficulty--that the Kanakas, brought from so many dil-'ferent islands, were there-

fore very difficult to manage. Secondly, he drew the Assembly's attention to the difficulty of procuring the islanders without spending a great deal of time and money in going from island to island, and that consequently the planters 'would rather have l a b o r e r s from British India because they could be more certainly calculated upon, and would not entail so much trouble and annoyance as there was with the islanders'. In other words, the Kanaka system was not proving as cheap as the planters had orig ally thought. Above all, they were becoming increasingly disenchanted with the complications which proceeded from Queensland's having to recruit the labour, with all the attendant moral responsibilities. In order to give his polemic a more persuasive force, Fitzgerald repeated the conventional, disinterested argument in favour of colored l a b o r . He referred to the rich tracts of country along the northeast coast which could not be worked by European l a b o r because of the intense moist heat; he alluded to the huge amount of capital already invested in the sugar industry (little short of a million pounds sterling) and declared that unless the planters obtained assistance of the kind they desired, enabling them to continue their operations, the industry would surely decay; he mentioned that the introduction of Indian coolies * A planter member of the Assembly who introduced the :motion providing for the implementation of the Indian Coolie Acts.. pt.]

46

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS

I N QUEENSLAND

would not put white out of jobs-on the contrary, they would provide further employment for whites as experience had shown in the case of the Kanakas, he charged that any agitation against coloured l a b o r was carried on by only a few individuals mainly confined to Brisbane, whilst no prejudice or agitation could be found in the North where the colored l a b o r was actually being employed. Finally, be pointed out that employers of l a b o r were free to import Chinese in any numbers, but that they did not wish to do so because of the great antipathy on the part of the digging population of the colony to the introduction of Chinese. They would therefore prefer having in the colony 'those who were, after all, already their own fellow subjects'.5 The arguments advanced against FitzgeraldS motion, if not so seductive, or even so extensive, were nonetheless fundamental and reflected the doubts and fears of a rapidly growing segment of public opinion. Such opposition focused its attack on the whole question of the acceptance in se of colored l a b o r and of

the incalculable effects which it would certainly have on the life of the colony and the character of its institutions: merely to argue the 'eeonornid pros and cons of Kanaka or Indian l a b o r on the entirely ad hoc assumption that coloured l a b o r was necessary, was to avoid essential issues. The Colonial Secretary, Macalister, speaking against Fitz erald's motion, devoted a great part of his

speech to this g-..I that the establishment of a system of coolie immigration would at once have the effect of Q;

W.-lU'

stopping European immigration to the colony. Furthermore, it was planned that Indians were to be introduced only as temporary

laborers and not as permanent settlers, they would therefore be of no use ultimately in settling the colony-even if they were desirable as settlers, which they certainly were not. In a word, the

Government (of Macalister) and the community at large would continue to denounce any system of Indian coolie labour~ especially if they were induced to remain in Queensland--since

the encouragement of such immigration would mean the introduction of a 'servile and inferior race'. To a large extent, Macalister's argument lost its force because he misinterpreted the feelings of the Assembly in regard to the '*This attitude of lmdisgttised animosity towards Chinese labour was a factor CUIIIIHOII to every section of Queensland society--the planters included. In this respect, colonial opinion had not undergone any change since 1860'

the danger of the 'Yellow Peril' was felt to be sufficiently acute to outweigh the possible advantages which might be got from cheap Chinese' labour. See Q..V.€="P. (1875) , vol. 2, pp. 555, et seq.

47

SECTION THREE READINGS

whole question of coloured labour. Reduced to the most simple terms, his appeal rested on the conviction that colored l a b o r

should be opposed on every conceivable ground. To Macalister, the social and economic effects of a coolie l a b o r system-the two being quite inseparable-would be productive of nothing but harm to the colony's standard of living, and the introduction of an 'inferior' race would progressively impair Queensland's democratic institutions.

However, in 1874-, an argument of this kind, coloured at it was with considerations of race and the inviolability of a white society, possessed only embryonic potency, though pushed with conviction, it had not the political power of persuasion which similar arguments in later years acquired. On the contrary, most people were still convinced that the principle of coloured l a b o r in some form was incontestable on purely economic grounds. Thus, the inflamtnable issue at hand was, in reality, a difference to be found in the camp of the protagonists of colored l a b o r : between those who advocated c o l o r e d labour as cheap l a b o r per se (that is to say, l a b o r which riced not necessarily be confined either to the tropical area of the colony or to the sugar industry), and those who condoned colored l a b o r as being essential for tropical agriculture (that is to say, l a b o r which should be restricted to the tropics and to the sugar industry in such a way as not to compete with white labour on an open market OI' to endanger the living standards of the colony as a whole). Ironically enough, it was not Macalister, but a Northerner,

Macrossan, who seized on these basic issues, divested all arguments of their superfluous rhetoric, and laid bare the sharp, though hitherto concealed, dichotomy between the several vested interests concerned. In doing so, he split the North, pushed public opinion a little further into the an ii-colour camp, and turned into positive

channels the amorphous 'liberal' sentiment which eventually put an end to the entire system of colored l a b o r .

Speaking late in the debate, he admitted had come to the House that night, it had b

even when he intention

of

support Fitz.s8erald's motion. However, when two squatting members, Ivory and Morehead, had supported it simply as a source of cheap l a b o r (obviously looking forward to its extension beyond the cane Iields), he was forced to change his mind. Quite emphatically, Macrossan said that he would not countenance coloured if the honorable competition with European l a b o r , '. member for Bowen, in bringing forward his motion, could so

..

manage it as to confine this class of l a b o r to the sugar industry

48

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS I N QUEENSLAND

and to that portion of the colony which, it was admitted, was unsuited for European labour, then he should vote for it, but on no other condition could he reconcile himself to do so'. Coolies

he would have, but only so long as they were kept within bounds and certainly not at all once there was a chance of their operating beyond the cane fields and so endangering standards of white labour in other industries. Obviously, 'while not even the northern members could agree, Fitzgerald's motion had no hope of success. It was defeated by eighteen votes to twelve, and the coolie question was thereby forced into abeyance until the Conservatives came into othce in

1878. Moles goes on to describe the Mcllwraitlt- Macrossan government's compromise legislation £ 1881. This sought to placate the less extreme opponents of colored l a b o r by bringing in Indian coolies wléaas would be compelled by penal provisions either to remain indentured in tropical agriculture or accept repatriation. But, as S. W. Griffith appreciated, such conditions were to prove unacceptable to the Government of India. (See Griffith's letter to the Cover-

nor of 1 April 1885, reprinted as document (iii) .) While in power in 1886 GriIIi tl1's liberal government removed the Indian Coolie Acts from the Statute Books.

(b)

KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND Reprinted, with grateful acknowledgment to the author, B. H-

MOLESWORTH,

and the Society, from the Royal Historical

Society of Queensland journal, vol. 1, no. 3, 1917, pp. 1413.

The first kanakas brought to Queensland arrived in the schooner

Don Juan, on August 14th, 1863. The man responsible for this first shipload was Captain Robert Towns. Formerly he had been a merchant and shipper in Sydney, and his business caused him to make several trading voyages to some of the Pacific islands. While 011 these voyages he had employed South Sea Islanders on his vessels and in other ways, and learning soon to estimate the worth of these men, decided to repeat Boyd's experiment, while at the same time attempting to avoid the causes of the latter's failure. He decided to avoid the exemptions from t h e New South "Tales Masters and Servants Act, and also the Southern cold by taking the islanclers to Queensland. He therefore acquired land on the Logan River,

§espatched a n agent to obtain

islanders for him. This agent, Mr- Ross Levin, made a successful

SECTION THREE READINGS

49

voyage and reached Moreton Bay on August 1A1th, with 67

...

l a b o r e r s on board. From Brisbane the natives were taken by Captain Towns to his land on the Logan River, and there set to work on the cotton plantation which he was making. Sleeping huts and a large mess room were erected, and the men at once settled down to their new mode of lite. The wages stipulated in their agreements were lil/pet' month and rations.

Sucli are the circumstances which attended the arrival of the first body of kanakas in Queensland, their introduction being carried out by a private capitalist. But public attention was very . at once it was soon to be called to these new labourers, . evident that there were two opposing opinions concerning the principle of their introduction.

`

.

An article appeared in the North Australian on August 20th, and was copied by the Courier on the 22nd, entitled 'The Slave Trade in Queenslandl This article was based upon what it termed a 'mysterious dialogue' between Mr. Pugh and the Colonial Secretary in the House. The dialogue referred to had caused the writer to make enquiries, through which he ascertained the facts of the arrival of the k a n a k a . The article then proceeded violently attack Captain Towns for instituting the 'slave trade in ,..ueenslancl', and ended by accusing the Government of 'winking at' the whole transaction. A reply to this article was written to the Courier of August 24th, and a further letter on 28th by Mr. W. I-I. transaction was Palmer. These letters pointed out that perfectly lawful, at the natives had been properly hired and

s- well

provided for, and spoke of the kanaka as 'British subjects', and 'fellow colonists hired for 12 months'. This argument during August, 1863, shows that from the very first introduction of the kanaka there were two distinct and opposing bodies of opinion in regard to the principles involved. From the various articles written against the importation of the

new l a b o r , the chief reasons for opposition during the early

sixties seem to have been economic, it was not opposed on sentimental, religious or humanitarian grounds until a few years later. For this reason the opposition at the outset made little headway because the economic facts were all in favour of the

introduction. The opposition centred mainly around the argument that colored aliens induced to'spend a few years in Queensland were not such useful colonists as Europeans, who bring with them their wives and families with the intention of making a

permanent home in the land, and that the latter kind of immigra-

I

50

COLOURED

LABOUR EXPBRIMENTS

IN QUEENSLAND

son would cease if the former were permitted. It was forgotten by such arguers that the former kind of immigrants would quickly make productive large tracts of country upon which the latter kind of immigrants, with their wives and families, could settle.

I t is significant that the Courier, which had been opposing the

importation of kanakas, speaking in an article on December 10th, 1863, of the great scarcity of l a b o r , asks 'where can we get laborers to meet our requirements? An answer was soon given and acted upon by other private persons, and during the ensuing few years the scarcity of l a b o r and the necessity for obtaining it somewhere led to the further importation of kanaka in gradually increasing numbers. On August 18th Captain Towns had landed the 67 kanakas at his plantation on the Logan River and set them to work. In spite of the controversy in the Press and the questions in the Assembly, i t was only when some months later Towns despatched to Brisbane

bullock teams driven by kanakas, that the majority of the city

residents fully realised that these men had been landed and were working in the colony. The realisation of the fact caused no small amount of excitement, and many persons paid a visit to the plantation, which was described with glowiNg terms in letters to the Press. The apparent success of the experiment formed the subject of a despatch to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, while a large grant of land was at the same time made by the Government to Captain Towns for experimental cultivation. During the following year, Towns' example was followed by Captain the Hon. Louis Hope who, obtaining land a t Ormiston,

near Cleveland, took there in July, 54 kanakas who had been landed by the schooner Uncle Tom from the islands. With these

men he speedily cleared the land, but then, instead of planting cotton, as had Towns, he planted sugar-cane. Thus, to Towns we owe the first experiment in the economic use of kanakas, but to I-Iope, the first application of them to the cultivation of cane the l i s t combination of those two factors-

kanakas and sugar-which has done so much to develop the Queensland littoral. This experiment of Hope's was successful beyond all expectations. The cane grew marvelously well, but more important still, the kanakas were found to be suited better to work of the cane Field than to that of the cotton field.

(C)

KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND {2] The following extract is taken from PROFESSOR GEOFFREY BO]..TON'S book, A Thousand Miles Away. A History of North

SECTION THREE READINGS

51

Brisbane, 1963. The Queensland to /920 (jacaranda/A.N.U.), editor acknowledges the kindness of author and publishers in granting permission for the reprinting of this extract (from pp.

78-80, 89).

Right from the beginning the trailic in Islanders had its critics.

Robert Herbert privately and others more openly described it as 'kidnapping', a word suggesting the use of fraud or force in recruiting. Often objections were on economic rather than humane grounds. The working men of Brisbane feared that these immigrants would undercut them in the labour market, and never grew to like them even though the development of the sugar industry created many new jobs. But those defending the system

included so liberal-minded a man as Charles Lilley, who believed that the civilized surroundings of Queensland were beneficial to the Kanaka laborers, and through them to the inhabitants of the South Pacific in general. Perhaps this was arguable after the 1868 Act had ensured some jet of the benefits of civilization for such workers, by providing a minimum scale of wages and rations, and repatriation after serving three years. Among the most persistent critics of the trade were the clergy, especially the nonconformist missionaries. Their views, indeed, were somewhat discredited after one or two of the more vocal had been caught exaggerating about conditions in Queensland; but

they received weighty support from oflieers of the Royal Navy. Patrolling the Western Pacific, H.M.S. Rosario brought to light

damning evidence about recruiting methods. 'BIackbirders', as those engaged in the l a b o r trade were called, lied to the natives without conscience. Few carried interpreters (and so many different languages were spoken in the Western Pacific that one interpreter would have been of limited use), but on the strength of a little pantomime and pidgin English, blackbirders were prepared to aver that the Islanders understood fully their obligation to work on the canfields for three years. The pantomime had often been farcical; 'a f a v o r i t e device was to hold up two or three lingers and to imitate the cutting of cane and grass or the

digging of yams. One gentleman with a sense of h u m o r took a w/am and bit it three tirnes.1 Left with the impression that they were simply being invited on a short cruising holiday, to .see the

.

wonders of the white man's island, the natives were often aston 1 See evidence proFcrred an the 'Royal Comnussion appointed to inquire into

the circumstances under which labourers have been introduced into Queensland from New Guinea and other islands'. V. é'P., 1884, II, p. 797.

52

COLOURED

LABOUR EXPERIMENTS

IN QUEENSLAND

shed on their arrival, and were found to require 'breaking in'. Other blackbirder got recruits by impersonating missionaries and promising the gifts which these clergy usually brought. In reprisal, several genuine missionaries were murdered by natives, among them the Anglican Bishop of Melanesia.

Sometimes force and bloodshed were used to shanghai natives aboard. The worst cases seem to have involved ships recruiting for Fiji, Samoa, or other places where no government exercised effective control. A notorious affair concerned a Melbourne vessel, the Carl, with seventy natives for the :Fiji plantations. After the Islanders had raised their voices in protest at being penned in the hold, Doctor Murray, the owner, lustily singing 'Marching through C.eorgia', led the crew in shooting down almost all the recruits and throwing the bodies overboard. The subsequent trial (at which Murray got off by turning Queen's evidence) cast a good deal of odium on the employ-ment of Pacific Islanders in Queensland. However, the Australian l a b o r trade fostered no such flagrant abuses--possibly because, as Ross Lewin argued from a long experience of blackbirding, it was not in their own

interests to antagonize through sharp practices. and violence the people of the islands where they hoped to recruit regularly.2 Under pressure from the British Government, Queensland in 1871 appointed government agents to sail with each recruiting ship and supervise the conditions of enlistment. This suited the planters, as it was now less likely that the trailic would be brought to an end because of abuses. Self-confident, hospitable, careless of outside criticisms, and 'incredulous of Government prornises',3 the North Queensland

planters may have looked to superficial observers like incipient Southern gentlemen of the American type. In fact, they stood largely in the tradition of planter paternalism which appeared in many other parts of the British colonies. It was a tradition which took for granted the right of white men to exploit the cheap l a b o r of more backward races, but laid on the employer the obligation of allowing his labourers some of the benefits of what

was then sincerely believed to be a superior civilization. This

tradition is perishing in our own day, and was even then felt to be 2 Cf. B. H. Molesworrh, 'The history of Kanaka l a b o r in Queensland' (M.A. thesis, University of Queensland, 1917) , chs viii and ix; and D. K. Dig fan, 'Kanaka political conflict' (B.A, I-Ions. thesis, University of Queensland, 1955).

8

Courier (Brisbane)

If

22 Oct. 1881.

SECTION THREE READINGS

5.3

unsuitable for Australia. But if the planters of Mackay and the Herbert failed to appreciate liberal and working-class feelings about colored l a b o r , on the whole they also avoided the ugly contempt for non-white races, which around that time marked parts of Australia, and not least inland North Queensland.

(d)

KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND [3] This extract is reprinted by kind permission of the publisher, Oxford University Press, from vol. HI of the late SIR TIMOTHY COGI-ILAN'S classic Labour and Industry in Australia (O.U.P.), London, 1918, pp. 1301-7. Notice that Cog flan mistakenly describes the Pacific Islanders who were recruited for Queensland as Poly-» resins. They were Melanesians,

The economic disturbance which Kanaka l a b o r appeared to threaten was not unheeded by the Government; early in 1877 an announcement was made that no further licences to employ Kanaka labour would thereafter be granted, or transfers of such l a b o r authorized except to persons engaged in tropical or semitropical agriculture. The regulations framed to carry out this policy were not very strictly enforced. But even if they had been so enforced, the objection of the European laborers t employment of Kanakas would not have been satisfied, and in any case no limitations were, or could be, applied without direct legislation to laborers whose period of service had expired. These men had the same civil rights as other persons. If they chose to remain in Queensland, they were free to take any employment a

offered them, without subjecting themselves

to l-Qlovernmental

inspection or control. Many of them became shepherds or station

hands on stations in the north and west of the colony, where it was difficult for pastoralist to obtain an adequate supply of European l a b o r . The fact that they did thus compete with white l a b o r was a grievance which kept the whole question of the importation of Kanakas before the minds of the laboring classes, and brought a strong reinforeemept of opinion to the side of the humanitarians.

The serious drought of 1879, the depression in trade, and the consequent unemployment, increased the complaints against Kanaka l a b o r on the part of the l a b o r i n g classes, and these

complaints were strongly reinforced by allegations, by disinterested persons, that the islanders were often treated with great inhuman-

ity and utterly neglected when sick. The Government was roused

54

COLOURED

LABOUR EXPERIMENTS

IN QUEENSLAND

to action, and sent two medical men to Marlborough to inquire

into the cause of the excessive mortality of Polynesian laborers in that district. It was found that the death-rate on some plantations ranged from 90 to 107 per thousand, and the doctors reported that the cause of this excessive mortality was 'indisputably plain'. The islanders were being killed by overwork, insufficient or improper food, bad water, the lack of medical attendance, and general

neglect. In consequence of this report a Bill was introduced in August 1880, which provided for the proper and better treatment of Kanakas, raised the age of recruits from sixteen to eighteen years, and strictly limited the employment of indentured l a b o r to tropical and semi-tropical agriculture, Q the exgl_u_§ign of work of any other kind carried on even upon the same estate. The Bill

as it passed the Assembly container; Q; clause forbidding timeexpired Kanakas entering upon other occupations than tropical agriculture, but to this the Council would not assent, the removal of the clause being agreed to, the Bill became law without it. The efforts made in 1880 to limit the employment of Kanakas, and the revived proposals to introduce Indian and Chinese coolies, without the direct sanction of Parliament, prompted Griffith, who was then leading the opposition, to Endeavour to obtain the repeal of the Coolie Act of 1862. He did not succeed in getting the Act repealed, but he drew from Mcllwraith a declaration that the Government had no intention of employing the Act without first securing the approval of Parliament. In spite of this the proposal was not dropped, and steps were soon afterwards taken to find out, from the Indian Government, the terms upon which coolies could be engaged for Queensland.

The introduction of Indian coolies, or any other kind of colored l a b o r , was the most prominent question put before the electors at the general elections of 1883. The Mcllwraith party was identified with the advocacy of coolie labour, which it claimed would prove to be more efficient than that of the Pacific islanders, and that, as recruiting in India would be carried on under the eye of the Government, it would be free from the abuses associated with the South Sea Islands traffic. The superiority of the Indian coolie was admitted by the opposition, who saw in it a further

reason for exclusion. The Kanaka was never a serious competitor with the white l a b o r e r , but the coolie might readily become such.

The opposition also claimed that it had not been proved that coolie labour of any kind was necessary, as the sugar industry

could be carried on by white l a b o r alone. As the result of the

SECTION THREE READINGS

55

election Griffith became Premier, the negotiations with the Indian Government which had been entered on by Mcllwraith were discontinued, and the Act of 1862 repealed, so that it was no longer possible for coolie l a b o r to be imported without parliamentary sanction being first obtained. The Act of 1880, which provided for the better treatment of Kanaka l a b o r employed on plantations, had been under Mcllwraith almost a dead letter, as the regulations required to give it practical effect had not been issued. Griffith caused regulations to be drawn up, and these were

issued in April 1884. Later in the same year, a Royal Commission was appointed to report on the recruiting of Polynesian l a b o r , in New Guinea and the adjacent islands, under the Act of 1880. This Commission made a close study of the whole subject, and its report was most unfavorable. It declared that, even under the best conditions, the recruits were often unaware of the real nature of the contract they were making, that in spite of the Act the recruiting often took place in the absence of the agent appointed by the Government, and that in fact 'many of the evils which the evidence taken by us discloses have arisen from the utter ineliiciency or incapacity of the Government agents'. On therstrength

of this report the Government determined to put an end to the importation of Kanaka l a b o r , and obtain some form of white l a b o r suited to work on the sugar plantations. In furtherance of this idea an agent was sent to Southern Europe and empowered to obtain laborers, who would go to Queensland under indentures to work on the sugar plantations. The sugar growers were invited to apply to this agent for the l a b o r they needed, and a small sum was demanded from them towards the cost of conveying the labourers to the colony. The growers had not been consulted in regard to this new scheme, and very few of them made any response to the offer of the Government, the prevailing opinion being that Italians or other Southern Europeans were not suitable for work in the canefields, and, in any case, were not likely to carry out their contracts, when work on much better terms was to be had for the asking. Nevertheless a Bill was passed making the importation of Kanakas illegal after the close of the year 1890. The planters were thus given about five years within which to provide themselves with other l a b o r before the recruiting of Kanakas should cease- The sugar industry showed immediately the effects of this legislation. No new capital was directed towards

it, the value of the sugar plantations depreciated rapidly, the area under crop declined, and some of the sugar mills were closed. As the planters could not be induced to pay for the introduction

56

COLOURED

LABOUR EXPERIMENTS

I N QUEENSLAND

of Southern European laborers, the Government placed a sum on the estimates in 1891 for the encouragement of that class of immigration. A small number of Italians was secured for the plantations, but very few of them were under indentures, and the attempt was not long persisted in. Queensland was one of the first o[ the colonies to fee] the depression which heralded the crisis of 1893, and this depression brought about a distinct change in the public attitude towards the

sugar planters. Even the most fervent advocate Of white l a b o r was not prepared to see the sugar industry die out for lack of men to do field work on the plantations. In February 1892 Sir S. Griffith addressed a manifesto on the subject to the people of Queensland, in which he stated that 'his objection to Polynesian l a b o r had been that it tended to the encouragement of large

estates owned by absentees; that it led Held labour in tropical agriculture to be regarded as degrading to white men, that the

permanent existence of a large unenfranchised servile population was not compatible with free political institutions; and that the colony was brought into discredit by the abuses of kidnapping to which the l a b o r trade was subject'. But he declared his belief that 'the system of growing sugar on large estates was doomed, that it had been shown to be a prof table crop for the small farmer who could grow it without colored labour'- He suggested, therefore, that a further term of ten years should be allowed during which Polynesian l a b o r might be employed, in order that the industry might have time gradually to adjust itself to these

changing conditions.

This compromise

was opposed

by the

Labour Party, but was in close agreement with public sentiment,

and the majority of people saw, or professed to see, the changes to which Griffith referred actually taking place.

At the end of March 1892 the Queensland Parliament met, some months earlier than usual, to deal with 'matters of public import-

ance', which included the removal of the restriction upon the importation of l a b o r e r s from the Pacific Islands, and the making

of provision to prevent them from entering into undue competition with European l a b o r , in industries other than sugar. The

Act was passed on 14th April 1892, and was immediately followed by the fitting out of vessels adapted to the trade, eleven such being licensed during the year. The number of Polynesians in Queensland a t the census of 1891 was 9428, and after recruiting was again

permitted the men brought to the colony were just sufficient to compensate for deaths and for men returned to their homes; so that, ten years later, in spite of the introduction of about 13,000,

57

SECTION THREE READINGS

the Kanakas were not more numerous than in 1891. The labour was obtained principally from the Solomon Islands and the New Hebrides, and the methods- of recruiting and the welfare of the islanders were carefully safeguarded by the Queensland Government, and, so far as was possible with such a traffic, it was free from the many abuses prevalent during its earlier stages. But even

thus mitigated, the introduction of Kanaka labour was viewed with great repugnance by the Labour Party. .

(el

..

KANAKA LABOUR IN QUEENSLAND [4] In this further extract from A Thousand Miles Away PROFESSOR

BOLTON examines some of the implications of Australian federation for the Pacific Islander and the sugar industry. (From pp. 20911, 248-9, 254-5.)

The Federation vote in the sugar districts was largely a vote for interstate free trade and some form of protection against imported sugar on the Australian market. As for coloured labour, the sugargrowers argued that every year saw an increasing risk of unfriendly

interference from a Brisbane parliament where Labour was steadily on the ascendant, and life could be no more uncertain under the Commonwealth. Only a small minority stood out against Federation, unable to credit that the rest of Australia would tax its sugar in the interests of the sugar producers. . .

.

The Northern vote was the decisive factor that brought Queens-

land into the Comrnonwealthl Commercial jealousies had divided Brisbane and the Darling Downs, and, as in New South Wales and Western Australia,.the outback vote carried the day for Federation. In casting this vote, North Queensland had chosen to solve its own problems in conformity with the general Australian

pattern. The sugar industry would accept the arbitration of the whole continent on its future conduct, structure, and economic framework. . . If a time came when sugar-growers could afford to pay better money, and the allureinents of mining faded; if, too, improved working conditions, more attention to public health, and greater knowledge of tropical hygiene made living conditions more attractive, then it would be possible for white l a b o r to carry North Queensland. As it happened, nearly all these conditions

.

1 Brownsville Bulletin reported Mackey Mercury, 22 Aug. 1899: 'North Queensland understands what an important bearing on its future the Federal union of the Australian States must have. . . . It certainly seems quite probable

that the federal b a l e will be Won by the North Queensland vote." Sec also Croydon Mining Record, 9 Nov. 1906.

58

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS IN QUEENSLAND

were fulfilled in the first years of the twentieth century. But in 1901 not everyone who doubted the possibility of North QueensIand's sugar industry surviving without c o l o r e d l a b o r , was

necessarily blinded by selfish prejudice. Even the abolitionists conceded that the sugar-growers might be harmed, but counted this a lesser evil than the continuance of a traffic in non-European l a b o r , even in its modern, well-regulated guise. Any decision to ban colored l a b o r would be to some extent a leap in the dark.

But the leap was taken. The new Commonwealth Parliament, which in part owed its being to North Queensland's enthusiasm Y

for Federation, was dominated by spokesmen for \-*\ hits Australia. Even the Herbert seat, comprising the whole sugar coast from Mackay north, had by a narrow margin returned a Labor man, F. W. Bamford. The working men of Brownsville and Cairns gave him his victory, but even a t Mackay his opponent's majority was not large. Within the House of Representatives coloured l a b o r had no advocates except one or two elderly city merchants. Outside they had the cautious advocacy of Robert Philp, by now premier of Queensland and fearful, in a period of drought and low primary produce prices, of any move which might mean slack business in North Queensland. Petitions flowed south from groups of farmers, Chambers of Commerce, and other interested parties urging that the Commonwealth Parliament should not be precipitate in ending Pacific Island l a b o r . There was even a lunatic fringe, much publicized by their opponents, who talked of |'

'resorting to civil war rather than submit to the expulsion of the

kanakas'.2 Such gestures were futile, so was the more temperate form of lobbying. Legislation was successfully introduced in October 1901 prohibiting the introduction of Pacific Islanders after SI March 1904, and providing for their repatriation by the end of 1906. But the sugar industry would not be left defenceless. A protective duty of £6 a ton was imposed on sugar imports, and an excise of £3, of which £2 would be refunded on sugar manufactured from cane grown and cut by white labour. The burden of finding the extra wages that the sugar-grower would have to pay white men would be shared by the whole cornrnunity. The North was uneasy, and for some years editors continued to bemoan a 'breach of faith'3 and belittle the available white l a b o r . The first reaction of many sugangrowers was to make the most of the few remaining years of colored l a b o r . In several districts 2

Age (Melbourne), 8 Oct. 1901.

"Barron Valley Advocate, 10 May 1905.

SECTION THREE READINGS

59

north of Brownsville employment of Pacific Islanders reached its peak in 1903, and in the whole of Queensland the proportion of cane cultivated by white l a b o r increased only from 15 to 25 per ce between 1902 and 1905. Yet during these last years of colored lab Ur, race relations deteriorated considerably in North Queensland, and every year proved the unlikelihood of building a stable society on the sort of multi-racial lines existing in the sugar

"I

industry.

...

The right of labouring under the North Queensland sun was to be, after 1906, entirely a white man's prerogative. For by now the North was considered the front line of Australia's defence, and it remained to be seen how far the united Australian Commonwealth would view Northern development as a responsibility of the whole community. So far there was a ten~ d e n y to concentrate on the Northern Territory, and (with the

very important exception of the sugar tariffs) to leave North Queensland's fate to the North Queenslanders. Since the Commonwealth Government sounded the knell of colored labour in 1901,

their chief problem had been the use of white men in the canefields. Results, @course, 'varied It was useless to expect a drunken city-bred unemployed to stand the pace, and there were many failures among men recruited from Sydney and Brisbane. But there was already coming into existence a self-reliant breed of European cane-cutters, men like -James Hood of the Herbert who boasted without contradiction that he would back his gang against any colored team nominated, experienced farmers'sons

from the Northern Rivers of New South W'ales, who had worked among cane all their lives with no worse effects than a sunburned nose. These men were shortly to be reinforced by surplus l a b o r from the mining fields, where the long golden afternoon was at last drawing to a close. Meanwhile, millers and growers were finding that, with the aid of the Commonwealth tariff and a worldwide rise in cane prices following European agreements on the marketing of sugar-beet, they could at last employ European labour, and so qualify for the government bounty. The change from coloured to European workers would require some adjustments among the sugar-growers, both in their attitudes towards

their employees, and in the conditions provided for work. Warily, contentiously, growers and cane-eutters, fillers and mill-hands came to grips with the problems of reconciling White Australia not merely with the continued prosperity of the sugar industry but with the settlement and development of Australia's northern

frontier.

3 Documents LABOUR ON THE SUGAR PLANTATIONS [Q'ld V. da'P., 1884, vol. 11, PP- 94l~2.] [PETITION]

1884

To the Honourable The Legislative Assembly of Queensland in Parliament assembled. The Petition of the undersigned RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

That your Petitioners are men of European and Australian

birth,

mostly natural-born subjects of Her Majesty, and that they have settled on that part of the north-east coast of Queensland which extends from

..

Cape Palmerston north. . They have purchased from the Government of Queensland large areas of land, portions of which they have cleared, fenced, and cultivated. grillages of They have erected mills, factories, foundries, towns dwelling-houses, churches, schools, and hospitals; they have discovered i hundreds . tracks and fords throughout the country, a of miles of streets and roads, some bridges, and miles of tramways. They found the country a wilderness; they have in many eases made it a garden, and in all places where they have settled have done good work in opening up the country, and while so doing have been good customers to their fellow-colonists-including ironfounders, engineers, saw-rnillers, and other tradesrnen of Brisbane and Maryborough, hay and maize growers on the Downs, merchants and shopkeepers who have furnished

supplies, and carriers in the country and on the coast. Your Petitioners, thougH mostly men born in the temperate zone, have cheerfully toiled in these tropical coast lands, enduring and struggling with a climate et which they are constitutionally unaccustomed, while building, as they hoped, homes for themselves and their successors in their new country. In addition to the hardships inseparable from the settlement of any new country your Petitioners had, before they could put the country to a profitable use, to encounter all the losses, perplexities, and delays which are invariably incident to the establishment or creation of a new industry, which the sugar industry was to nearly all of your Petitioners. Against all these troubles and difficulties your Petitioners have successfully contended, and have, after twenty years of effort, succeeded in

establishing the industry of sugar production from cane on a sound commercial basis.

SECTION THREE DOCUMENTS

To do this those of your Petitioners

no engaged

61

directly in the

production of sugar found that it necessary to employ colored l a b o r , and being encouraged by the Acts of Parliament passed by your

Honourable House to regulate the importation of Indian and Polynesian l a b o r , they invested a r e sums of money in the industry on the faith of those Aets being carried out in a practical and bond fide manner, and have in effect received for many years large supplies of l a b o r from Polynesia. From causes which in is not here necessary to state, that supply is failing, and can no longer be relied on to meet the legitimate requirements of your Petitioners. The Act relating [O Indian l a b o r has never been put into practical working form, and your Petitioners' prayer now is that it may at once be so amended or added to as to provide a remedy for the collapse in the sugar industry, which otherwise is imminent

from the failure of the Polynesian supply. Coincident with the failure of their colored l a b o r supply your Petitioners have had to encounter an enormous and unprecedented fall in the price of sugar, owing to the excessive production in Europe of beet-root sugar whidl has for many years past been fostered on the Continent by a system of bounties, and the raw material of which sugar (beet) is produced by very low~priced l a b o r , a great portion of the l a b o r of weeding and harvesting being done by women and children; and even the adult male agricultural l a b o r e r s employed in its production being paid a t rates which white men will not accept in this country. Your Petitioners assert that . ax . employment of white women and children in __ similar manner in producing sugar-cane is not to be thought of, the climate of the tropics being such as to prevent it, did no

_

other reason exist. The lowest possible cost of adult male white l a b o r being such as to preclude the possibility of cane sugar competing successfully with beet,

or

it remains only to either abandon the industry to procure such a reliable supply of cheap colored l a b o r as will meet the requirements of the ease. Adopting the latter alternative, it has been suggested that

your Petitioners should employ the Chinese who are now becoming so numerous on the coast, despite the obstacles placed in the way of their admission, which your Petitioners believe are in many cases successfully evaded. Your Petitioners believe that a large permanent settlement of Chinese on this coast would be pregnant with the greatest danger to the whole of Australia, and they are convinced that, should the Chinese in large numbers once get hold of our coast lands, no measures that would be tolerated by the Imperial Government would be sufficient to get rid of them. The danger of even an Indus trial Chinese invasion is not by any means chimerical. The foreign policy of that country becoming daily more aggressive, and the increase of surplus population so excessive, that at any time hordes of thousands or even millions of Chinese may be expected to be flung forth on the islands of the Eastern Seas and the

North Coast of Australia. Your Petitioners consider, therefore, that the extension of Chinese

62

COLOURED

LABOUR

EXPERIMENTS

IN QUEENSLAND

settlement on our coast lands should be guarded against in every way, and they think that the most certain way of meeting that danger and supplying the legitimate l a b o r requirements of the sugar industry, is to

be found in

at once passing such further laws and making such regula-

tions in this colony as will meet the requirements of the Government of India with regard to the deportation of natives of that country to Queensland as laborers to be employed only in the cultivation and manufacture of tropical vegetable products.

[Here follow 1,574 Signatures.] (ii)

MR. R. J- .JEFFRAY TO COLONIAL SECRETARY S. w. GRIFFITH) paid., p. 931]

(SIR

The Exchange, Melbourne, 4 October 1884.

.

. . The sudden collapse of the island supply of labourers has brought the question of labour into a position of extreme urgency, and there is not IIOW time to trust to the gradual change to an entirely new and experimental system, based on an influx of European laborers under the sanction of the Government, even if that system possessed greater probable merits than it does. 'We have not been slack in trying the experiment of cheap European l a b o r , and at our own cost and risk I arranged for the trial of sixty Maltese two years ago. This experiment

ended disastrously, because when the men once found themselves in Queensland, and in the presence of a more highly paid white l a b o r i n g class, no contracts were sulhcient to prevent them from breaking their engagements and becoming dispersed in the general labour market. It is as impossible to prevent this absorption and to maintain artificially a different level of wages among European labourers in the same commun-

ity as it would be to keep one part of the ocean at a higher level than another. At all events our well meant and costly experiment with Maltese completely failed. (iii)

THE PREMIER OF QUEENSLAND

TO THE GOVERNOR

OF QUEENSLAND [Qld V.vltP., 1885, vol. I, PP- 378-82.] Colonial Secretary's Ofiicff,

Brisbane, 1st April, 1885. SIR,

I have the h o n o r to acknowledge the receipt from Your Excellency of Lord Derby's Despatch, No. 6, of 28th .January last, transmitting a copy of a letter addressed to the Secretary of State, by Messrs. ]. E. Davidson

SECTION THREE DOCUMENTS

and

J. B. Lawes,

63

in which they state the reasons that, in their opinion,

render it desirable that the Northern portion of Queensland should be erected into a separate Colony, and inviting a n expression of the views of this Government on the subject. 10.

The character and resources of the various parts of Northern or

Tropical Queensland differ almost as widely from each other as those of the extreme southern and northern portions of the Colony. It is quite erroneous to suppose that the whole of this territory is to be considered as subject to the ordinary incidents of tropical countries as commonly understood. The rich lands lit for tropical agriculture are confined to narrow and not continuous strips on the coast, rarely extending more

than twenty miles inland, and forming a very small and inconsiderable portion of the whole territory, so far as area is concerned. The area of mineral lands already known is of much greater extent. Gold, silver, tin, copper, and other minerals are known to exist in large quantities, and in deposits of great richness. But by far the greatest area consists of pastoral lands, diltering in no important particular from the rest of the pastoral lands of Australia-a fact which is to a large extent accounted for by the comparatively high elevation of the table lands dividing the waters of the Gulf of Carpentaria from the Southern waters. Moreover, in some parts of this territory-notably, in the Herberton District, in

lat. 170 to l8o-the ordinary products of temperate regions can be grown with success.

11. I unhesitatingly affirm that the demand for colored l a b o r is almost exclusively confined to persons interested directly or indirectly i n the agricultural lands on the coast, while the town and mining populations and persons interested in pastoral pursuits, except some of the runowners, are almost unanimously opposed to it. 12. The advocates for this l a b o r are in the habit of asserting that the climate of this part of Queensland is such that white men cannot work in the open air. If this were so, a strong reason would undoubtedly exist for the admission of Asiatic labour, without which apparently the land would necessarily lie idle. Upon this point there are no doubt great differences of opinion amongst those best qualified to judge; but it is a fact that for many years white men have been engaged in the lumber

business in these same jungles-a work much more arduous and quite as injurious to health as the cultivation of sugar-and these men almost unanimously ridicule the notion that white men cannot do any kind of outdoor work in North Queensland. Their own health, when they have not injured it by excesses, is the best proof of the correctness of this view. The supposed unhealthiness of the Queensland Coast, and its unfitness as a home for white men have long been a subject of discussion in this part of Australia. At one time the supposed limit for Europeans was put somewhere south of Brisbane, and Moreton Bay was said to be too hot for white men. The imaginary limit has, however, for many years been steadily advancing northward. But wherever it may ultimately be fixed, I think that it has not yet been reached by the progress of settlement.

64

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS IN QUEENSLAND

13. I do not wish it to be supposed that I think that Europeans will be found to work on plantations under the same conditions as the colored races. But I believe that the land can be cultivated by Europeans, and that it will be so cultivated, but under different conditions, unless that result is prevented by the introduction of Asiatic l a b o r e r s

in large numbers. And this leads me to the consideration of the social and political aspect of the labour question. But I desire to observe, before passing to this subject, that I am unable to recognize that the system of cultivation now principally prevailing and desired to be perpetuated by the advocates of colored l a b o r - t h a t is, in large estates

owned for the most part by absentee proprietors represented by managers or agents, and worked by large gangs of men of an inferior race-is an unfixed or even a considerable advantage to the Colony. A larger number of owners themselves resident on the land would, I think, conduce much more to its lasting welfare and prosperity. 14. The advocates of colored labour for Queensland do not always urge the same arguments. Sometimes they admit that Europeans can do the work, but assert that they will not do it, or that they are not reliable, and that they might combine for higher wages a t inconvenient times. This argument has, no doubt, a foundation of truth. 'Nhite laborers are more in the habit of resisting ill-usage, and of asserting their rights than men of races accustomed for generations to a servile or inferior position. But it will at once be seen that in a Colony whose institutions are founded on a basis of popular representation this contention raises a grave political and social question. Is it desirable, regarding Queensland, or the northern portion of it, as a country which is to be civilized and governed on the model adopted in the rest of the Australian Colonies, that a servile race should be introduced who can never be admitted to a share of political power, and whose interests will need protection by a paternal govern rent? On this point I do not expect that the persons, of whom Messrs. Davidson and Lawes are the spokesmen, will feel any sympathy with the arguments which nevertheless force themselves upon the attention of men who are charged with the responsibility of adminis-

tering the affairs of a British self-governing' community, and which I think demand the best consideration of Her Majesty's servants both here and in Great Britain. 15. There is, I believe, no country in which Asiatic and European labourers are found working side by side on terms of equality. \fVhere

the Asiatic labourers predominate or are admitted in considerable numbers, it is invariably found that they, being able to save money out of a pittance on which Europeans would decline to attempt to support

life, by degrees monopolise all branches of industry. The function of

manual l a b o r

is regarded as degrading, and if any numbers of the

white races continue to be engaged in it they degenerate in social estimation, and are looked down upon as 'mean whites'. It is scarcely necessary to examine the reasons for this result, or to speculate whether i t is a note: of the superiority or inferiority of the

white races. The fact is apparent, and is the key, I think, to the fierce

SECTION THREE DOCUMENTS

65

objection that is made in the democratic communities of America and Australia to the introdugiion of large numbers of Chinese. The fact is, indeed, so far recognised that the advocates of the introduction of Indian laborers into Queensland have always ostensibly claimed the § should be "under 'PWPE safeguards'-s Et that the Asiatics should be prevented by law from coming into competition with Europeans in industries which it is not disputed that the latter can successfully prosecute in this climate.

16. The party which are at present in power in this Colony are opposed to their introduction, not because they are not fully sensible of the apparent temporary advantages which would follow from a large and immediate supply of l a b o r , but because they consider that any such 'safeguards' would be futile. When it was proposed some two years ago to introduce laborers from India, it was provided by the Draft Regulations, submitted by the then Queensland Government [or the approval of the Governor-General in Council, that Indian coolies should not be allowed to engage in any occupation but that of tropical or semi-tropical agriculture, and that, on the expiration of their terms of agreement, they should be compelled a t once either to re-engage for similar service or to leave the Colony, under a penalty of imprisonment. The Indian Govern meet naturally refused to assent to any such conditions, but were willing to agree to a Regulation that other persons should be liable to a penalty for employing .them in any other occupation. 17. It appears to me, however, that any regulations of this kind would, in the nature of things, be entirely inoperative, even if the Government which was charged with their administration were perm nent and influenced by a continuity or identity of policy-a condition which cannot be expected in a constitutional Colony in this part of the Empire.

18. The conclusion which I draw from these considerations is, that if coolies or any other inferior colored races are introduced into a country in large numbers they will within a measureable time overflow

the whole country and enter into competition with the European work men, whom they will ultimately displace. I need not point out in detail the difference between the European civilization, such as we are now endeavoring to establish in Queensland, and the Asiastic civilization, such as is found in places like Mauritius, but I think I have indicated with sufficient clearness the nature of the danger which is apprehended by a large number of people of this Colony. 23.

The diFF1euIny of separating i n Queensland the

parts of the

Colony which it is said require Asiatic l a b o r from the rest which admittedly do not require it would, iron geographical considerations, be very great, but this diliiculty would be nothing in comparison with the social and political troubles which seem to me to be the inevitable result of any attempt to unite the Asiatic and European civilizations in a constitutional Colony- For reasons already given, however, I do not think

66

COLOURED LABOUR EXPERIMENTS IN QUEENSLAND

that there is any sufficient reason for supposing that either experiment is necessary. 24. The permanent advantages that would result to Australia and the Empire at large from preserving Queensland as a future Held for European settlement appear to me so greatly to outweigh the present gain that would ensue to a few persons-of much enterprise no doubt, but who have no intention of making Queensland their home, regarding it rather as a Held for exploitation-that until the experiment of European settlement has been fairly tried and has failed, I hold that it would be a most fatal mistake to adopt the opposite policy, the consequences of which would be probably irreparable. In any event I feel confident that Her Majesty's Government will give their careful consideration to the arguments which I have brought under Your Excellency's notice, and which, although very familiar to the people of this Colony, have, I believe, never before been officially formulated in their present form.

I have, cc., S. W. Griffith.

(iV)

THE KANAKA I N QUEENSLAND [New Review (London), no. 37, June 1892, pp. 642-4, article by Archibald Forbes.l

The following is the sketch to which I have referred above of the Polynesian as I found him on the Queensland sugar plantations in 1883. The Polynesian seems to me by nature a cheerful, bright sort of fellow. If he is l o [ so in his island home he soon takes on this complexion when he comes to Queensland. 'When you look at him he grins responsively; when you speak to him he smiles all over his head. I-Ie is a likeable fellow, and has an instinctive politeness and cordiality. He will run of his own accord to open a gate for you, or to hold your horse. He seems, and is spoken of, as a willing workman, he does his work with a light heart, and takes a manifest interest in it. His employers unanimously accord him a good name. He gives little trouble, they say; he needs no assiduous watching to keep him from idling, nor stimulating to keep

him lively in his task. He is an independent fellow in his way-he is a man, and he will have his rights like an man; but let him have them, treat

him frankly and fairly, and there is nothing about him of what the Americans expressively call 'cussedness'. There is a good deal in him of the feudal instinct. He becomes exceedingly attached to his master, if the latter is a considerate master, with a kind word for his henchman and a genuine solicitude for his welfare. After he has gone home from 'time-expired' CMCH[ he very often returns to another on the Same plantation, §1d when Polynesian friends meet on the quiet idle Sundays, I am told that their gossip is mostly about the relative merits of their respective plantations, and t h a t great is the vaunting of the

fellows hailing from those which have an established reputation for good

SECTION THREE

Doc;umE:~:'rs

67

treatment. But it is not easy to see how there can be anywhere anything approaching to bad treatment. The Kanaka knows his rights to a tittle. The islands swarm with men who have returned from their three»years' engagements. . . The Polynesian in Queensland fares infinitely better than does the Earm laborer in England. The following are the former's rations

.

and allowances, secured to him by Act of Parliament, altogether apart

from his money wage: Per diem, l i b . bread or Hour, lib. beef or 502. sugar, goz. tea, Slb. potatoes, per week, loss. tobacco, 2oz. salt, doz. soap. Compare this plenteousness with the oatmeal diet of the Scottish farm l a b o r e r , Pat's toujours potatoes, honest Giles' scrap of rusty bacon or hunk of lean cheese! If renewed and permanent prosperity is to smile on the Queensland

mutton,

...

sugar-growing industry by means of the full utilisation of Polynesian l a b o r , the Legislature of the colony must make provision for a modus vivettdi between the white man and the coloured man, the conditions of which would suffice to deter the former from wrecking the new Act by his vote. If it is to last and escape that fate, the measure passed the other day in the Parliament House of Brisbane must contain stringent enactments which must be stringently E. forced. The fulfillment of the planters' pledge to employ Polynesian l a b o r only in 'tropical or serna tropical agriculture' must be rigidly enforced under penalties for infringement. Resolute officials must be held [O the duty of seeing to it that there shall be no more 'bed-making, table~waiting, boot-cleaning, grooming, carriage-driving, &c., clone on the plantations by Polyriesians, who should be restricted to 'tropical or semi-tropical agriculture'. The time~expired Polynesian must be utterly abolished. He need not be summarily bundled off to his island on the expiry of his engagementBut his alternative to this deportation must be that, as soon as his term shall have expired, he must enter on not may thus remain indefinitely, and his stay will be at once a not unfair economy to the planter and a benefit to himself, but a t the end of each engagement he

I

must 'take on again', to use the old soldier's phrase. He must be con-

stantly 'under engagement' in the avocation that alone gives him H, locus stands on Queensland soil. In this there is no f l a v o r of slavery; he may be [ree to let himself out to the highest bidder among the planters. .

..

(V)

A wHiTe AUSTRALIA-THE QUESTION

KANAKA LABOUR

[A Herald Investigation, Melbourne, 1901, pp. 81, 83, 84.] The moral phase of the Kanaka question is in itself a subject big enough for a series of articles, and I can only pretend here to touch upon a few of its features. I have said that the frequent stories of cruelty, ill-feeding, etc., are either wholly untrue or grossly exaggerated, but that does not alter the fact that the black tragic is only thinly disguised slavery. Part of the disguise is the elaborate Queensland system of. laws in regard to it. These laws are so often and Hagrantly violated-even Dr. Maxwell admits

68

COLOURED

LABOUR

EXPERIMENTS

I N QUEENSLAND

some transgressions-that one is constrained to take the view that the whole complicated system is only a blind. . It is not only a traffic in living flesh and blood, hut in human life. The death rate of Kauakas in Queensland, as I have shown in these articles, is not so high as it used to be, but it is still very high. It is estimated that up to the end of 1894 about 50,500 Kanakas had been imported into Queensland, and that of this number no fewer than 10,000-some say 5 11,000-had died. Vv'h:1t awful tribute is this! . How does it accord with national honor to carry on such a business as that represented by the trade i n Kanakas under the glorious Hag of our Empire? Let me quote that experienced Polynesian missionary, the Rev. William Gray, in answer:-'What I am concerned about is that we as a Christian nation should wipe out these races to enrich ourselves. Our credit as a Christian people and a nation is at stake. . .' The last official figures of the Queensland Registrar~General relate to the year 1900. For that year the Kanaka death rate is given at 39.75 per 1000, in contrast with 12 per 1000 for the whole population of the State.

. .

..

.

The same authority tells us that 'the death rate for infants (in Queensland) is nearly ten times as great as that of the total population, ranging from 9 to I I per 100'. Now ,when it is remembered that there are

practically

IIO

Kanaka infants, that the 39% per 1000 means a mortality

incidental to 'the pick of the (Kanaka) males', one may grip the idea of what this tragic in human beings is. . Readers of these articles will have been impressed by the fact that my inquiries amongst the planters invariably showed what a small number of Polynesian women are imported. 'The proportion of women was always scandalously small," says a writer in Progress, 'but generally reached something approaching 10 per cent. With the destruction of the Liberal party who stood watch-dog over this shameful business, the traffickers

..

appear to have considered that there was no further need for keeping u p appearances' How just that criticism is let the following figures of Kanaka population a t the end of each year named show: Percentage

of Females '92

Males 7,514

Females

769

'93

7,088

'94 '95 '96

7,830 8,094 8,003

683 651 651 600

'97 '98

7,807 8,099

537 490

I

to Males 9.20 8.79 7.68

7.44 6.97 6.43 5.70

Recently I saw a reference to the Kanaka, in which he was described as 'fairly morale Now, whether he is moral or not in his relations with the women of his own race is a matter with which I do not for the moment concern myself. The matter of special importance to us is his relations

with our women. It is that very concern which has time and again con~

SECTION THREE DOCUMENTS

69

vented decent American citizens into bands of lynchers capable of taking the most fiendish revenge upon the negro who had dared to lift his eyes to a white woman. Does any sane man suppose that the hordes of fullblooded and unmarried savages brought from the South Sea Islands to work in the cane fields are leading lives of celibacy? I am told on reliable authority that there are a t least twenty-three prostitutes at Bundaberg whose 'business' is confined to Kanakas. Of these nine are Japanese, the remainder are European women. At Cairns the _Japanese women in the 'business' number thirty, and there are 'some low white women', but I did not get the number. 'o

..

Racial Homogeneity Becomes a National

Policy (H)

GROWTH OF TH18 WHITE AUSTRALIA CONCEPT Reprinted below is the latter part of N. B. NAIRN'S article, 'A Survey of the History of the White Australia Policy in the 19th Century/', Australian Quarterly, vol. x v i i i , September 1956, pp. 24-31. Grateful acknowledgment for permission to republish is made to the author and to the Australian Institute of Political Science.

The anti-Chinese movement underwent different forms as it went to final success in the late 1880s. The goldfields phase had ended by the late 'sixties. By then the restriction policies of the colonies had checked the influx of Chinese; even if many still remained. At the same time, the operation of the colonial Acts had been cumbersome; the diiiiculties of controlling Asian immigration to a n island continent by means of a number of different legislative enactments had been made explicit. Meanwhile, the Federation Movement had not advanced considerably. Despite the

basic

conviction of a common bond, the political and economic realities in colonies consolidating their new democratic institutions were hindering full realization of the necessity of federal union. But the idea of Federation remained active and suggestive. In 1870 Gavan-D uffy, in the Victorian Parliament, moved for a select committee to review the question. The Chinese in Australia were finding occupations in many

industries including the pastoral, but mainly as hawkers, market gardeners and in light manufacturing. In each case they were competing for scarce jobs with white workers. This situation kept alive opposition to them, with important stress deriving from the

growth of trade unions. And a not unimportant widening of

opposition developed as some of the more enterprising of them

SECTION FOUR READINGS

71

branched out as merchants. They continued to 'send money ou: of the country", their living habits remained strange, they still showed not the glimmer of interest in democracy. . In 1871 the N.S.\-'\7. Trades and Labour Council was founded. A new power and controlled direction was given to the workers. The Council soon became concerned with the whole question of immigration; a lira policy of opposition emerged. On European immigration, Council wanted such a firm control as to approach prohibition. On Asian immigration Council wanted prohibition. This policy summed up the workers' position: they resented all immigration on economic grounds, but were prepared to tolerate European newcomers, albeit grudgingly, because they knew that

such immigrants were capable of sympathy with their aspirations, industrial and political. The workers were prepared to take a risk on the possibility of general development finally absorbing what

was at first surplus population. But they were not prepared to do this with Asians, for the good reason that they were convinced that Asians would never come to accept Australian industrial standards. Yet within this general situation, it is possible to find torrid references to most groups of British as well as Continentals, notably Italians. And in the 'seventies is noted the use of the term 'Asiatics'. Of course, the usual insulting rationalisations concerning Chinese living habits continued to be made. Two events in the 'seventies raked the embers of opposition.

Additional gold discoveries were made in Queensland and in 1878 occurred an important strike of seamen which affected both r and Queensland. The Queensland government met that N.S.\&. colony's influx of Chinese with restrictive measures which were criticised by the British Government; support for the colonial government was forthcoming from a number of the other colonies. Thus were combined the problems of continent-wide action on the Chinese and the role of the British Government in the affairs

of the Australian colonies. An era began of attempted concerted colonial action to solve the Asian problem, sharpened now by

more direct British interference. The Seamen's Strike brought these issues further into open discussion. The basic cause of this complicated action was the by the Australian Steam Navigation Coy, Of Chinese emnlovment 1 J'

Q

-

. -

seamen at considerably less than union rates of pay. The strike ended in a formal compromise which was, in effect, a victory for the men. During the course of the strike it widened out, especially in N.S.'W., to include (i) the whole Chinese question, (ii) rising,

and some extreme forms of, nationalism and (iii) fiscal protection~

72

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

ism in N.S.IW. In a unique way the com amatively simple form of opposition to the Chinese by the workers was linked to the economic and intellectual nationalism of other groups in the community. The Chinese question had entered on id decisive stage. Trade union policy received emphatic confirmation at the first

International Trade Union Congress held in Sydney in 1879 when a motion against 'Asiatic Immigration' was carried unanimously.

Against a background of emerging political parties. the Chinese question became part of practical politics: this was most noticeable in N.S.W. and Victoria, but other colonies witnessed similar

developments. The 'eighties were to see the final success of the anti-Chinese movement, although the formal seal was not applied until 1901. In this decade Australian nationalism grew lushly and strangely, combining transitory anti-British, republican and racial elements with its firm and lasting basis of true Australian patriotism which

had been present from the beginning. Nationalism, shed of its dross, continued as a main driving force towards Federation, a parasitical racialist was to adhere to the White Australia Policy, failing to submerge the Polic)-"s reality, but providing a t once traps for the superficial analyst of the Policy and lures for the unprincipled supporter of it. It was in this period that the term 'White Australia' appears. The term's genesis is almost certainly associated with the acquired party-political aspects. For now the traditional community opposition to non-assimilable elements became the opportunist's weapon as the Policy became a commonplace topic for discussion a t

political and other public meetings. In the process it became a verbal phantasmagoria, and at this level moved into a realm, with

other nostrums of the times, where sober analysis became almost impossible. It is this facet of the lNhite Australia Policy that was accepted extensively then as the whole policy, even as it is to-day. But the fundamental forces conditioning the growth of the Policy remained undisturbed. This misleading, but intensely interesting phase of the Policy's development, is summed up in the debate in the N.S.W- Parlia-

rent in May, 1888, on the Chinese Restriction Bill. Sir Henry Parkes had introduced this Bill in response to a n extraordinary demonstration of public intention to prevent a small group of Chinese from landing in the colony. Shrewd demagoguery had played an important part in the phenomena; and Parkes. was not

a man to resist such forces. Yet in examining his speech it is

SECTION FOUR READINGS

73

possible to discern the truth of the persistence of the White Australia Policy amongst a welter of the typical posturings and rantings considered proper on such occasions. With the 'nineties to usher in both the Parliamentary Labour Party, and a decisive move, at last, towards Federation, it was certain that the Policy would soon enough become enshrined as national policy. In many respects the complete development of Federation has not, even yet, been satisfactorily explained. The Parliamentary Labour Party was strongest a t first in N.S.W. It was more interested in immediate social and political reform than in Federation. Yet the new Party was vitally concerned with the idea of Australian nationhood; its trade union base had long been opposed to Asians; and it was as sensitive as any group to undue British interference. In this area of political action, which can only be sketched here, there was plenty of room for otherwise diverse groups to coalesce. Notably in Victoria where comparatively advanced social legislation had evolved with a fiscal policy of protection, there were attachments between Labour and liberal groups. The White Australia Policy was one of the most potent formal points of agreement, and this extended beyond Victoria. In this way the Labour Party was forced to take an interest in Federation; and the White Australia Policy slowly emerged as one of the prime motivating forces towards that end; until in the first Federal election campaign it was to be, in effect, the first plank in all parties' policies. Continued British review of Australian action on Asian immigrate facilitated this development. Japanese, especially, and Indian affairs now began to replace Chinese as the main centre of interest. When the first Federal Parliament was elected the Australian people had made it clear that they wanted action to give watertight legislative form on a national scale to their wishes to keep out Asians. This fact is unmistakable and impressive. The unanimity of opinion is startling. It is quite impossible for any one factor to have produced such a remarkable situation. Racialism, or excessive nationalism had played its part but invariably it had produced its opposite; whenever it had been stressed, other points oiview, related to Christian principles or simple humanity, had been put; in any ease, racialism had tended to include European as well as Asian groups; it could not, nor did it, of itself, condition Australian opinion on Asian immigration. Similarly, the fact that the White Australia Policy had become a part of practical politics, then a major part, and finally a sine

qua non to election, did not of itself explain the unanimity of

»

74

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

opinion, on the contrary, the very statement of the evolution of the Policy as a political argument reflects the truth of the situation: the Policy moved to the top of all parties' programmes simply because the politicians perceived that that was what the people wanted. On the other hand, the Policy's continual projection into public discussion by means of political organisation, and

especially its automatic espousal by the Labour Party did help materially to clarify and formulate general opinion on the matter and paved the way, necessarily, for the final Federal action. But it is well to recall that the whole question had been debated in public since the 18405, before political parties existed. The economic factor was of infinitely greater importance in the

development of the White Australia Policy than either the racial or political. Yet even it, alone, does not explain the Policy's progress. It is true enough that Asian labour (and especially Kanaka labour-a question apart from the essential White Austra» Ii Policy) tended to be ineliicient, just .as convict l a b o r was inefficient. And as improved technological processes came to be applied to production so did Asian l a b o r become less and less productive. This argument concludes with the H-'hite Australia

Policy coming to be inevitably accepted as more capital was applied to industry and capitalists' insight became sharpened by greater profits. It is enough to point out that certain groups of European labour also tended to be inefficient; and that such groups were both resented and Finally accepted; and that i n the long run these groups did achieve a reasonable standard of productive efficiency, as the Asian groups certainly would also have done. The economic factor requires a wider analysis than a simple linking of Asian l a b o r to advancing capitalism. Above all, the factor has t.o be related more fundamentally to the evolution

of the Australian ethos against the world background of the 19th century.

The 1901 debates on the Immigration Restriction Bill, both in the House of Representatives and the Senate, provide a summary

of all the reasons advanced for the existence of the White Australia Policy. Racial, economic, patriotic arguments are all there, expressed in all relevant forms. The whole of the debates require a more detailed analysis than is possible here, especially important is the party-political background as seen in the finessing of George Reid and J. C. Watson, in the delicate alignment of rudimentary parties and groups, and in the par ties' internal troubles. Another vital factor is the positive role of the British Government in its advice regarding the terms of the Bill and the political use made

SECTION FOUR READINGS

75

of this advice by the Opposition and the Labour Party. Above all, it must be kept in mind that these debates were the first on any but machinery Bills in the Federal Parliament. The speakers were alive to this occasion; some of them were inexperienced; it is clear that all of them felt the tension which influenced their arguments and language. Each part of the debates received minute examination in the daily press, and was accompanied generally by comments

from the representatives of the Japanese Government in Australia. Thus there are many traps in the debates for the unwary or uninformed. All of the members of Parliament were agreed that Asians and other unwanted immigrants should be excluded from Australia.

There were one or two philosophical objections to the White Australia Policy interspersed in speeches but the speakers did not vote against the essence of the Bill. The main argument against

the Bill did not touch this essence, b u t was rather directed against the educational test-on two grounds: (a) it was a dishonest method of exclusion and (b) it reflected too great a conformity with the British Government's advice. \'Vith regard to (a) there was much sincere confusion, but it is certain that the objections to the Australian Governlnent's relations with the British Government on the matter were part of normal Parliamentary manoeuv-

rings. The Government's case was in fact put by Alfred Deakin, although Barton spoke ably. The educational test was justified; it survived in the Bill but only just, the Senate debate on this clause providing an interesting case of Australian Parliamentary proceedings as affected by party agreements. During the Representatives' debate it became possible to test public opinion on the actual terms of the Bill as a result of a Queensland by-election. L. E. Groom was returned and came fresh to the debate to tell

Parliament that he had successfully gone 'before (his) constituents pledged to the principles of the Barton Bill'. The feature of the historic debates giving them dignity and purpose was the idea of nationhood developed by many speakers,

but most eiiectively by Deakin. This leavened the whole proceedings, swamping all racial crudities and economic extravagances. Before considering some parts of Deakin's speeches as examples of this compelling essence of the general principles behind the Bill, it is worthwhile to have a brief look at a part of Groom's speech. This Queensland M.P. was destined for a notable career in the Federal Parliament, he came fresh from the people, and h e was a n

Australian of character and resource. Groom told the House:

'I have just come from a contested election where the question

76

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

of a White Australia was really a vital one, and I can say emphatically that I believe that principle has given an impetus to our national life. It is no mere catch-cry, it is no mere

sentimental question, it is a question striking deeply into the vital principles of this new Commonwealth. . . We are just on the eve of our national life, and it behaves us at the very beginning to decide who are going to be the citizens of the Commonwealth. It is not a matter that we have to decide for ourselves only. We have got to decide it for posterity; and it is

.

right that we should decide definitely that Australia shall be for

those of European extraction.

. . .'

These words not only raise the nationhood question, they also associate with it the unequivocal direction of a democratic people to their elected representatives. But it was Deakin who really got to the heart of the matter. The survival of the White Australia Policy to a stage in which it could be formally stated in legislative form to cover the entire

nation had only been possible because it had been an essential part of the development of Australia to a"nation. Rooted basically with economic considerations of great importance, the Policy, nevertheless, transcended those associations in its even more fundamental connection with Australian patriotism. The progress of a group of disconnected or loosely connected colonies to the status of a worthy nation had been inextricably linked with the development of a democracy on the British model. Indeed, in

some significant mechanical electoral functions, such as adult sufiraoe, and in some more basic democratic measures, such as payment of members, the Australian democracy had outstripped the British, even as it was sustained by the latter. Embedded in this democratic progress, helping to make it, were certain principles having social as well as other implications: the most irnportant of these was the White Australia Policy. The Policy was not the least of the forces making an Australian nation possible in the terms required by Australians. However regrettable, given the 19th century situation of Asian peoples, they could make no contribution to such a nation. On the contrary they could only be a threat to it. As Deakin put it in democratic and generous words: 'All that is necessary for us to urge in justification of this

measure is that these people do diHFer from us in such essentials of race and character as to exclude the possibility of any advantageous admixture or inter-marriage if we are to maintain the . Our standards of civilization to which we are accustomed. civilization belongs to us, and we belong to it; we are bred in it,

..

77

SECTION FOUR READINGS

and it is bred in us. It its us and is our means of progress and advancement. These people have their own independent development.,

their own qualities, and also the civilizations,

forms of life and government which naturally attach to them. They are separated from us by a gulf which we cannot bridge to the advantage of either. The attitude of Australia is not an offensive one when it becomes understood that it is based upon these principles. It is not based upon any claim of superiority. Where is the standard of comparison just to both? . arguments which are used in favour of exclusion do not call for any reflection whatever upon the character or capacity of the people excluded.'

. .

(b) CHINESE COMPETITION IN DIVERSE OCCUPATIONS

This extract is reprinted, with acknowledgment

to author and

journal, from DR. G. ODDIE'S article, 'The Lower Class Chinese and the Merchant Elite in Victoria, 1870-1890', Historical 6Studies: 5 Australia and New Zealand, vol. 10, November 1961, pp. -7. In the latter part of his article, not reproduced here, Dr. Oddie describes the social cohesion of the Chinese enclaves in Victoria, and points to the unusual degree of political control exercised by the merchant elite. Bloc voting by the Chinese was urged as a reason for their disenfranchisement and exclusion. See Victorian Par~ Ziamentary Debates, 22 September 1880, p. 357.

During the period 1870-1890, contemporaries, whether friendly or hostile to Chinese immigration, were careful to distinguish between two types of Chinese migrants. On the one hand were the

majority, the illiterate lower class Chinese described in the colored phrase of one member of parliament as 'the sweepings of the Canton river', and on better educated and socially The lower class Chinese peasants and farm-labourers

the other hand were the minority, the superior Chinese merchants. who reached Victoria were mostly from Canton and surrounding areas.

In order to obtain the capital necessary for their outfit and passage to the colony some of them sold or mortgaged their plots of land, while others managed to obtain loans from village headmen or merchants which they were expected to repay from their earnings on the gold-fields or elsewhere. They were generally birds of passage having no intention of

settling permanently in the country they visited. 'The majority in the colony,' wrote the Rev. W. Young, a missionary who worked

78

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

among them for many years, 'are looking forward with hope to that happy consummation, the return to their fatherland.'1 Emigration statistics show that there was a large and steady number of departures and, according to one report, the average stay of the Chinese in Victoria was only about time years, this Period being roughly equivalent to the length of stay of the Chinese in California. These lower class Chinese clung tenaciously to their own customs and beliefs and could have felt little desire to assimilate with the European community. Victorians noted with disgust that they failed to understand the niceties of democratic procedure and, in spite of missionary activity, were slow to accept the Christian faith. The vast majority came without wives and families and were prepared to tolerate considerable hardships and isolation for their short period of residence.

Many were living in considerable poverty. This is made evident not only by the comments of both Europeans and the Chinese themselves, but by the high proportion of arrests (in the two localities where records were available) for idleness, vagrancy and insuiiicient means of support. Their separate camps and quarters on the goldfields, which soon became the haunt of European pick-

pockets and prostitutes, were very often sub-standard shanties which could have afforded little warmth and protection in bad weather. During the seventies and eighties, the occupational pattern of the lower class Chinese was steadily changing. Census reports show that in 1871 74 per cent of the Chinese in the colony were occupied in mining, but that by 1891, this proportion had dropped to 25 per cent. The position was neatly summarized Br a representative of the Ainalgaxnated Miners' Association who stated that European miners were no| longer worried by competition and that 'owing to the protection of the laws and the great depth a t which mining was now conducted the Chinese were gradually withdraw-

ing from the Heidi? Chinese remaining on the goldfields generally continued as alluvial miners patiently going over deserted claims.

They worked as individual fossickers, in gangs on a profit-sharing basis, or were engaged by European or Chinese employers. 'While the proportion of Chinese occupied in mining was steadily declining, the proportion of those in agricultural and pastoral pursuits had risen from 8 per cent in 1871 to 30 per cent in 1891. An increasing number of lower class Chinese were turning to 'Rein W. Young, 'Report on the Condition of the Chinese Population in

Victoria', V. up., Vic. Leg. Ass., 1868, v. iii, p. 33.

SECTION FOUR READINGS

79

markebgardening, iggiards the end of the century the Chinese owned and worked most of the market-gardens within easy reach of Melbourne and were the principal vegetable growers in country districts. 611 and industry they often succeeded in areas where others failed, and were able to undersell their European competitors. Chinese also owned and worked tobacco plantations on the Ovens River and elsewhere. Here, too, they were causing concern among' Europeans. 'The experience of the people of Bcechworth,' said a local storekeeper to a committee inquiring into the state of the trade, 'was that the cultivation of tobacco had a tendency to fall into the hands of Chinamen, who would work for smaller wages than Europeans. They turned out an inferior article, and the result was serious injury to the inclustry.'3

Other lower class Chinese were working for European employers as general station hands, sheep~washers and shearers and as seasonal laborers-harvesting, working in the hop~lields and picking grapes. Once again white workers reacted sharply, The Shearers' Union was particularly sensitive and, in September 1887, W. G. Spence remarked that there was a great danger of the Chinese putting Europeans out of the shearing business. 'He had received a dozen letters from the Riverine district, urging him to prevent as much as possible the unfair competition of Chinamen in shearing and other station work." Such fears were probably prompted not merely by the willingness of some Chinese to work for low wages and perhaps for longer hours, but also because they were proving the better men. In 1863, the A r a f a t Advertiser pointed out that Chinese shearers in the district 'are represented 'Q'

as being most careful with sheep, close shearers and civil and

obedient to the orders of the superintendent'. Referring to Chinese harvesters as well as shearers, the Rev. Young stated that 'in

this capacity, as a general rule, they give great satisfaction to their employers, and though they cannot perform as much work as Europeans, yet what they do is done carefully and steadily. One writer to the Australian in July 1887 was adamant. 'I speak from experience when I say that as cook, shepherd, shearer or gardener you cannot beat him. He is sober, patient, industrious and most reliable. Besides my own observation I have the direct testimony of a large station manager, who is also a magistrate, that during his thirty years experience, he has ='Age, 20 Sept. 1887. :I

Ovens and .Murr¢¢}' Advertiser, 21 Apr. 1888.

* F. c5*P., Vic. Leg. Ass., 1888, v. i., Papers Relating to Chinese Immigration.

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

80

almost invariably found the Chinese amongst the most valuable of his station hands." Finally, in the face of even more intensive European opposition, lower class Chinese were entering the furniture trade in increasing numbers and, in 1888, represented 28 per cent of all furnituremakers in the colon;/.5l§"hese Chinese were fairly prosperous and were rapidly extending their premises. In 1888 one observer commented:

'Whenever an old shanty has been knocked down and a decent building set u p in its place, the new tenants are almost certain to be Chinese cabinet-makers, who may be seen planing and chiseling till past midnight. And instead of being confined in Little Bourke Street, as was once the case, these celestial carpenters are gradually encroaching on other parts of the city. In Lonsdale Street, Latrobe Street and other thoroughfares north of Little Bourke Street, a great many substantial buildings, some of them two stories high, and formerly used by Europeans as hostels or lodging houses, are now Chinese cabinet-making factories.

(C)

...

THE LATE COLONIAL PERIOD The restrictive laws passed by some of the colonial parliaments after 1896 and by the new Commonwealth Parliament in 1901 differed from previous legislation in two obvious ways. They were intended to exclude all non-European immigrants, and they employed, in place of the blunt language of the anti-Chinese acts, the more courteous device of the dictation test. Readers who wish to study in detail the complex of forces that produced these new departures

are referred to the Melbourne University Press publications' A. T. Yarwood, Asian Migration to Australia; and Myra Willard, History of the White At.ssh'afla Policy. It is the purpose of this introductory piece* to explain briefly why the colonies extended their network of restrictions to cover races other than the Chinese, and why they used a less offensive form of legislation.

The first question is immediately posed by noticing the small numbers of Japanese and Indians resident in Australia. I n the State censuses of 1901, only 3,554 Japanese and 4,681 Indians were recorded, compared with the Chinese total of 30542. Clearly, "Many Chinese furniture makers had been miners who, finding the alluvial diggings in the district all but exhausted, drifted to Melbourne in search of employment and finally settled down as cabinet makers. (C. H. Cheong, Chinese Remotzstranee to the Parliament and People of Victoria, Melbourne, 1888, p- 31.)

* By A. T. Yarwood.

SECTION FOUR READINGS

al

the bills of the 1890's were of a preventive character. They were devised to meet a potential influx made possible, in part, by the opening up of regular steamship comm plication between Japan and Australia and by the beginnings of Japanese l a b o r recruitment for the Australian tropics. In spite of the arguments of a

few powerful advocates who applauded the marvelous advances of the Japanese nation and who pointed to rich trading prospects, the view that won general acceptance was that Japanese, being of non-European race, could not be assimilated into Australian society. For the same reason the people of India, though British subjects, were to be excluded. As George Reid, Premier of New South Wales, expressed the point, in moving the second reading of the Coloured Races Restriction and Regulation Bill of 1896, which was subsequently refused Royal Assent . . 'I do not think it necessary to make a very long speech . much of what was said in 1881 and 1888 on the question of restricting the immigration of Chinese is applicable to this bill; in fact it is simply an extension of the views which were held at that time in connection with the Chinese' This, it must be recalled, was a time in world history in which the theories of the Social Darwinists combined with the military, technical, and administrative pre-eminence of the white races to confirm Europeans in their assumption of an intrinsic superiority over the colored races. In Australia, th e popular mood was expressed by the Brisbane Worker, which welcomed the proclama~ dion of the new Commonwealth and the beginning of the 20th Century with an editorial that called on the federated colonies to form a society free from the 'class distinctions, traditions, super-

..

.

stitions and sanctified fables and fallacies of the older nations',

free also from the extremes of wealth and poverty, a 'state built up of a multitude of perfect human units'. In the racially homogeneous utopia of the Australian nationalist there was to be no place for the colored man. George Reid made a vital contribution to the movement that culminated in the Commonwealth's Immigration Restriction Act of 1901, both in calling the intercolonial conferences of 1896 and .1898 that sought to evolve a common policy on non~European immigration and in insisting on diplomatic arguments for excluding Japanese. In his own parliament and at the London premiers' conference of 1897, he warned of the danger of permitting the development of a 'uitlander' situation that might give the Japanese government a pretext for intervening in Australia, as Britain was shortly- to intervene in the Transvaal, on behalf of its

B2

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

distressed nationals. Striking vindication for this policy was soon afforded Br Q.ueensland's experience of diplomatic protests against her discriminatory treatment of Japanese, and by the bitterness injected into Japanese-American relations for three decades by

the disputes over the disabilities suffered by the Japanese residents of California. Reid's apprehension of the new kind of danger that might be posed by a sizable Japanese minority bore immediate fruit in the 1896 bills, excluding the coloured races in unambiguous terms. In company with his fellow premiers at the London conference of 1897, Reid heard Mr. Chamberlain's appeal for the self-goveining colonies to refrain from legislation that offered a gratuitous insult

to the Indian and other colored races which comprised a large portion of the British Empire. The Secretary of State for the Colonies recommended instead action on the lines of Natal's

Immigration Restriction Act of 1897, which required a modest standard of literacy in a European language. This device was not at first acceptable to Reid, who wanted to legislate in clear and unmistakable terms. But the diplomatic pressure mounted by the Japanese government, directly through its consular stall and indirectly through the Foreign Office, at length persuaded the Australian premiers of the expediency of using the Natal device. Western.Australia, New South 'Wales and Tasmania did so in 1897 and 1898. The Commonwealth followed their lead in 1901 with the Immigration Restriction Act, establishing a dictation test in any European language chosen by the administering officer that was to prove capable of excluding any immigrant to whom it was applied

4 Documents Ii)

POLICE REPORT ON THE CHINESE RESIDENT I N NEW

SOUTH WALES Inspector Gencral's Olficc, 12 November 1878. N.S.VV'. Government Archives 4/829.1

'Chinese Immigration 1880-I881.' The conclusions which may, I think, be drawn from these returns are:

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

83

I. That the Chinese are, as a class, industrious and inoffensive. 2. That where they are congregated together in large numbers, especially i n cities such as Sydney and Newcastle, they are immoral in their habits, and having no women of their own country with them their intercourse with European women is degrading to the latter, and socially pernicious. 3. That the Chinese are almost invariably inveterate gamblers. 4. That a large number of the Chinese are opium smokers, though the habit does not appear to have been adopted to any great extent by European women living with them.

5. That when the Chinese are employed singly, or in small numbers scattered over a district, either on their own account or in service, their characteristic is more favourable, and the example of their patient industry i n gardening and other occupations might be followed with advantage in

byJ

Europeans,

My own observations, and the result of my inquiries when travelling in the interior, confirm the reports now made, and the only suggestion which occurs co me to make is,-that the Chinese and their dwellings should be placed under more stringent official observation and control, when, no doubt, any habits socially injurious to the community at large would be more vigorously exposed and checked than a t present. It is unnecessary to add that there are many Chinese of a superior class engaged in business in Sydney and elsewhere who are highly respectable citizens.

I may mention that the number of Chinese in the Colony when the last census was taken in 1871, was 7220, and according to the statistics of the Registrar General that number has been diminished by 358 since that date by the excess of departures over arrivals seaward, but taking rivals overland, I am disposed to think the consideration number returned by the police approximately correct.

I have, Sac., EDMUND FOSBERY,

Inspector General of Police.

(ii)

THE SEAMEN'S STRIKE In mid 1878 the Australian Steam Navigation Company began to employ Chinese seamen in its Pacific Island and coastal trade. Rates of £2.15.0 per month were paid, compared with the white unionist's £6.8.0. The following extracts from the Town and Country journal indicate the solidarity of l a b o r support for the striking seamen, who remained 'out' from November 1878 to .January 1879. An important factor in securing the virtual capitulation of the company was the Queensland government's decision to withdraw its mail subsidy and to make its future award conditional upon the exclusive employrnen§ of white l a b o r . This fact, together with frequent references to support being given to the strikers by men of .. . ..

. . .

under

cs

16 years

Children

No. ofreputed Opium Smokers

RETURN OF CHINESE RESIDENT IN NEW SOUTH WALES, 1878

*H

i

* . 1 . . .

go

EE go

. r

.r

I*-1

,CPI

I

_ # L i l

.

_

E

n

c"~~d-=L='a

.n an

.

-

l

_

-

1 1

LD -waH

* I

m

..I

naaaoannd*

U mr

.

-

*l"'-

n

a

-

m

C4'1C¢'l»--r

r-I

LD

=::-

1

C""~.l.-I.-1-1¢"".lI

-

..

" "

*HH

Gu54-i*_*I

mmm

D,;:E:!E"5g

.u"q_,_, EF.: DF3lT-,'».q'Umu

C 1 " ] - l " } ' L D C ' * " F " I

d*

-Ra

3 mnm¢5M U+::»'¢=u

3 u I-f in

pa

I LD DD C`*l

-:--d- . m m mmVmhmmm-

E

:is

:::c-4r"-:=:

m

E

_QU

L*.=: --H: D .g Dun Z: :=»

DO C*I

u-l

1-1-1

:et

EE

-==i~

uri-'

E dl

:D

'EE

C"~IL'P m m rwL-:a EUCG CPI LD DO CCI

:is

m

'U

c:

G

it:

111111111111

.2 EU E m

E H.

.

C'~JE'\l-1

.~='1--

l

* gr;

l

|

. l

C'*-I Tl'l

FI-1

D

5

E

no

CO C11 -I

E n

'go

_+

»-1 _ t

m

|

.r-1

~:"-I

I

g.:

E

Ea 5.5

D

an

U

;:»E Dru... Z&?

m m + ¢ m ¢ m + m

é E

__

l .

in

II

--4

I-l

CQ

I-I

u: m

1-1

r-

1-*I

1-'I

+:::=

Ln

C"~I go go

1--4

DO no cu -1-1

1-1

I

PFI

-L'

on

I

1-1

¢-=

.-.-

.

r n g u p l

E

.EU-'-I

'U

.

mf-nm

u m m m m : .az Q

a

D

in

on

I"'-

Q*

.|

11"

E

n:»s:¢:.=1-.1::=1"--d'rI'-IG".»\-~r;;~1 M h hmmmm~ D

Wh

C".1

UP

. ..-

. *L*

...s I

1

§ § E2

r"VI"*8 - r

|B

q.

: 2 . ,.,.g m

:,... :.

'Ll_.:

*L

or v f é

I-.r

|:

m

1

4-=

h

LD

EC"-IE¢'§DUd"'U'JC"~IH»-rG

:

E

H .F

.

:T

f

"

:i

4"*. "1

1r .

.. of: n i ..kg n . . r

.

h

.

i

* *

1,4

\

. F

;.,,=.

:=

D

:

.., ._E . : 1.

.

5 "¢'i*-.rjif';1

ET

=§§.ZJ

..l

*

.-

5 s-

I~

. *` *F **

*.

.

,. . *T* " es:. 5;-=:. m. .r.=. . =-=y means of intercolonial conferences to erect a continent-wide legislative screen against Chinese immigration.

[Myra Willard, History of the White Australia Policy, pp. 61-2.] Sir Henry Parkes also learned in 1880 of the Hong Kong government's practice of overcoming its shortage of prison accommodation by offering Chinese criminals the alternative of deports son. An abrupt telegram of 17 June 1880 drew the satisfactory reply that Governor Hennessy had abandoned the practice three years before, thinking it 'unfair to the Australian colonies' to which a large proportion of the criminals had elected to go. The incident, though closed, probably aroused misgivings about the adequacy of protection that could be secured by emigration restrictions at the

Chinese end. [N.S.W. Archives 4/829.1 'Chinese Immigration 1880188I'.]

Deputation to Sir Hermy Parses on the Chinese Question [Extracts from Sydney Morning Herald, 29 Islay 1880

Yesterday morning a deputation, consisting of Messrs. ]. B. Douglas, B. Row, J. Millikin, F. Braidwood, and J, Josephson, and representing a public meeting held in the Guild Hall on the 5th instant, waited upon the Colonial Secretary, to present a memorial in favour of prohibiting Chinese coming to the colony. MR. DOUGLAS read the document, which set forth that the Chinese were not desirable colonists nor traders, that their habits were antagonistic to those of Europeans, and that great antipathies existed between the

two races; also that the presence of the Chinese race obstructed the social

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

89

progress of Europeans, that the Chinese were amenable to maa.wi governmental authorities, but only to their own, while their numbers were increasing so rapidly that they would be able soon to defy the law; that unless the introduction were shortly checked they would absorb all the means by which Europeans derived a livelihood; that the sanctuaries of the colony were reeking with their abomination, to alleviate which nothing had been done, and that it would have been better for the colony to have remained a convict settlement than for it to become a sink of Chinese depravity.

It was said that the colony was bound by Imperial enactments, but he knew of nothing in the treaty between England and China preventing the people here legislating in their own interests. Besides treaties might be abrogated if they interfered with the necessary conditions of a State. Several nations had proved this, and had turned foreigners away from their ports. And if the people here had not sovereign rights of their own to preserve why was the power given to them to legislate for themselves. It would be a terrible misfortune to alienate Englishmen from Englishmen, but this he feared would take place if something were not done to prevent it. The diiliculties America was experiencing in connection with the Chinese l a b o r question were enormous. The Americans were stupid enough to permit the evils to accumulate, and the people here with the example of America before them would be more stupid if they permitted themselves to be ruined from the same causes. Anything that the people outside could do to prevent the accumulation of similar evils here would be like battling with the winds. It was to the Legislature they must look. I n the time of Sir George Gipps, i n 1842, the Imperial Government

decided that the introduction of aliens would be detrimental to the interests of the colonists. Yet now there was responsible government in the colony the introduction was permitted to go on. The evils at present were in bounds, and could be cured if suitable precautions were taken, but if allowed to increase much more they would not be curable, even by legislation. He hoped that the colonies would take combined action

on the subject now. So HENRY PARKES said he had listened to the statements the deputy

son had made, and he syrnpathised with much that had been said. The evils attending the introduction of large numbers of Chinese into the

colony were very great, and might lead to consequences which even farseeing men did not clearly foresee just now, but the applying of a remedy to them was more diihcult than appeared to be considered Br the persons the deputation represented. It was very easy to sec the mischiefs, and to look straight to the exclusion of the Chinese to remedy them, but nothing in such a direct way as that could be done. Nothing could be effected in such a matter without having in view their relations with other countries. England, of all countries in the world, had been the pioneer in insisting upon the free intercourse of nations; and it must be

borne in mind that, far above the mere letter of treaties, the object of

England was to force an entry into China for Englishmen. This was the

r

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

90

policy of England, and it was accompanied by a measure extremely dillicult to defend compelling the Chinese to receive the opium of England.

This having been the policy of England-to open free intercourse with all people-the people here could not act.without recognizing it. Some things the deputation or the memorial expressed he could not agree to. They were not borne out by history or fact. For instance, it was no use to

say

that the Chinese we-'re

2 semi

sax age race, when they

p()qql.c\qq9d

one

of the oldest forms of civilization in the world, although to a great extent it was a mystery to Europeans. He had never joined with those who only saw the vices of the worst class of Chinese, and who, measuring the nation from those vices, regarded the Chinese as one of the most

inferior races. He considered them a very intelligent people, and it was because he did this he apprehended that great dii-Hculties would arise from their coming here. I t was said that the first Napoleon expressed himself to the effect that if they learned the art of shipbuilding, they would be able to conquer the world. . One remark from the deputation he concurred in-that whatever was done now ought to be done in union with all the colonies. He would open communications with all the other

..

Australian Governments, to ascertain what they thought on the subject. That was the only definite promise he could make; but he could assure the deputation that the whole question should be dealt with in the way most consistent with all the conflicting interests involved in it. . . .

Representation. to S ecretwrgr of State The following paragraphs reflect a growing demand by the Australasian parliaments for uniform action against Chinese immigration. They are extracted from letter to the Secretary of State for the Colonies of 25 January 1881, signed by the representatives of Victoria, New South `W'ales, New Zealand, South Australia, Queensland and Tasmania.

[N.S.W. Archives 4/829.1 'Chinese Immigration 1880-ISSL] The undersigned, Members of a Conference of all the Australasian

Governments, now sitting in Sydney, and the duly accredited Representatives of the Colonies named after our respective signatures, have the h o n o r to respectfully approach Your Lordship as Her Most Gracious Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, and to represent to Your

Lordship certain transactions now taking place in Western Australia, which we consider highly prejudical to

the best interests of

Her

Majesty's free and loyal subjects in this part of the world. As a preliminary explanation, we desire to point out that the computed population of the six Colonies we represent is over 2,500,000,

while the population of the Crown Colony of Western Australia is under 30,000 souls. In all the six Colonies a strong feeling prevails in opposition to the unrestricted introduction of Chinese, this opposition arising

principally from a desire to preserve and perpetuate the British type in the various populations. I n several of the Colonies stringent measures have been passed at different times to restrict the influx of Chinese

immigrants even at their own expense. In Queensland, a law of this

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

91

restrictive character exists at the present time, in New South Wales a similar Bill was passed by the Legislative Assembly not two years ago, though it was subsequently lost in the Legislative Council, and in South Australia a similar measure was twice passed by the House of Assembly last year. The present Conference has been convened to consider, amongst other things, the subject of Chinese immigration, and a resolution has been agreed to 'recommending uniform legislation on the part of all the Colonies to restrict the influx of Chinese into these Colonies'.

It is while sitting in Conference that we learn for the first time that the small and remote Colony of Western Australia is introducing Chinese a t the public expense. . . If 'Nesters Australia persists in her policy it cannot fail to engender among the people of the other Colonies a sense of public injury and of resentment, and it is almost certain to lead to the enactment of laws imposing restrictions on communication between her ports and the other Australasian ports. It cannot be expected that the people who object to receiving Chinese immigrants direct from China will submit to their arrival by way of Western Australia. At a time when a disposition is growing u p in the Colonies to draw more closely together the ties of political relationship, it is a matter for deep regret that the smallest Colony of the group should take a course so calculated to cut her off from popular sympathy and to isolate her in her colonizing progress. We desire to urge upon Your Lordship that the action of the Government of Western Australia cannot be regarded as other than opposed to the common interest in the social advancement of these Colonies, and that, if it be continued, it must be attended by consequences which it is highly desirable to avoid; and we join in an earnest hope that Her l\Iajesty's Government will take such steps as may be deemed expedient to procure its reversal. Colonial Secretary's Office,

..

Sydney, 25 January 1881. (iv)

THE CRISIS OF 1888

In introducing some representative documents from the Iinal phase of the anti-Chinese movement it will be useful to add a {ew won of clariheation. The reader is also advised to consult Myra Willard's History of the White Australia Policy, . . republished by Melbourne University Press. nu: During 1887 and 1888 some thousands of Chinese arrived a t Port Darwin, intending to work on railway construction and in reported ruby mines in :he Macdonnell Ranges. Partly because of the discov-

ery of smallpox cases on six successive vessels and partly as a consequence of pressures from the eastern colonies, the government of South Australia, which then administered the Northern Territory,

imposed severe restrictions. The How was diverted to other Australian ports. In May 1887 a group of Chinese Commissioners visited the Australian colonies in the course of a survey of the disabilities of the

92

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

overseas Chinese. The visit stimulated some hysterical discussion of dangers to be apprehended from a resurgent China. It led also to a Note from the Chinese Minister in London, protesting against Australian laws as being inconsistent with Anglo~Chinese treaties. Asked by the Colonial Oiiice for their comments on the Note, the majority of the premiers, after consultation amongst themselves, sent

'I

tthe Secretary of State affirming their opposition to despatehes Chinese immigration and requesting the British government to stop the emigration at its source by a treaty with the Emperor of China. Sir Henry Parkes took a speedier course. He telegraphed the

Secretary of State on 31 March 1888, urging immediate diplomatic action, failing which he hinted a t the likelihood of drastic legislation. The state of the Chinese Empire at that time would almost

certainly have rendered restrictions on emigration ineffectual, as Thomas Mcllwraith and Sir Samuel Griffith recognised (Queensland Parliamentary Debates, 12 September 1888, p. 239) . But the opportunity for a diplomatic solution vanished with the arrival in Sydney Of ships carrying a total of 531 Chinese passengers. The much publicised tardiness of the British governments diplomacy contributed to a mood of impatient nationalism. Against

a background of furious anti-Chinese rallies and angry meetings of unemployed workers, Parkes caused standing orders to be suspended

so as to rush an Influx of Chinese Restriction Bill through the New South Wales Parliament. This bill, much criticized by the other colonies which wanted to evolve a common policy a t a projected conference, was designed virtually to prohibit Chinese immigration and to indemnify the government for its action in refusing admission even to those of the May arrivals who had certificates of naturalization and exemption.

of Queensland, 24 March I 888 iN.S.W. Archives 4/884.1-41884.8 'Chinese Immigration 1888'.1

Sir Sarrzttei Walker Griffith to Governor

. . . '7. In the year 1884, the laws already mentioned having been found insufficient to restrict the immigration of Chinese, the Act of 1877 was amended by reducing the number of Chinese passengers that might be brought into Queensland waters by any ship to one for every 100 tons of

registered tonnage, by increasing the sum payable on arrival to £50, and by repealing the provision for the repayment of the poI1~tax on departure within three years from the date of arrival.

8. The effect of the law of 1884 has been that the number of Chinese arriving in Queensland by sea has been in each year somewhat less than the number of those departing. The easy means of transit by land between the various Australian Colonies, however, renders it impossible to exercise any effective control over their migration across the borders of the Colonies. And as the laws of all the other Australian

Colonies are less severely restrictive than those of Queensland, and there

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

93

is a t present no law restricting their immigration into the Northern Territory of South Australia, the danger of an inHux of Chinese from the other Colonies, attracted by the rich goldfields of Queensland, is becoming very serious.

9. It has been proved by experience that the Chinese become formidable competitors with European l a b o r in almost every branch of industry-some branches, such as cabinet-making, having been almost monopolised by them in several of the Australian cities. And as, owing to their habits of life, the cost of subsistence is to them very much less than to Europeans living in accordance with European habits, the effect of their unrestricted competition would undoubtedly be to materially lower wages and reduce the standard of comfort of the European artisan and l a b o r e r . 10. But the main and, in the opinion of this Government, the insuperable objection to allowing the immigration .of Chinese is the fact that they cannot be admitted to an equal share in the political and social institutions of the Colony. The form of civilisation existing in the Chinese Empire, although of a complicated and i n many respects marvelous character, is essentially different from the European civilisation which at present prevails in Australia, and which I hold it to be essential to the future welfare of the Australian Continent to preserve. Under our system every citizen is allowed to have a voice in the government of his country, and the presence in considerable numbers of an alien race occupying an inferior position could not fail before long to bring about very serious troubles, and would probably necessitate a radical change in our political institutions, and entirely alter the future history and development of Australia. When the Chinese Commissioners referred to in the Chinese Minister's note visited Queensland, I took the opportunity of directing their attention to this aspect of the question, which they appeared to fully appreciate.

"He There

%e no doubt, I think, that the public opinion of

Australia is firmly and resolutely opposed to the further introduction of

Chinese, and it has become a matter of pressing moment to devise the best and Mose efficacious means, acting within the rules of international

comity, of excluding them. 12. I conceive, however, that there is no rule, either of international law or comity, which requires one nation to admit within its borders, against its will, the subjects of another. Instances have not been infrequent of the exclusion of persons of alien nationalities from various European States, and, although it has not been the practice of the British Government to follow these examples, I apprehend that the principles of self-preservation would compel any State to prevent an invasion, whether hostile or peaceful, by subjects of another State, which would be injurious to its own subjects. 13. I hope that Her Majesty's Government will support the earnest wishes of the Australian Colonists in this matter, and will use their good offices with the Court of Peking with the view of inducing the

94

RACIAL I-IOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

Chinese Government to discourage, and, if possible, forbid the emigration of Chinese to Australasia.

s. w.

GRIFFITH.

Speech on the Influx of Chinese Restriction Bill [New South Wales Parliamentary Debates, 16 May 1888, pp. 4781-7.1 SIR IIENRY PARKES rose to move: That this bill be printed and now read the second time. He said: In moving the second reading of this bill, I disclaim any Pttrftes'

attitude of even aversion to the Chinese people settled in this country; a n d I disclaim any possible action on the part of the Government in deference to public agitations out of doors. I am convinced in my conscience that neither have we at any time joined with those who have derided, and, as I think, traduced, the Chinese resident i n this country,

nor have we at any time yielded to the pressure of popular agitation. So far as the Chinese people who reside amongst us are concerned, I have for thirty years, many times and often, borne testimony to their lawabiding, industrious, thrifty, and peaceable character, and I have never for a single moment joined with those who have held them up as i n many respects more disreputable than a similar number of English

subjects. For a generation-long before some of the men who are listening to me took any part whatever in public life-and at all times I have opposed the introduction of Chinese upon these, as I conceive, national and to a large extent philosophical grounds: I maintain that in a country like New South "Hales it is our duty to preserve the type of the British nation, and that we ought not, for any consideration whatever,

to admit any element that would detract from, or in any appreciable degree lower, that admirable type of nationality, Now, I would like for a moment to examine the ground on which I stand. I contend that if this young nation is to maintain the fabric of its liberties nnassailed and unimpaired, it cannot admit into its population any element that of necessity must be of an inferior nature and character. In other words, I have maintained at all times that we should not encourage or admit amongst us any class of persons whatever whom we are not prepared to advance to all our franchises, to all our privileges as citizens, and all our social rights, including the right of marriage. I maintain that no class of persons should be admitted here, so far as we can reasonably exclude them, who cannot come amongst us, take u p all

Olla

rights, perform on a

ground of equality all our duties, and share in our august and lofty work of founding a free nation. I t is OI] this very intelligible, this solid ,ground that I, at all events. have been adverse to the admission of Chinese. Now, I want to call attention to the state of the question at the present moment. I t cannot be denied-it is tacitly admitted by all-that there is a widespread legitimate agitation on this subject. Vie, the members of the Government, who are responsible for bringing in this bill, have been in no way instrumental at any time i n promoting this

agitation, but the question is there, black and startling, in the midst of

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

our social economics, irritating, agitating all classes of persons, operating in a most intense way on those who arc: least informed, and for that TCEISOII the most dangerous. Can this thing be a ow "§iilo'n, this gangrene in the body politic, this seed of disturbance in the midst of society? No friend of the social fabric in this country can for a moment say that this thing can be permitted to go O11 without; danger to the peace, to the law, to the good order and stability of society itself. I t is because this thing has grown now to gigantic dimensions of danger-not

a danger in which we need have any fear of an invasion-not that danger which has been in such puerile terms alluded to, but the danger of a poison-running through the veins of society, poisoning the very health of our social life-it is that danger that we have to confront; all the more deadly for its being so subtle, so unseen, and so little demonstrable to the ordinary observer. It is against this danger that we are called upon at the present time to legislate. You tell me about obedience to the law, you tell me that because I occupy the great place which I :Tm permitted to occupy in this country, that I am to set a n example of obedience to the law. I say, in reply, that there is one law which overrides all others, and that is the law of preserving the peace and welfare of civil society. . . I have passed through some thirty-hve contested elections, and I never won a single vote by panclering to any class. Well, we have the work fig-class in the country, great by its apparent and undeniable virtues. I do not believe that at this moment there is any class in society of more value, of higher character, with a more lively sense of social and personal obligations, than the better portion of the mechanics of New South Vfales. Most of those men are married, and have families, many of them have freehold homes, which even in bad times they struggle to preserve. Can it be surprising Lo any of us .that

.

the mothers of those families, during a period of depression such as that which has passed over the country of late, look with something like aversion-with even stronger antipathy-towards the C.hinaman, who is a direct competitor with her husband-the father of her children--and with the future of her household? In this crisis of the Chinese question, and it is a crisis, we have acted calmly, with a desire to see clearly the way before us; but at the same time we have acted with decision, and we do not mean to turn back. Neither for her Majesty's ships of war, nor for her Majesty's representative on the spot, nor for the Secretary of State for the Colonies do we intend to turn aside from our purpose, which is to terminate the landing of Chinese on these shores tor ever, except under the restrictions imposed by the bill, which will amount, and which are intended to amount, to practical prohibition.

Well, in the meantime, what occurs? Ship after ship arrives in this port with Chinese passengers. A day or so before the arrival of the first ship, tWO large meetings of citizens were held in and near the Town Hall, one inside, and the other outside the Town Hall. A large, irregular, and disorderly crowd of persons numbering, 1 believe, some 5,000 or 6,000, headed by the chief magistrate of the city, arrived at Parliament

LA',,z1.1crrrr15 un: 1-nndrum-sDIc1y'un'u\:tuurIL'u1"IIIs-mlzc'2uIc€ co1ur;11ItIm€I-ms-

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

96

House, and as some hon. gentlemen observed to-night, it is almost by a miracle they did not invade this place, and drive you from your seats. Are we to have a recurrence of such proceedings as those? When the Mayor of Sydney pressed upon me to receive a t Parliament House a deputation from that disorderly multitude, I refused to receive it. The request was modified, and I was asked at last if I would receive a deputation consisting of the mayor and one or two other persons. My answer was that, with every respect for the mayor a n d his high position, I could I10t recognise the disorderly proceedings which he countenancer by receiving him at that place; but when he wrote to me a respectful

request, under his own Qiame, as mayor of the city, to know what the Government would do on the arrival of the Afghan with these Chinese passengers, I replied to him in writing that they would not be allowed to land. I have said sulhcient to show my condemnation of the course he pursued; but, still, he was the chief magistrate of the metropolis of this country, and he was a very proper medium through which for me to speak to the people of the country; and I consider that I have given, through the mayor of this city, a written pledge to the people of New South \-Vales that these Chinese passengers shall not land. And, so far as I am concerned, I cast to the winds your permits of exemption. Federated Seamenic Union

of

Australasia

New South 'Wales Branch Sydney, 23 May 1S88_ [N.S.IW. Archives 4;/88-1.1-4/884.8.]

To Sir Henry Parkes Premier.

Sir As the Members of the Federated Seamen's Union throughout the colonies have expressed in their various meetings assembled a n earnest Pe unanimous desire to congratulate you So your colleagues on the resolute

and determined attitude assumed by the government of which you are the distinguished and honored head I am instructed to forward you a Copy of the resolution as carried a t our meeting on Monday evening last by acclamation viz. "That the Federated Sealnen's Unions of Australasia accord their fullest support to and endorse the action of Henry Parkes our Premier in the resolute and determined attitude has taken re the suppression of Chinese Immigration and desire assure him of his having earned the wellwishes and admiration of

Sir he to the

ten thousand Seamen composing this body." Believing as we do that the urgency and necessity of the case required immediate action and that in pursuing the course you have done You was [sic] actuated by a desire to do what the people desired and expected

from you viz. the protection of our race and country from an invasion of innumerable hordes of Chinese So which if allowed to continue would eventually make the solution of the difficulty harder to attain and

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

g7

perhaps the consequences of such solution more serious. We believe that you have the support and voice of the people of this Colony and all Australians who have a spark of patriotic feeling within them and as one of the largest and most numerous bodies of l a b o r existing in the Colonies we would laxnentably fail in our duty if the Members allowed this opportunity to pass without paying you this small tribute of respect

and admiration for you. But while admiring the able and statesmanlike manner in which you have dealt with this question and the eloquent speech you delivered in defence of your action We have not lost sight of those who would for selfish considerations place obstacles in your path and try to defeat the object in view especially one, the Leader of the Opposition who by his demand for total prohibition displays his inconsistency when taken in conjunction with the attitude he took when trying to wipe White Seamen from oft this coast with Chinese Labour. . . . The writer goes on to assure Parkes that the seamen recognize in Mr. George Dibbs, Chairman in 1878 of the A.S.N. Company, a man 'whose pretended antipathy to the Chinese is for 'motives known to

us a-Ii and- no: through any particular aversion he has for the Cliiuese race.' . . Thomas M. Davis.

.

(VI

'THE JAP. ON THE I-IORIZON'

[Leading Article in The Bulletin, Sydney, 22 June 1901.] A few weeks ago news reached Australia that the British Government had vetoed the Queensland Act providing that State aid should be given to certain sugar mills with the condition that

II()

colored labor should

be employed therein-in other words, that the Government, as the party who found the money, and was, therefore, the virtual employer, claimed the right, like any other employer, to engage only white workers if it felt that way inclined. Now an explanation comes by cable: Mr. J, CHAMBERLAIN, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in the House of Commons last night, in answer to a question as to the reason of the Royal assent being refused to the passing of the Queensland Sugar Works Guarantee Act Amending Bill, said that the Imperial Government considered that the Queensland Bill proceeded on objectionable grounds. The principle of the policy of disqualification was based solely on the place of origin of colored labor, and excluded the Indian subjects of Great Britain solely for the difference of race and color. Moreover, the disqualification was offensive to the Japanese, who were placed in the category of Asiatics subject to the bill regardless of their civilisation. 'What a clumsy lie! Australia doesn't care whether the Asiatic was born in Asia or in Sheol. It doesn't care whether he is black, or brown, or bright-8reen with red feet and a blue stripe down the back. So far from

excluding the Asiatic solely on account of his race and color, neither his

98

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL

POLICY

race nor his color have anything to do with the matter. Australia objects to the whole Asiatic, African and Kanaka tribe because they work for wages on which only a person far lower in die scale of civilisation than the white Australian can live, therefore, where they are numerous, the white man, in order to get work, has to come down to their wage-level, and, in consequence, to their civilisation-level. It objects to them because they introduce a lower civilisation. It objects because they intermarry with white women, and thereby lower the white type, and because they have already created the beginnings of a mongrel race, that has many of the vices of both its parents and few of the virtues of either. If JUDAS C1-IAMBJERLAIN can find a black, or brown. or yellow race, in Asia or Africa, that has as high a standard of civilisation and intelligence as the whites, that is as progressive as the whites, as brave, as sturdy, as good nation-making material, and that can intermarry with tlle whites without the mixed progeny showing signs of deterioration, that race is

welcome in Australia regardless of color. It is impossible to have a large colored alien population in the midst

of a white population without a half-caste population growing up between the two. India proves that, would prove it much more conclusively only the white population isn't large enough to be a very extensive parent to the Eurasian mongrel. Spanish and Portuguese rated States show it. Queensland shows it show ii .Amer alreat alarming extent. And Australia thinks highly enough of its British and Irish tleiLn11Céhi to feel a desire to keep the race pure. This may be a mistake, of course. It may be that the British race isn't worth keeping pure. _]OSEPH CIIAMNERI.AIr~t evidently thinks so, and certainly if all the British race was like .IOSEPI-I its preservation would be very doubtful policy. When there were no restrictions upon the influx of Asiatic immigration it Howed into Australia at a rate which, ii it had not been checked, would have monstrously adulterated the scanty white population of this country. Between 1881 and 1891 the half-caste Chinese in Victoria increased by 500 per cent., while the white Victorians increased by 32 per cent. But for the early restrictions put Of] the Chinese influx, .. ... ..

wherehv there were not enough Chinese fathers to go round, Victoria

would apparently be almost a wholly mongrel State by this time-and

Victoria is in a better position than the other mainland States. A continent with only 4,000,000 white inhabitants, and with 800,000,000 colored people at its back door, is easily mongrelised, unless it shuts that back door hard. Australia doesn't want to be mongrel. It values its British descent a great deal more highly than does Renegade JOB of

Birmingham. And if, through Britain's ignorant and brutally-sclNslt course of action, it ultimately loses its white status to a great extent, then the Briton will be the first to jeer at it for doing so, just as he jeers at the Eurasian mongrel and the Levantine. And yet Australia doesn't care a sLt°:1w for mere whiteness, and when .]'os1:pH CHAM8ERLAIN says that it objects to a n y race because of its color

or birthplace, then _losarn CHa11S1SRLAIN is lying. The fact that Josisrii

go

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

is lying can't be too strongly impressed. What Australia values is the fact that the white man leads the world in almost everything. If CHAMBr.Rr.A1N can show a black or brown race with higher civilisation, and higher mental capacity, and a greater ability to lead the world, than the white, then Australia wants to import 10 millions of that race as soon as possible. But there is no such race. The Japanese CHAMBERLAIN

is probably the nearest approach to it, but even he doesn't fill the bill. If Britain is shocked a t Austrzllia's desire to maintain its pure European descent, then Britain doesn't know the value of its own white status, and is only lit to be a nigger, and a 'very poor kind of nigger at that.

(vi)

SPEECHES

ON

THE

IMMIGRATION

RESTRIcTION

BILL, 1901

[Commonwealth PnrliametNary Debates, 1° September 1901, p. 4804] Mr. DEAKIN (Ballard-Protectionist Attorney~Genera1) We here find ourselves touching the profoundest instinct of individual

...

or nation-the instinct of seE-preservation-for it is nothing less than the national manhood, the national character, and the national future that are at stake. . . No motive power operated more universally on this continent or in the beautiful island of Tasmania, and certainly no

.

motive operated more powerfully in dissolving the technical and arbitrary political divisions which previously separated us than the desire that we should be one people and remain one people without the admixture of other races. I t is not necessary to rcllect upon them even by implication. It is only necessary to say that they do not and cannot blend with us; that we do not, cannot, and ought not to blend with them. This was the motive power which s a v e d tens of thousands who take little interest in contemporary politics-this was the note that touched particularly the Australian born, who felt themselves endowed with a heritage not only of political freedom, of a n ample

within which the race might expand, and an obligation consequent upon such an endowment-the obligation to pass on to their children and the generations after uninvaded.

them

that territci

undiminished

[Commonwealih Pm'€iz1zru:n¢a1'y Debates, 25 September 1901, pp. 5153-654 Bruce Smith was one of the very few members of either house who spoke against the principle of absolute exclusion. The following extracts convey his continuing adherence to 19th Century liberalism and his concern, as a son of Howard Smith the shipowner, to safeguard British and Australian trading interests i n the East. Mr. BRUCE SMITH (Parkes-Free Trader) . . I am very much afraid that the remarks I intend to make will seem

.

exceedingly heterodox after the very continuous flow of advocacy for a

white Australia, and for the necessity for taking up a very strong

100

RACIAL HOMOGENEITY BECOMES A NATIONAL POLICY

attitude towards the Imperial Government in this connexion. There has been a good deal said about a determination to keep Australia white and pure, two phrases which I am bound to say 1 have not been able to

clearly understand after all the speeches which I have heard and all the newspaper articles which I have read. I think that this measure is a very important one, but I do not regard it as-important for all the T€3SOllS which have been given by many honorable members. I think it is important in this respect, that the debate on this great question-and it is a great question-and the results of this debate will constitute a sort of mirror in which we, as a people, can be seen by other nations, because for the first time in Australian history we are put to the test to demon-

strate our sincerity in using so many glib phrases which though they

apply admirably when they involve concessions by other people, yet seem to change their meaning altogether the moment they involve concessions to he made to others, `We tall; very fluently, especially in one

part of this House, about the equality of man. Whenever gentlemen who use that term very freely appeal to it, I always observe that it is in

order to obtain some concession for the particular class which they represent. I am not speaking of its use in this House particularly, but rather of the broad sense of the political term. 'The equality of rnanl' W'hen we inquire 'What r a n i " we may be told 'Australiansl But when we attempt to apply that term in its broadest sense, as implying human nature, we are met with the answer-'Oh no, we draw a n important distinction.' That is one of the matters upon which we are to be put to the test. We talk much, too, from time to time about the open door; and in national political phraseology it is generally taken to mean that the doors shall be open which we wish to [once open. Already that national spirit is beginning to assert itself by which men say, '\=Ve, the Australian people, desire a certain state of things to exist. If the Imperial Government does not like it there is an alternative) That spirit has not been expressed in those bald terms, but something like that sentiment has been voiced, and I deprecate that attitude in the strongest possible way, because 1 can conceive of no circumstances whatever in which it would be politic or desirable for us-whether we look a t it from a patriotic or from a purely utilitarian point of view-to speak slightingly or lightly of the Imperial connexion. If, because of this, I am to be dubbed an Imperialist, I am proud of the term, because I recognise

not merely the broad spirit of Imperialism, but the fact that we depend for our future upon that Imperial connexion. The statesmen and

thinkers in all parts of the world who closely study the history of other nations are watching carefully the spirit we show and the attitude we are going to take up on this particular question. "Te are being put to the test, and we should remember this when we speak of the open door, of the equality of men, and of our Cliristian principles; and when at the very moment we are sending forth our people to preach those Christian principles to others, yet propose to turn round and shut out many of those whom we a r e seeking to convert to those pruicxples. .

. . 61

per

cent. of the trade of China is transacted with the British people, and it

_

101

SECTION FOUR DOCUMENTS

can be easily understood why the Imperial Government is anxious not to do anything that would unnecessarily alienate the friendship of these people. We should seek to restrict immigration to the very best class of these Eastern people by a politic and statesmanlike course: to avoid deliberately insulting those whose friendship may be of the utmost importance to us in our future history. . [Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, 25 September 1901, pp. 517'7*8.] Mr. 'WATSON (Bland~Labour Party leader) . . . the honorable member for Parkes spoke of a phrase which, he said, has been used by a certain section, that is, -quality of mankind', or 'the equal rights of man'. Now, I do not know that the section of honorable members whom I represent, has, at any rate during my term, used any such phrase. What we have claimed is that all citizens

..

should have equal opportunities. We never say that 'all men are equal! No sensible set of men would ever say so. But we say that every man

should be equal with every other man in the eyes of the law, and that equal opportunities should be afforded so far as the law can allow to every citizen. And we reserve the right to say who shall be citizens. We ask that they shall be on a moral and physical level with ourselves, and that they shall be such as we can fraternize with and welcome as brother citizens of what we hope will some day be a great nation. Again the honorable member spoke of the necessity on occasions like this of preserving a statesxnanlike attitude. I agree with him in regard to that. I do not pretend to have any of the qualities of statesmanship myself, but, a t least, I think I am justified in claiming this-that if 100 years ago the people of America had had legislation of this character, with reference particularly to the immigration of slaves to that country, and any man had lifted up his voice against that immigration, he would to-day have been hailed as a statesman by the people of America. . . f * could have foreseen all the dangers, and the troubles, and the dire distress, that have followed in the footsteps of the introduction of black labour into America-the man who could have foreseen and even ' - o f

..

attempted to prevent that evil in those days-would to-day have been honored as one who should have had the whole nation behind him in the work he tried to do.

.. .

Attitudes and Policies in the 20th Century (H)

THE EARLY COMMONWEALTH PERIOD The piece below in republished, with the gracious permission of the concluding chapter of m y Melbourne University Pr q Australia. The Background f.o own book Asian Migration ExF;i'usio71 /896-1923, (1\'I.U.P.), Melbourne, 1964, PP~ 151-5.

Two principles emerged in the late colonial period that were to guide Commonwealth action on the restriction of Asian iininigration. The first, enunciated by Joseph Chamberlain, was that exclusive legislation should be non-discriminatory in form, at least SO far as it affected races in which Britain had special interest, notably the Indians and the Japanese. Reniinded of this requirement by the COlonial Secretary's despatch explaining the reasons for disallowing the Queensland Sugar \Vorks Guarantee Act, the Australian Prime Minister committed his government to the 'education test'.§H§ persisted in this decision in spite of hostile

criticism from the Labor and Free Trade Parties and from within the ranks of his own supporters. The eventual passage of his Bill probably owed much to a realization that the viability of a 'White Australia' depended on British naval protection. This was a humiliating position for Australian nationalists to accept, and it was largely with the aim of creating a greater ineasure of sells dependence that a programme of military and naval deface was laid down towards the end of the Commonwealtlrs first decade. The second principle, very much the product of George Reid's statesmanship, and emphatically vindicated by the experience of Queensland and later of the United States, was that a foothold should be denied to the subjects of a n Asian p

'

which might

take up the cudgels on behalf of its distressed nationals. In 1901

SECTION FIVE READINGS

103

Edmund Barton showed not the slightest inclination to yield to Japan's persistent requests that her subjects should be exempted from the Act. Subsequently, for all his anxiety to achieve harmonious relations with Japan, Alfred Deakin was constrained to refuse the right of settlement to Japanese. By the time the Immigration Restriction Bill had completed its progress through the Senate it had been given the grudging support of the Labor Party as the best available measure for dealing with Asian immigration. With the choice of any European

language left to the discretion of the officer, the test had a potential severity and flexibility which recommended it to this party, representing as it did groups in the community that had most to lose from an influx of Asian laborers. Within a few weeks of the Act's coming into force it had become apparent the Labor parliamentarians were assuming the responsibility of ensuring that its potential was fully realized. W'hen occupying the cross~benches they probed administrative deficiencies and drew attention to

loopholes in the law through which a number of Asians had gained admission. Probably as a result of this continuous pressure, effective because it was exerted by a party holding the balance of power, the Protectionist government modiliecl the test so that it

took on a really prohibitive character. "hen in power Labor initiated an impressive number of legislative and administrative measures that were designed to frustrate the attempts of Chinese to enter Australia illicitly by stowing away, deserting and by using false papers. A comparison of the records of various governments during our period leaves no doubt as to the special role of the

Labor Party as the guardian of the ports. 'A nation for a continent, and a continent for a nation.' This was a saying that had popular currency during the nineties, expressing a belief in the unique opportunity offered to the people of the Australian colonies, then in the process of forming themselves into a nation. Significantly, the first non-machinery Act passed by the Parliament of the federated colonies was one aimed at seizing this opportunity by preventing the growth within the nation of racial cleavages far more inimical to political stability and social harmony than the divisions that had been brought

substantially to an end by the Constitution Act of 1900. The policy of protectionism that was increasingly f a v o r e d by the Commonwealth involved the sacrifice of economy and efficiency in the name of definite public goals. Simil orly, the po'icy of excluding c o l o r e d laborers implied the accep lance of

a limited rate of national development, especially in the tropical

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

104

areas, as a reasonable price to pay for racial homogeneity. This strong element of national self-denial was well brought out by the Sydney Morning Herald's dictum that: 'no commercial benefits that we could conceive would be commensurate with the evils that might come upon Australia from 'an unrestricted inHux of Asiatics'.1 It was expressed in rather more terse language by Prime Minister Barton in response to the deputation of shipping repro sentatives who appealed vainly for relief from the provisions of the Bill that threatened their interests. Examples may be multiplied of the consequences of this policy: the repatriation of the 'white'-grow_n sugar; Kanakas and the payment of a bount white l a b o r clause in the Post and Telegraph Act and its consequential increase in the costs of mail contracts; andgener; ally, the rejection of the easy profits and the rapid utilization of facilitated by tropical resources that might have -importation of colored workers.

While making a very special and limited exception of the pearlshelling industry, the Commonwealth maintained an inflexible stand on the question of indentured colored l a b o r . The millions of words written by its advocates and opponents rather obscure the fact that at no time during our period was it a live political issue in Australia. No political party nor even an part leader in the Federal Parliament challenged the belief that the preservation of racial homogeneity must remain a fundamental aim of Austra-

lian governments. For this reason it is not considered necessary to examine in detail the heterodoxy of some conservative journals and newspapers, of indiscreet State Governors? of one State Premier,3 of the Associated Chambers of Commerce and of a few federal backbenchers, whose arguments had no elect either on the . basic policy or on its detailed administration, except perhaps

to indicate the existence of an element that did not share the general aim. Most of those who urged the admission of colored laborers claimed that their proposals would in no way infringe the '\Vhite Australia' policy. Indeed, they commonly held that the policy 1

Quoted in Shepherd,

J. Au.stfalia'5

Interests and Policies in the Far East,

p. 9. of South Australia, speech reported in 2 Si r G. R. je Hume, Governor S;M.H., 4 Sept. 1905, Sir Henry Galway, also Governor of South Australia,

speech reported in Register, 15 Feb. 1915. s Henry Barwell, Premier of South Australia, expounded his Views on the necessity of colored l a b o r to develop the Northern Territory, in speeches, interviews and letters published in the Register, 5 Jan. 1922; Argus, 10 Jan.

19225 Daily News, 3 Feb. 1922; fierald, 16 ]lI11C 1922.

SECTION FIVE READINGS

105

applied by the Commonwealth was self-destructive, and that in the absence of coolie l a b o r , allegedly uniquely suited to tropical work as well as cheap, the northern parts of the continent must languish undeveloped and unpopulated. According to this line of reasoning the established policy was not only morally reprehensible, in that it transgressed some supposed obligation for a nation to exploit its resources at a maximum rate, but also strategically unsound as it left the 'richest unoccupied area of the globe' an inviting bait to invasion by the overpopulated countries of Asia. A

'well regulated system' of indentured colored l a b o r could disarm Asian critics, create supervisory jobs for Australian workers and profits for Australian capitalists, and at the same time establish an effective barrier against potential aggressors. Common to such plans was a n insistence that the coolies should be admitted on condition of compulsory repatriation, their movements restricted to an area north of a 'colour line' drawn, perhaps,

through the Tropic of Capricorn, permanently.disqualified from political rights and forbidden to aspire to occupations that suited the white man. Not a single feature of these proposals escaped criticism by orthodox exponents of the '\-Vhite Australia' policy. Most of all they olfendecl the prevailing belief in the dignity of l a b o r , which implied the rejection of a society in which certain kinds of work should be reserved for a tnenial race or class. The old assumptions about the population-carrying capacity of northern Australia and about the special fitness of the c o l o r e d races for manual l a b o r in the tropics no longer went unchallenged by scientists and publicists. I t was pointed out that Australia's security would in no

way be enhanced by the presence of a mass of unassimilated aliens whose loyalties to the governing race must be suspect. Even if it

were true that white men could not live, work and breed in the tropics, there would be less danger in preserving the status q u o

than in deliberately creating a situation comparable with that of the southern states of America, of the Union of South Africa, of

Kenya or of Fiji. The Australian public was not alone in its emphatic rejection of such proposals. Unofficial members of the Indian Legislative Council had campaigned against the indentured l a b o r system, which was suspended by regulation in 1917 and abolished by the _lzlmigration Act at 11922: I n Britain there had been 5 marked for the problems o the scantily-populated white dominions, aS evidenced by the statements of Colonel Seely ""n

..

106

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES I N THE 20TH CENTURY

and Earl Crewe. The sentiments of The Times in 1901 had been conveyed in tendentious reports and editorials that interpreted

Australian immigration legislation as being inspired by the excessively powerful Labor Party in deface of its own narrow interests* From 1907 its comments on Atlstralia'.s policy reflected an awareness of the critical nature of the domestic and international crises then developing over racial questions in SOuth Africa and between the United States and Japan. An editorial in 1922 frankly applauded the 'White Australia' policy which it now regarded as being aimed at preserving race purity. In short, the examples of race problems in other parts of the world served not only to confirm Australian policy but also to convince some erstwhile critics of its essential virtue. The race consciousness that underlay the 'White Australia' policy underwent some changes during the passage of the years. In 1901 the desire for racial homogeneity manifested itself in express s o n s of intolerance and superiority towards the colored races, described by Prime Minister Barton as being intrinsically inferior to the whites. By the end of our period Australian publicists and politicians explicitly disavowed the suggestion

that the 'White

Australia' policy was based on assumptions of race superiority. They referred instead to differences between Oriental and European cultures, which militated against their fusion into one

harmonious society.5 The change of emphasis may be ascertained by comparing the B11,lletItz's denigration of ]apart in 1904.6 with its recognition in 1919 of the 'distinction of the Japanese, their force and their intellectual gifts'." This development involved something far deeper than a mere tactical desire to placate a powerful Pacific lighbour. the achievements of the Japanese people in the First two decades of

the twentieth century had acted as a striking rebuttal of the doctrine of the inferiority of the coloured races. More generally, as an Australian observer remarked i n a Round Table article, the

contraction of the Asian minorities in Australia had removed a prime cause of race friction and had made for a lessening of the prejudice exhibited towards them. The success of the Act of 1901 had cleared the way [or the more equitable treatment of resident 4 Times, reports 13 Sept., 21 Nov. 1901, leading article 2 Sept. 1901. 5W. M. Hughes, despite his flair for antagonizing the Japanese, did not suggest that they were an inferior race (5.M.H., 23 April 1919, C`a,'{U1 P.D., 7 April 1921, vol. 94, p. 7265).

'*Bullet{n, 'Plain English', 25 Aug., 22 Sept. 1904; crlrwon of 15 Sept. 1901.

'Ibid., 'Plain Erlglish', 30 Jan. 1919,

SECTION FIVE READINGS

107

Asians and for the progressive liberalization of the temporary en try policy. . . . (b)

UAPAN AND AUSTRALIA' The following extracts are from a n article by MAJOR E. L. PIESSE, who had been Director of Intelligence in the Prime MinisterS Department during the first 'World `War. It is reprinted

by special permission from Foreign Ala£rs, April 1926, pp. 479-86, 488. Copyright by the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc., New York. Major Picssc begins his article by describing the early trickle of Japanese migration to Australia in the 189U's. He notices the failure of diplomatic attempts to secure the exemption.Ia_Ea11ese from the 1901 Act, but emphasizes the smooth working of the 1904; arrangement, which provided for the entry of Japanese merchants, students and tourists on passports issued by their government. After rather overstating .Jap:m's satisfaction with this concession he

goes on: In no country did the success of Japan against Russia in 1905

produce a greater impression than in Australia. That war revealed to us a power with vast and efficient armaments on land and sea, distant only 2000 to 3000 miles from our northern coast, it s population of unexampled patriotism, ten times as numerous as

ours and already as large as its resources seemed able to support. Only four years before, we had adopted a policy with which Japan had recorded her 'high dissatisfactionly Australian opinion was poorly informed of ]apart's history and economic position, and it seemed natural to suppose that she might desire an outlet to the south, and that our policy of restricting immigration would give

her a pretext for fastening a quarrel on us. In this state of mind Australians began to hear rumors of Japanese espionage in two areas of great importance for our defense against an invader from the Pacific-the coast to the north of Sydney in New South

Wales, and the Great Barrier Reef which stretches for over a thousand miles along the coast of Queensland. Doubtless the rumors grew in the telling, but there seems no reason to doubt that between 1905 and 1910 a number of Japanese did busy themselves in these localities in collecting information useful to the naval and military staffs of a foreign power. If it be taken for

granted that these men were in the pay of their country, we assume no more than it is well known Japan did in many countries. I t was a n era of espionage, by Great Britain and Ger-

many, to name no others, as well as by Japan. All over the world

108

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE

20TH

CENTURY

nations were engaged in collecting naval and military information regarding other states, no matter how remote might be the likelihood of any quarrel between them. Indeed the practice was so general that the presence of one country's spies in another country was of very slight value as evidence of any hostile intention. Australians, however, had had little previous experience of being spied upon, and were not disposed to qualify their impressions by any general reflections on the significance of espionage in general. It was taken for granted that Japanese had been sent by their Government to spy on Australia, and that this was a preliminary to the making of plans and to a subsequent attack. So the habit became fixed of regarding Japan as our future enemy. This attitude towards Japan led in 1909 to theadoption of compulsory training of all youths for military service (it is still the principal obstacle to the generally desired abolition of compulsory training) and was responsible in large part for the formation in 1910 of an Australian navy separate from that of Great Britain. Quick as was the response of Japan in 1914 to Great Britain's call to her to join in the war in fulfillment of her obligations under the Anglo-.Japanese Alliance, and useful as was the help given by the Japanese navy, the events of the war period increased rather than diminished Australia's suspicion of Japan. In par t this was due to Japan's actions in China, particularly to the twenty-

one demands of 1915, and in part to the anti-British campaign in the Japanese press in 1915 and 1916. But it was due also to events more directly affecting the relations of the two countries. Of these the most important were connected with the immigration question. Piesse now examines ]apart's attempts from 1911 to 1915 to stabilize

trading and immigration arrangements with Australia bY winning the latter's adherence to the Anglo-japanese Treaty of Commerce and Navigation. Australia refused, partly because of a disinclination to grant maximum tariii? preferences to Japan, but mainly because of a continuing determination not to yield any part of her control over the entry and residence of Japanese.

The Prime Minister, Mr. Hughes, came back from London in August, 1916, impressed with the gravity of the struggle that was before the Allies, and determined that Australia should pull her iull weight in the war. To this end he advocated conscription; but it became understood that in doing so he had in mind not only the war in Europe but some question with Japan. Shortly after his return, Mr. Hughes addressed a meeting of members of both Houses of Parliament. The proceedings were not published, but

SECTION FIVE READINGS

109

it was currently reported and widely believed that an authoritative statement had been made to the meeting that Japan would challenge the White Australia policy after the war, that Australia would then need the help of the rest of the Empire, and that if she wished to be sure of getting it she must now throw her full strength into the war in Europe. Rumors of this statement, doubt» less exaggerated in the telling, were current in the community, but the censorship made any discussion of the facts impossible. Another question which alarmed Australia was the occupation by Japan of the Marshall, Caroline and other groups of islands, former German possessions in the Pacific north of? the equator. These, with other German possessions south of the equator, were surrendered to an Australian force in September, 1914, but were not then occupied. In October, ih the course of naval operations against German ships, the Japanese navy occupied them. It was understood in Australia that the Japanese had gone into occupation only until Australia could assume control, and a n expedition was sent from Australia to take over the islands; but it was stopped before i t reached the equator. In Japan i t was assumed from the first that the islands had passed into the permanent

keeping of that country, while in Australia it was taken for granted that, in virtue of the surrender to Australia, the islands belonged to us. So the continued occupation of the Japanese, as well as the obstacles which Japanese oilicials placed in the way of Australian lirms who for many years had traded with the islands, caused much irritation. But early in 1917, unknown to the Australian public, the Commonwealth Government assented to an

arrangement for the future disposal of the islands. The Allies, hard pressed by the German submarines, had asked Japan for additional warships, and Japan had taken the opportunity to ask for assurances of Allied support in keeping the German leases in Shantung and the German islands north of the equator. The Allies, including Great Britain, gave the assurances asked for, and so the question was settled, but nothing of this was known to the Australian public. During the war, Japanese warships gave some assistance in

escorting Australian troop-ships across the Indian Ocean and in patrolling in Australian waters, although the Japanese Admirals were unable to give much help at the time it was most needed, when German raiders were near our coast. The extent of the help

given

be Japan had necessarily to be kept from the pu.bl_ic, and of

course nothing was known as to the degree of its ellicieney. Never-

theless, the presence of .Japanese warships

regarded with

110

ATTITUDES

AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

great uneasiness. In turn, the lack of cordiality on the part of Australia became known in Japan and caused some comment in the Japanese press. The Australian Prime Minister, Mr. Hughes, left Australia early in 1918 for Europe, in readiness for the anticipated Peace Conference. On his way he delivered a speech in New York in which he said that, 'if Australia is to continue a free Commonwealth she must have guarantees against a future aggre Zion. This involves the Australian Monroe Doctrine in the South Pacific. . "Ve seek Arnerica's steadfast cooperation, and we are committed by inexorable circumstances to the doctrine "Hands off the Pacific" '. Later in London he repeated this phrase and said that, 'against all predatory nations we shall strive to give this doctrine

..

effect to the last ounce of effort at our disposal'. The Japanese press did not jail to perceive that Japan was the aggressor whom Mr. Hughes. had in mind, and much indignant comment was published. At the Peace Conference itself Mr. Hughes by his

speeches and interviews reinforced the impression he had already given, and for a time he and the country he represented were

treated in the Japanese papers as the chief opponents of the

legitimate claims of .la The part which Japan took t the Conference was far from reassuring to Australia. First, ere was Japan's advocacy of a declaration of racial equality, which few in Australia had expected. President Wilson's plans for a better world after the war were of course as widely read in Japan as elsewhere, and the Japanese saw that now was an opportunity to bring before the world the grievance which they sttflered through their unequal treatment in various foreign countries, especially in the United States. A movement to right these grievances by a declaration of racial equality no

|

might not only soften the affront which California had given to their dignity but might also assist Japan to that hegemony of the Asiatic peoples to which many Japanese aspired. Accordingly the racial equality movement swept the country. This movement

sought a declaration by the Peace Conference of the equality of the peoples of all countries, and there is little doubt that in the popular view in Japan i t was intended to involve also the aboli-

tion of all restrictions on the entry of Japanese into foreign countries. A general declaration of racial equality was consonant with the long declared policy of the Japanese Government. All through the reign of the Emperor Meiji the Government had devoted itself to

internal reforms and to the strengthening of the national power

SECTION FIVE READINGS

111

so as to secure recognition as an equal of other countries. _Japan had now obtained a place as one of the great powers, and a formal declaration of the equality of the peoples of all races would crown its achievement. Accordingly the Japanese delegates to the Peace Conference received authority to propose such a declaration in general terms. But the Japanese Government could not go further and claim the abolition of all restrictions on the immigration of Japanese into foreign countries, for it practiced and intended to continue such restrictions against Chinese and other foreign laborers who might wish to settle in Japan. It seems, then, that the proposed declaration was not intended as a challenge to the right of any country to control immigration. In February, 1919, the Japanese delegates who *were taking part in the discussion of the draft of the Covenant of the League of Nations proposed that the Covenant should include a clause binding all nations to accord 'equal and just treatment in every respect' to the nationals of other countries. In this form the proposal did not meet with support, being thought too wide. Later the Japanese proposed to insert in the preamble of the Covenant a reference to 'the indorsement of the principle of the equality of nations and the just treatment of their nationals'. This proposal was supported by the delegates of a majority of the countries. But Mr. 1lv_ M. Hughes, scenting danger to the `Wllite Australia policy, ~posed it vigorously, and his speeches and interviews gained him _great notoriety in an.---' At one stage of

_

the discussion it was sttggestecl to the Japanese that immigration

express words from the scope of the should be excluded amendment, but to this the Japanese would not agree, although they stated privately that immigration was a matter for domestic Ieg1sIation free from The consoll of the League. UUltimately the proposed amendment was withdrawn. But the refusal of the Japanese to declare expressly that the control of immigration must be decided by each country for itself has been thought to be evidence of an intention to maintain the contrary if opportunity offered. A little knowledge of Japanese affairs might have dis-

.

pelletl this suspicion. In reality the refusal of the Japanese dele~ gates was probably due to the circumstances of home politics. Although Japan is far from being a country in which the rulers

are swayed by popular agitation, the delegates were not indifferent to the excited state of public opinion in Japan. They knew that

the racial equality movement was supported by a society of patriots which had committed more than one political murder, and je seems probable that their refusal to exclude inlrnigTatioI1

112

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

from their amendment was due in part to fears for their own safety.

In conclusion, it may be pointed out that this survey has interest even for those not concerned with the relations of the two countries. For, like the relations between more important countries, this small section of international life has been influenced by lack of knowledge and understanding. Australian public men who have dealt with the questions that have arisen between Australia and Japan have had little opportunity to understand Japanese policy. Living far removed from the centre of international intercourse, and unaccustomed to deal with external questions, they have been ready to suppose that Australia was of great importance to Japan, and ready to treat her every act with

suspicion. The press--particularly those evening papers which are in unscrupulous hands--has been ready to inflame the public. The people have been as unqualified as have their public representatives to form a calm judgment, and they have been hindered rather than helped by the failure of the Government. to give out adequate information, and especially by its attempt during the war to suppress publication both of facts and comment. But, here as elsewhere in the world, it may be hoped that an increase in knowledge will enable us to avoid some a t least of the causes that produce quarrels between nations.

(Cl SINCE WORLD WAR I This extract is reprinted, with grateful acknowledgment to MR. DAVID JOHANSON, to 'Melbourne University Press, and to the Immigration Reform Group

It comes from pp.

23-7 of Mr.

.]chanson's introductory historical chapter of Immigration: Control OT

Colour Bar?, edited by Kenneth Rivett, Melbourne, 1962.

Not only had Australia's participation in 'World \-Var I stimulated new theories about her development, but it had also put her under some obligations to the Asian countries of the Empire, especially India, for their war time co-operation. This demanded a reappraisal of India's status in the Empire. Wlfatson, in 1901, had said that Australians were 'citizen-subjects' of the Empire,

where Indians were the 'subject-citizens'.1 Australian representative at the Imperial Conference of 1907 had been equally . ten India paid lair contemptuous of Ink,,,.,. f

wages, he said, could she invite comparison 'with all other white

113

SECTION FIVE READINGS

people of the self-governing colonies'. But by 1922, when Srinivasa Sastri came to Australia as part of an Empire-wide campaign for the recognition of Indian equality, Australians welcomed him and

applauded his objectives. Only a small section of the press, headed by the Bulletin, remained doggedly suspicious: 'If and when India obtains Home Rule, the next demand will be for free migration

..

within the Empire in which India is an equal partner .'1 Sastri's visit also Ietl the Commonwealth government in 1925 to exempt Indians from those disabilities arising from their race under Federal electoral law. The most significant effect of this was to allow the franchise to British Indians within Australia. Some minor modifications in the application of the immigration laws in relation to Indians were also made. In pursuance of the Reciprocity Resold son passed at the Imperial Conference in 1918, the wives and children of Indians resident in Australia were exempted from the application of the dictation test.2 And agreements permitting the admission of tourists, merchants 'T students were made with the other British possessions of Ceylon, Burma, Hong Kong and the Straits Settlements. None the less, the WThite Australia principle remained unchallenged. The exemption agreements implied the acquiescence of the governments concerned in Australia's application of the dictation test in cases other than those specified. India herself agreed to the principle of immigration restriction at the Imperial Conferences between 1917 and 1923 when she was endeavouring to prevent the emigration of indentured Indian coolies to South Africa, she was therefore obliged, as Sastri pointed out when he came to Australia, to grant the same right to this country.3 The e

tension between Australia's immigration policy and her member-

ship of the British Commonwealth seemed to have been solved. The principle of restriction having been conceded, Australia was prepared to abolish legislative discrimination within Australia, to recognize Indian equality in the councils of the Empire, and even to give some support to India in her struggle with South Africa.

In the late twenties, the White Australia policy received incid~ ental and temporary publicity during a struggle between the right and left wings of the Labor movement. The newly-formed, leftwing Australasian Council of Trade Unions was affiliated with international working-class organizations such as the Pan-Pacific

t2 June

1922.

Mackenzie (Cd.), The Legal Status Of Aliens in Pacific Cnznltries,

PP- i-a8.

Ox S Swing*

.M.o_£ninpr" jerald, 12 and 16 June 1922. .;

114

ATTITUDES AND POLECIES IN THE 2011-1 CENTURY

Trade Union Movement, and strongly influenced by the activist doctrines of the Australian Communist Party. These emphasized the common struggle of the working-class against the capitalist class--'the unity of workers of all lands, irrespective of nationality, c o l o r or creed, for a United Struggle against capitalism and imperialist war'. The Pan-Pacific Trade Union secretariat rejected the Vfhite Australia policy as 'viciously anti-working class', and the office-bearers of the A.C.T.U. pledged themselves 'to tear down the barriers that heretofore separated the toiling masses of the East from the Labour movement of the W'est, and all the racial and national prejudice at tificially created by Imperialists and their hirelings'. The right wing of the union movement, represented Br the Australian W'orkers' Union, attacked this statement as expressing an intention to destroy the White Australia policy and appealed to Labor Parliamentarians for their support.

Scullin repudiated any such intention. Labor, he said, 'was stronger than ever for the polio. The A.C.T.U., disaffiliating from the P.P-T.U.lvI. in 1930, declared itself in favour of the White Australia policy. These doctrinaire assertions of the left-wing unions challenged a national boast, and the alacrity with which Scullin moved to repudiate them was a measure of the support for the policy at that time. Until the late thirties, as observers noted, the 'White Australia policy was regarded as 'the indispensable condition of

every other Australian Policy' and 'firmly rooted in sentimental, economic and political grounds4 Bruce had declared in 1924 that Australians were 'unanimously determined' about the policy. But while Australians were asserting the policy as firmly and aggressively as ever, the explanations which they offered were becoming more and more defensive. We have already noted some change

from economic to racial explana sons between 1890 and 1900. But there are modifications and mutations of tone even within the racist vocabulary. For the Iirst ten years of the Commonwealth, the argument was rendered firmly in terms of the avoidance of racial contamination ('blood untinged by any c o l o r e d stream').

But when Asian nations came to prove their equality by the standards of the X-Vest, talk of superiority and inferiority quickly resolved itself into talk of 'did?erence': 'thoughts that are not our thoughts, and ways that are not our ways'. By the late nineteen'Ml K. Hancock, Australia, London, 1930, p. 77, YV. E. Agar in The Peopling of Australia, Melbourne, 1930, p. 144, WK Levi, Au5»fraf£a'5 Outlook on Asia, Sydney, 1958, p. 52; NI. C. Groom, T'Vithin the Shadow, Melbourne,

1926, pp. 178-9.

SECTION FIVE READINGS

115

twenties, Australians were offering explanations in terms of their own inability to assimilate and saying that ' "color" has actually very little to do with it'.5 By the later thirties and forties, the racist implications were being played down altogether. A national boast was becoming a national apology. Demands began to appear for

a change in the policy's name. In December 1941, the Japanese moved south, and for Eve years Australians had more urgent preoccupations than immigration. News of Japanese atrocities during the war gave a fresh but brief impetus to racist feeling,*' but vocal expression of discontent with the policy had begun during the war years and continued during the later forties.

This was partly the result of wartime experience of Asians as allies. 'If the Chinese were good enough to fight for d e m o c r a c ' said a Country Party politician, 'they were good enough to live in democratic Australia', Mr .]arnes, l\J.P., declared: 'I would not have a c o l o r e d man defending me, unless I could say later "\-Velcome, brother, come and live with m e " ' The policy was defended in more apologetic terms. 'The White Australia Policy' said Senator Cameron, 'is economic, not racial.' 'Labor's support', said Mr l=\-?ard, M P . , 'has never been based on any claim of racial superiority . . . That is a Nazi doctrine' The title of the policy, in particular, was proving a n embarrassment. Sir John Latham said that 'it was time Australia dropped the term "YVhite Australia policy", which was deemed offensive be certain nations, Australia could conduct its immigration policy without reference to color.' In 1944, Senator Cameron admitted that 'a better term could have been chosen'. Demands for a quota system of Asian immigration, which had been only spasmodic since they were first put forward in 1918, began to come more frequently from that growing segment of the Australian people which looked for some modification of the policy. In 1945, the Australian Communist Party, Archbishop Mannie and the Presbyterian General Assembly called alike for a quota system of Asian immigration. The churches were particular active in this movement. As early as 1943, the President of the Methodist Conference had said that 'the \'Vllite Australia policy is coming up for judgments In the following year, the Methodist Spectator urged that the church dissociate itself from the policy, and the Methodist Conference "Sydney Molning Herald, 14 June 1922, 'W'hite Australia', Round Table,

xi, 1920-1, pp. 320-36. e

P. D.

Phillips, 'The Pacific through Australian E}=es', Au.5£1'a{-Aszhtic

Buflclin, vi, no. 2, 1945, pp. 14-91.

116

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

objected to the term 'white' as being racially offensive. In 1945, the Foreign Missions Committee of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church expressed similar misgivings. On the other side stood the R.S.I..., which in 1945 'unreservedly insisted on the continuation of the policy', and the Australian Natives' Association, whose President announced in the preceding

year that 'the war had proved the wisdom of the 'White Australia policy'. The lines of demarcation of opinion with which we are still familiar were beginning to emerge. Yet considerable support for the policy remained. In a national Gallup Poll, conducted in April 1943, Five out of nine Australians opposed the admission of

a quota of Asian immigrants.7 The movement of opposition to rigid exclusion had grown strongly by the beginning of the next decade. This was partly due to its implementation

by Mr Arthur Calv ell as Minister for

Imrnigrationt Though the M/hire Australia policy had been a national boast, Australians had always been very ready to offer their public sympathy to those Asians resident in Australia who were its victims. Even in 1910, when the Department of External Affairs had forbidden the immigration to Australia of the wife of a resident Chinese, public opinion had been aroused against the 'cruel administration' of the policy. From 1945, Mr Calv ell pursued the 'White Australia' line with unrelenting consistency.

He proceeded to deport a small number of Asians who had fled to Australia from the Japanese invasion of their homelands, and the publicity aroused by these cases was out of all proportion to their

number. Mr Calv ell had passed the ¥Vartinle Refugees Removal Act as an instrument for his rigorous enforcement

of the policy. A

number of celebrated cases, such as that involving Mrs O'Keefe,

the widow of an Ambonese wartime hero, and Sergeant Can boa, a Filipino in the United States Army, drew Australians' attention to the real meaning of the policy. Doubts began to be expressed by leading citizens such as Professor A. P. Elk if, Sir Ian Clunies Ross and the Reverend Alan 'Walker The Sydney Daily Telegraph declared: 'If Australia's immigration policy has to break up families to survive, let's overhaul it.' V4/hen th e Menzies Liberal government took office in 1949, it committed itself to reversing what one of its supporters described as the 'fanatical . . . and, in my view, un-Christian policy applied by Mr. CalweIl'.8 Since that " Material in this and the previous paragraph is based upon C. Turnbull, 'Are White Australia Feelings Changing?', Herald, Melbourne, 7 Nov. 1945.

'Senator Maher, Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, vol. 206, 23 Feb. 1950, p- 42.

SECTION FIVE DOCUMENTS

117

date, fewer particular cases of a harsh administration of the policy have attracted public attention. Some that have done so are mentioned in other chapters. The narrative must remain unfinished, but its lessons are plain to see. The concept of 'White Australia' emerges as a response, first to a wave of immigration, widespread but special in character, then to an intense but uneasy consciousness of the appearance of a military threat which the young nation seemed unable to meet. There are no grounds for thinking that it was ever the most appropriate or accurate response to either situation. The kind of arguments produced in its support have consisted almost invariably of a few sim ingredients-===as of the depression of standards of living, awareness of social differences, alleged racial inferiority, political radicalism and nationalist f e r v o r . Since 1853, these ingredients, though basically consistent, have been offered with wide variations of emphasis. It is safe to say that no one generation of Australian has produced, in sum, quite the same deface of the policy as any other. The arguments, the very content of the concept of 'White Australia', the conditions which seemed to require it and to continue to justify it, have varied immensely. Only the policy of excluding virtually all Asians remains unchanged.

5 Documents JAPAN AND THE POLICY OF A 'WHITE AUSTRALIA' The following extracts are taken with grateful acknowledgment from ALFRED STEAD'S article in The Monthly Review, London, vo1.xvi, .July-September 1904, pp. 85-6, 89-90, 101-4.

The vagaries of the late Australian Government and the strange freaks in which it at times indulged under the §1fiuence of the necessity for standing well with the Labour vote are no new things, but of all these actions the attempt to make Australia a §vhite' country was the most

..

amazing. . The way in which the cry for a 'White Australia' has arisen in a

118

ATTlTUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

country where a little over a hundred years ago there was not a white man to be found, is very interesting. Although almost all of the black population have died out since then, the geographical position and the climate have not changed, and powerful though the Commonwealth

may be, it is extremely doubtful if it can make all of that great island continent suitable for white inhabitants, without the aid of the colored

races. • . • The action of the Commonwealth in regard to aliens brings u p several very important questions, chief of which, undoubtedly, is that of the right of a portion of the British Empire to make special arrangements touching foreign countries, contrary to the wishes of the Central Government. In other words, can Australia be both within and without the Empire? Can she choose what conventions shall bind her, and what ignore? The position that Australia has assumed is a most anomalous o n e , n d it behaves the Imperial Government to define more

clearly the limitations and possibilities of such a vital situation. . . . . . . [In 1896] Mr. Chamberlain decided that, for the future, exclusion laws were not to be aimed at a nationality, but a t the undesirable elements of all races, really a proposal to judge immigrants less by c o l o r and race than by quality. 'While the Immigration Restriction

Act is ostensibly aimed at all

undesirable immigrants, the speeches in the Federal Parliament show very clearly that it is intended to cope really with the Asiatics, and is primarily aimed against the Japanese people. This being the case, it is necessary to study more closely the question of Japan in this connection, apart from that of either India or China. .Japan's rapid advance forms one of the most interesting, and probably the roost conspicuous, features

of the history of the nineteenth century. The wonderful development of her trade, the growth of her naval and military power, and her undeniable diplomatic skill, have compelled recognition from the great Caucasian nations. The geographical position of the country and the friendly sentiments of its people toward the British Empire have caused Japan to be sought for and welcomed as a trusted ally of Great Britain,

and thus to ,play a most important part in shaping the destinies of mankind. Japan being a civilised country, holdiri a position in the front rank of r a t e s , and worthy of being admitted to an alliance with Great Britain on an equality, why then should she be treated as an irresponsible country overflowing with hordes of possible immigrants to Australia, and legislated against by that colony without any attempt to ask the opinion or assistance of the Japanese Government?

To protect her l a b o r market by legislation should be a fairly easy matter for Australia, without having to set at defiance friendly nations. I t is easily conceivable that there may be undesirable elements among

the lower class of Japanese who immigrate, and if such proves to be the case, after due investigation by the proper authorities, the remedy might easily be sought by coming to a diplomatic arrangement over the matter and by limiting the objectionable features. The Japanese Government would without doubt be open to reason, but to pass a law

SECTION FIVE DOCUMENTS

119

condeniuling the Japanese wholesale, for no other reason than that they are Japanese, is striking a blow a t Japan at her most sensitive puittt. A11 open declaration of war would not he resented as much. The reason is not far LO seek. Japan has had a long struggle i11 recovering those rights of an independent State which she was forced to surrender to

foreign Ilzltions at the beginning of intercourse, and in obtaining a standing in the civilised world. And now, when that goal has seemingly been achieved, if those nations will no longer associate with her on equal terms, the reselltmellt against them must of necessity be bitter. Are not the signs too evident that in the coming century that part of the world known as the Far East is going to be the seat of stupendous convulsions from which great nations could not keep themselves clear if they would? And is it not most desirable that in that crisis those countries which have a community of interests should not have misunderstandings

with each other? It is earnestly to be hoped that statesmen will estimate these large problems at their proper value, and not let them be over-

shadowed by partisan considerations. Although the Australian Goveninlent was not consulted as to the Treaty of Alliance between Great Britain and Japan, Sir Edmund Barton expressed publicly his high opinion of it, and Sir Horace Tosser wrote OII the subject that: Japan has always been looked upon as the menace of the Far East. It; is the only powerful neighbor that we have a t our doors, for Japan is within eight days' sail of Australia. If that powerful n e i g h b o r is

turned into a n ally, the entire menace is withdrawn. We hail with satisfaction the removal of a danger which, I can assure you, has not been absent from the minds of responsible men in Australia.

It is in this dependence of Australia upon the British Empire and her ally for protection that is found the whole crux of the question. If Australia were in an independent position, even while retraining a part of the Empire, able to defend her own shores from an enemy, then there might be more justification for her action towards the Japanese, but so long as Australia is anxious to be able to borrow money a t British Empire rates, and relies upon the protection of the British Empire and expects that conventions entered into for the purpose of the better deface of the Empire shall also include Australia, then § & @ morris strously unpatriotic move for the Australians to 'complicate the foreign relations of the Empire'-to use Sir Edmund Barton's own words. Such action as has been indulged in towards Japan, for this, if for no other reason, should not be considered to be in any way justified. The shallow pretence that the education test does not discriminate between races is valueless as a shield of hypocrisy, when no secret is made as to what is to be the practical working of the Act. Even the most bitter opponents of the Japanese race in Australia have to admit that, as things now stand, the Australian Commonwealth has assumed a position which she does not possess, with regard to the Empire, in dealing with this question. It

is difficult for outsiders to realise why there should be such a strong

120

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

desire to offend a civilized nation, when the protection of the labour market in Australia, the ostensible cause of the agitation, could have been secured by invoking the direct action of the Japanese Government. There is no doubt that, should Japan be asked to regulate her immigration to Australia, she could do so thoroughly. First, she possesses a most competent central authority, and, secondly, every emigrant leaving Japan has to have a special passport, and thus absolute control of them is possible. The cases of Queensland and of the United States, where the influx of Japanese came to an abrupt end owing to the action of the Japanese Government itself, proves the efficiency of this control. By such an arrangement any danger of coolie or artisan hordes swamping Australia could be obviated at any moment by applying to the Japanese Government. As to the admission of .Japanese business :men travelers in

Australia, there should surely never be any more question than there is of Australian travelers in Japan.

Let Great Britain remember that mutual intercourse is a necessary condition for the existence of any member of an international society. Let her appoint a special commissioner, or a small commission, to go

through the evidence at first hand and negotiate with the Japanese Government. Then if the facts justify it, let the Australian Commonwealth be given to understand, as a part of the Empire, what are the duties which it has to that Empire and to the Imperial Government. But,

first of all, let the Immigration Restriction Act be repealed as far as .Japan is concerned, that is an essential step before discussion can take

place. The great value of this question of Japan and Australia is that it may be regarded as a portent of the great and imminent danger which is now hanging over the British Empire, and which may come to a crisis at any moment, rending the already loosening ties between the Mother Country and the Colonies asunder beyond hope of repair. No time

should be lost in removing this danger, and it may be truly said that

never before has there been such an opportunity for an Imperial statesman. But where is that statesman?

(ii) THE 'WHITE AUSTRALIA' POLICY AND ITS CRITICS The article by the HON. F. W. EGGLESTON,

m.L.A.,

from which

this extract is reprinted was published in The English Review, vol-

xxxix, july-D ecember 1924, pp. 159-163, when the late Sir Frederick Eggleston was Minister for Railways and Assistant Treasurer in the Victorian Cabinet. I t is republished with due acknowledgment to the author and the journal.

The critics of the White Australia policy have never paid it the compliment of a dispassionate study of the foundations, scientific and ethical, upon which its advocates base it- They are content to dismiss it as a crude expression of national pride and selfishness and loftily counter the arguments upon which they suppose it to be supported. It is assumed

that it flies in the face of Nature, that it is the product of a feeling of

SECTION FIVE DOCUMENTS

121

racial superiority by the Anglo-Saxon over coloured races, or of the desire of the manual worker to maintain an artificial standard» of comfort. These assumptions may be correct or they may not, but it is not right to take them for gTaIlted and base upon this conclusion a whole string of consequential deductions. Australians dispute this a priori reasoning. A diiiicult problem of this kind cannot be determined in the uninformed inner consciousness of a publicist-lay or clerical-in his London study. The typical national slogan naturally becomes suspected of a selfish

basis. It is the crude expression of the average man and is uttered in the language of national passion. But the White Australia policy is not the creed merely of the man in the street. It is a national ideal held by all sections and parties in the State. There are many people who doubt our power to maintain it. But there are very few indeed who do not regard it as desirable and necessary if the ideals and methods of life which we at present cherish are to be maintained. It is a doctrine which is well reasoned. Its various elements are carefully related by thinkers to the underlying facts and rrrrurnstanres of the °.]fl1'ihnn The Ivar' Ausfrahrl Policy is indeed the )'ormula which the Australian people have framed as the only solution of a number of very complex problems which all'ect their security and welfare. These problems are of great difficulty. If each were isolated and taken on its own merits, a series of different con-

clusions might be arrived at, but, where questions affecting the integrity of the Commonwealth are involved, a people has to reconcile these differences and formulate a policy which will lead to the preservation of the fundamental basis of its life. The only way to determine the validity of the Vvhite Australia policy is to examine these points one by one and see what solution of the whole complex of problems is possible. The Problem of Racial Admixture as Applied to Australia It is no t necessary in this post-war age to emphasis the danger of racial conflict. It seems impossible for two different races to live together happily on the same territory and under the same sovereign. Nationality

is the obstinate fact of twentieth-century international politics. Its problems cannot be altogether settled by reason. In the peace treaty a sincere attempt was made to settle the map of Europe according to the principles of nationality. Where a homogeneous people is collected on one area under one sovereign set of instr tutors there is stability and order. But unfortunately in too many areas this consummation cannot be achieved: a clear cut cannot be made, and, mainly for this reason, Europe to-day is a seething cauldron of conflicting national claims. It is not the backward races only which are afflicted,in this way. The two most

gifted races in Europe-Anglo-Saxon and Celt--cannot live together in Ireland, and to end conflict a solution has to be arrived at which niaims

Ireland and penalises all sections. The case for obviating similar struggles in the newly settled countries is irresistible. There are, however, certain mitigating factors in the settlement of new terri tories. European nations

are so closely akin that with intermarriage coalescence is only the matter

.r

122

ATTITUDES AND POLICIES IN THE 20TH CENTURY

of a couple of generations. If a country is well settled by one vigorous race, if the Problem of sovereignty is securely decided, if the language is decisively chosen; if the culture is one which can be shared by all, there is no need to apprehend trouble in a new country from the admix t u r f : of Iiuropeans. The immigrant accepts the culture of the new land with pride. He learns its language and looks upon it as his home. But there are limits to the absorptive power of the settled race. The history of the United States shows that, where the immigration is too rapid, the aliens form enclaves and give all sorts of trouble. The absorptive faculty varies in the geometrical ratio. I n a small country, where the original settlers are scanty, a large immigration might easily put the dominant culture in doubt. It might easily raise the question of the allegiance of the people to its old sovereign a n d institutions. And when the culture of race is threatened the racial conflict coinmeiices.

The United States were so populous when the great stream of immigration started that no effective challenge could be made. But this does not apply to a small population like that of Australia, where a n immigration of one million Italians or Germans might at once give rise to racial conflict.

Quite other considerations apply to the immigration of non-European races. America, which has shown such absorptive power in the case of European races, has never absorbed the negro. Non~European immigration is of two kinds. One is of races who have had no experience of civilised institutions-the negro and the South Sea Islander. These are generally regarded as inferior. The other is of races who have old cultures which vary widely and essentially from European culture. In the first you get striking dilierences of c o l o r which indelibly discriminate the alien. You get an inability to live u p to the forms and the institutions of the white race. You get a n admission of inferiority by the colored race and a life of mean and squalid conditions. You get two entirely cligcrent coilccptioné of :sex Isroblclllri cuts all ineradicable

instinct against

intermarriage, which renders absorption impossible.

Mixed marriage becomes an act of treachery, and the progeny of the

marriage are penalised. Economically the colored races become pawns, depressing the standard of life a n d removing the white race from a healthy contact with manual l a b o r . No system of indentured l a b o r has ever been satisfactory. Recruitment has given rise to all sorts of scandals, the life of the illdelltured labourer has been unnatural. It was never more than veiled slavery. Nowhere was indentured l a b o r more closely guarded than i n Australia, but the death-rate among the South Sea Islanders was always greatly in excess of the whites', even in tropical parts. The return of the indentured worker to his home gave rise to

scandals worse than the recruiting. The case of older civilisations like the Hindu, Chinese or Japanese is like the racial problem in Europe, only ever so much more intense. Here you have an old, honorable civilisation, a noble culture very tenaciously held, but a low economic ideal. You have the conflict of colour and language, but a tenacity of

purpose-a racial pride and an intellectual capacity which are absent

SECTION FIVE DOCUMENTS

123

from the inferior races. In races like the Japanese you have a patriotism l»~= our own, which will never accept alien which is more intense culture or sovereignty. l Lastly, we must recognise that under democracy the chances of racial mitigated. This paradoxical result is due to conflict are intensified, the fact that democracy is only possible where there is a foundation of mutual trust and confidence. The method of democracy is progress through struggle. There is a constant conflict of ideas and objectives which is only not dangerous because, underlying these diiliculties, there is a strong unity of race, institutions, language and history. We permit the utmost latitude in our Parliamentary struggles, because we know that all are interested in the integrity and value of the State. But if this interest is not shown by all, in there is a large section anxious to instant another set of ideas and institutions, the free and tolerant basis of democratic institutions becomes a danger. The very freedom can be used as an instrument to destroy the old culture. And so racial conflict develops almost automatically. The older race feels that its language, its institutions are priceless privileges. They are the condition of its political efficiency. A minority which cannot understand the language and the institutions in which the State is governed cannot be said to enjoy self-governrnent. If it strives for government in its own language, it threatens the culture of the other race. Here is an irreconcilable

_

problem. The dominant race will discriminate against and hold back the minority for [ear of the threat to its position. 111 the struggle all the

reality of democracy will be lost. In America, where there is a difficult stralia, where the only racial problem, racial hatred is intense. there is no racial feeling. The remnant of coloured aliens are vis the old Chinese who were originally hunted down in racial riots are really popular. Japanese scientists and sailors lately had receptions which surprised them

their cordiality. That cordiality would be

changed to hatred if the Japanese were settling here and challenging our hold on this continent. Racial conflict is a fact which cannot be ignored. It is not based on depravity, but is the result of national and often virtuous characteristics on both sides. Any wise planning of world settlement would avoid it.

Toe

Current Debate

WHITE AUSTRALIA-REFORM? The final section is intended to outline the present policy of the Australian government on non-European immigration and to offer a sample of the views of some important and representative advocates and opponents of change. It is introduced by extracts from A. C. PALFREEMAN'S article in the Current A.t'j'ai1r.s Bulletin, vol. 34, July 1964, pp. 56-61. Mr. Palfreeman is the author of the Melbourne University Press publication, The Administration of

the White Australia Policy. The editor offers his sincere thanks to Mr. Palfreeman and to the Department of Tutorial Classes in the University of Sydney for permission to reprint these extracts.

Moral and Legal Bases 'Were the Australian people justified, morally and legally, in establishing the policy in 1901? On acceptable criteria, the answer would have to be yes. Whatever the undertones and overtones of racial preiudice,_the .protection of the community against the importation of cheap l a b o r and of an unassimilable minority was morally justified. It must be remembered that the Chinese Polynesian immigrants in the

nineteenth century were

unskilled laborers and were in fact, by Australian sociological standards, non-assimilable. In law, international or domestic, there was no question of Australia's right to restrict certain kinds of immigrants. One could certainly take exception to the transparently devious methods of exclusion prescribed, notably the

dictation test, but the general purposes of the policy could be considered sensible and justifiable in the circumstances. One question to be answered therefore is whether or not these

circumstances have changed sufficiently in 60 years to attribute a degree of immorality or illegality to the policy generally. They might have changed suflici ently at the political level to make new methods of administering the policy imperative-but this is a

different kind of question.

SECTION SIX READINGS

125

Christian Opinion Is there anything immoral or unchristian about Australia's policy of restricted immigration? To begin with, the morality' of political decisions, both internal and international, is a subject of endless debate among political theorists. And clearly we can

ask, does a single, recognised moral code for political activity exist within one community-let alone between 100 communities? I t could be maintained that Australia is preponderantly a Christian community, and that as such a recognisable morality

should be reflected in its political ethics. If we accept this limited thesis, is it possible in these terms to pass judgment on the Y/Vhite Australia Policy? Spokesmen for the Churches suggest diflferin interpretationsThe Australian Council of the Vtforld Council of Churches has consistently advocated a quota system or bilateral arrangements because it would 'alarm our conviction of racial equality and

remove suspicion that we are governed by c o l o r Prey"aclice'. The ,r Australia Policy is Society of Friends has said that the 'A-hite 'basically wrong' since it is a 'denial of Clzrislian love, of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of l\fan'. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church has resolved that 'the strict exclusion of non-European Peoples from Permanent residence in

Australia is detrimental to good relationships with non-white races and incornpalillle with Christian Principles of human lnrotlzerhood. . .'

.

The Australian Catholic Bishops have condemned

the 'false

assumption of racial superiority which too often underlies the White Australia Policy' and have declared that 'absolute exclusion can hardly be liustihedi

On the other hand, Dr. Rumble, long regarded as an official spokesman of the Catholic Church, or at least of the Sydney Archdiocese, has said that the policy is more a national and political than moral problem and that in his opinion the existinsr policy should be maintained. One conclusion drawn by Catholic laymen

from a discussion entitled 'Christian Morality and Australia's policy of Restricted Immigration' was that a quota system would be little more than 'international window dressing. The restrictions were sound because 'charity alone cannot oblige this country to incur heavy sacrifices and grave dangers in the interests of other PeopleS. The views of Christian theologians occupied with the problem of the moral duties of one nation towards another show consider-

able divergence, especially when applied to specific national

126

THE CURRENT DEBATE

policies. And there does not seem tooas clear answer question of the morality of the policy even from the theologians, although they seem to agree that they is nothing very objectionable in its ultimate aim. Their chief criticism is aimed at some aspects of its application. Where the criterion in admitting immigrants is based on justifiable economic, health, character or assimilability grounds, we are, it seems, morally on good ground. W'hen it is based on racial distinctions we are violating Christian principles. Wr.hen it results in personal hardship and the break~up of families, it offends against Christian charity. The difficulty here is that it is particularly troublesome, in applying the policy, to separate these criteria. It just happens that the people least likely to meet the morally justifiable criteria are non-white, so that racial distinctions can readily be made for nonracial reasons. It is also possible, though open to question, that if the administrators are to achieve the general objectives of the policy, some racial discrimination is inevitable and justifiable. It is sometimes difficult to see the logic of the attitudes of the

Churches in proposing quotas or some other very limited degree of permanent en try. If and degree of racial discrimination is unchristian, then any entry policy which discriminates between European and non-European is equally unchristian. And all the current suggestions for change--a quota system, bilateral arrangements, an 'assimilation formula', and the la»Iinister's discretionwill continue in one wav or another to make this discrimination. It could perhaps be said that in spite of this, the objective should be to get the racial factor into proportion. In law, internal or international, conditions have not changed. enjoys the right to determine who its immigrants, if any,

JAustralia

are to be. If anything this right is more complete than it was in 1901 when Britain, which controlled Australia's foreign relations, looked askance a t a policy which ran counter to its own views on the easy movement of people within the Empire, irrespective of And there has been nothing in the development of inter-

national law which modifies national sovereignty in respect to immigr except possibly SO far as international law gives increasing recognition to the right of political asylum. 'Control or Colour Bar? To reiterate, therefore: if the objectives relevant lo immigration policy are to safeguard economic standards, to preserve established political institutions, traditions and social stores,

and thus to prevent the settlement of minorities which might

SECIION six READINGS

127

endanger these objectives-then there is little doubt that the

policy is as morally and legally jusiiiecl in 1964 as in 1901. It is true that in the nature of things these objectives are inseparable from some degree of racial discrimination, but it can be argued that this does not make the objectives in themselves any less valid. To be honest with ourselves, we might be forced to admit that

those who criticise the administration of the policy are mainly concerned with its appearance to others--not about its general objectives. This charge, however, cannot be levelled to the same extent a t the authors of Inivnigralfion: Control or Colour liar?,

whose arguments are closely reasoned and sophisticated, vide the

following passage:

To announce a quota for each nation, and to leave things at this, is the sort of proposal that might be appropriate if our only aim were to placate Asian opinion. The present book has stressed that this is only one of the reasons for changing our

immigration policy. We need a different policy because proper links with Asia cannot be built if all Asians who come here know that, except in a few f a v o r e d cases, they will beasked

c to leave. We need a different policy because we OI' later are being deprived of the opportunities for mutual enrichment

e sooner

and understanding which a less inhibited contract would open

up. We need a different policy because the present one implies that skin colour is a near-perfect test of the possibility of absorption, and this view, as well as being rubbish, strengthens the race prejudice that undoubtedly persists alnong some Australians. For all three reasons the admission of non- Europeans is called for, quite apart from obvious moral and humanitarian grounds and the likely effect on world opinion.

All these are valid reasons for changing the policy as it stands, but most of them are closely related to the political relationship which Australia must develop with Asia. 'Proper Links with Asia' will determine and be determined by Australian foreign policy and trade policy in Asia. 'Enrichment' in a cultural sense is a worthy aim, but the precise meaning of this is vague and unclear -if it means more than cultural exchange between Australia and

Asia at the highest levels, which the policy does not in fact exclude. The degree of 'u11dersta11ding' between Australia and Asia will be largely determined by the need for both to reach a political modus vinefidi. The fact, finally, that the present policy implies that skin c o l o r is a near-perfect test of the possibility of absorp-

tion no doubt has the effect of reinforcing prejudice in Australia,

128

THE CURRENT DEBATE

but what many Australians fear to be a more dangerous consequence is the effect of this implication on Asian opinion. Public, Party and Parliamentary Opinion Generally speaking, public opinion, which can only be defined here as the aggregate of expressed views of groups and individuals, has not undergone startling change since 1957. The debate for and against retains many of the same arguments, with the same inconclusiveness, although they are certainly presented with more sophistication.

The significant groups which continue to oppose change in the administration of the policy include the R.S.S. and A.I.L.A., one of whose leaders has referred to critics of the policy in November, 1961, as an 'unholy alliance of do-go odors, some influenced by Communist organisations and others by religion bodiesi The Australian Natives Association saw in the 1962 attempt to bring

a trick 'to _ Japanese children of Australian in destroy by any means possible Au.stroléa's Policy of migration controls Some trade unions are no less opposed to change. groups that favour change continue to be the Churches, student groups, Apex and Rotary clubs, the Australian Junior Chamber of Commerce and others. Until 1961 all these groups, for and against, were primarily concerned with their own objectives and onl took a line on the

X-Vliite Australia Policy 'in the public interest'. The really significant development since 1957 is the creation of organisations whose .sole aim is to eIIect changes in the immigration policy. These are the Immigration Reform Group, a research b , , and the Associations for Immigration Reform, which are now constituted on a State basis in all mainland Stat'es. Their objective is to persuade

the Government to modify the policy, for reasons which are presented in great detail and clarity in the Group's book, Imrnzgration.: Control 07" Colour Bar?, and which were touched upon earlier. Their method is basically to educate and convert public and party opinion, although direct representation to the Legislature and Executive are not ruled out. The members of these bodies see themselves as having several functions, one of which is to act as a catalyst of opinion, another is to provide a course through which some of the pressure for change may be channeled. This kind of manoeuvre was carried

out in the United States in 1943 with signal success. There, a catalyst group acting in this way brought about the repeal of the

Chinese Exclusion Laws in the face of opposition from groups

SECTION SIX READINGS

129

remarkably similar in name, objectives and outlook to their Australian counterparts. In Australia, the Associations for Immigration Reform were not expressly created by the groups i n favour of change and have not

attracted their formal support as yet. Nevertheless, sympathy for

the objectives of the associations is widespread, as their representative membership indicates, and it would be reasonable to expect that it the associations were to call for a declaration of support from all those groups in favour of change, it would on the whole

be given. Refoirmist Proposals There has been one interesting example of this. Just before the federal election of November, 1963, the N,S,1/ll, association prepared a statement expressing concern about the administration of the policy, quoting with approval a statement by Mr. Downer to the effect that Asian migration to Australia was 'increasing through various exceptions. The statement was signed by 26 prominent citizens, including the Anglican Primate, leaders of the Methodist and Presbyterian Churches in N.S.lAl., professors and businessmen who affirmed that 'in our view it is of high importance that the Government formed after November 30 shall keep moving towards a more generous and flexible Policy as regards the entry of suitable non~Europeans'.

The Gallup Polls, in so far as they are representative, do seem to indicate a trend in popular opinion. Of those questioned in 1954, 61 per cent were in favour of no non-European entry, while 31 per cent wanted a 'token' entry. In 1962, so per cent wanted exclusion; 64 per cent wanted the entry of small numbers. In 1962, also, 31 per cent thought the policy should continue to be called the White Australia Policy; 57 per cent suggested other namesIt is possible to come to two general conclusions about public . opinion and the policy: 1. There is no strong feeling in favour of radical change. The

questions asked in the Gallup Polls have concerned a possible quota system or else the name that should be given to the policy. Fundamentally the policy is not a vital public issue. For the great majority of Australians it remains a settled thing-an agreed national objective which, if it is to be modified at all,

can be so only in small measure. 2. In spite of this, there is often significant public reaction to

special cases of apparent individual hardship brought about by

TIIE CURRENT DEBATE

130

the application of the policy. This has been a constant feature of public opinion and does not change much in intensity, as numerous cases since 1901 indicate. Public reaction to the refusal of the Department of External Affairs in 1913 to grant entry for permanent residence to the wife of Poon Gooey was very similar to public reaction in 1948 and 1949 to Mr. Calwell's attempts to deport Sergeant Cainboa, Mrs. O'Keefe and the

wartime refugees. Similar also was the public reaction in 1961 and 1962 when Mr. Downer attempted to deport the two Malayan pearl divers from Darwin and to prevent the entry of the Japanese children of Australian servicemen.

These people and many more have gained the sympathy of Australian opinion, although their plight is in some measure due to a policy which part of that opinion wishes to maintain.

6 Documents 'THE POLICY WE FAVOUR' From The Immigration Reform Group's publication, edited by Dr. Kenneth Rivett, Immigration, Control or Colour Bar (M.U.P.), Melbourne, 1962, pp. 135-7. This extract is reprinted with grateful acknowlcd cuts to Melbourne University Press and to the Immigration Reform Group.

We suggest that the Australian government should take the following steps to put its immigration policy, as regards non-Europeans, on a satisfactory basis. I. The government should announce publicly that the WThite Austra-

lia policy is at an end. It could point out legitimately that this is IIO sudden departure, and that the working of the policy has been partly modified in recent years.

.

"re should announce that, henceforth, our capacity to absorb 9 migrants without social or economic strain will be the sole determinant of our level of intake, [or non-European migrants as for Europeans. This capacity will be determined by the need to avoid harmful economic competition that gives rise to social tensions, to prevent a concentration of any racial group in low-status employment, to avoid housing congestion, and to ensure ltatiriouious integration with the rest of the Austra-

Ilan community.

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

131

We should state that, guided Br these criteria, we are prepared to negotiate bilateral migration agreements with the government of any non-European country whose citizens may wish to come here. 3. We suggest that for an experimental period of about Ive years the number of non-Europeans allowed to settle permanently could be set at 1,500 a year. This appears to be several times the number who have entered in recent years. I t is impossible to predict how many nonEuropeans might make bona-lide claims to political asylum during this period, but any admitted on this ground should be let in without regard to the overall figure. In addition, a. number of non-Europeans now here

on temporary permits should be allowed to remain. Non-Europeans below executive rank, and war evacuees, who have been able in practice to stay, should be allowed immediately to bring in their wives, and adult children of non-European permanent residents, who wish to settle here with their parents, should certainly be permitted to do so. When non-Europeans are admitted on temporary permit, their spouses should be allowed to accompany them. 4. All agreements should be subject to revision about the time that the experimental period came to an end. 5. I n deciding who should be admitted, close relatives of non-Europeans who live here aireadv should be given first call, up to about half the total intake. Other immigrants should fall within occupational eategories to be settled in consultation with their governments. The need to avoid economic conflict and any concentration of non-Europeans in low-status jobs should be the overriding factors. A reasonable balance should be kept between the claims of the various countries from which immigrants might wish to come. 6. The governments with whom agreements were reached should be invited to express their views as to how applicants within the agreed categories should be selected. 7. The ratio between male and female migrants from each nonEuropean country should be kept even. 8. Non-Europeans coming here would be required to satisfy the same requirements as Europeans. The same standards as regards health, criminal records etc. should be adhered Lo. Non-Europeans on coming here could qualify for citizenship in exactly the same way as Europeans. They would be covered by the same industrial awards and would have exactly the same legal rights. 9. 'Wise selection and legal equality on arrival are only two aspects of a prudent immigration policy. The others are to educate our own people and to remain cease essy vigilant as regards what happens when the immigrants get here. The extent to which non-Europeans were fitting i n should be watched continuously,y signs of discrimination in housing and employment should he noted, and the four criteria of satisfactory absorption carefully applied. In agreements covering subsequent years, the number of immigrants in any particular category, and the total number of non-Europeans, might be varied-up or down.

It would certainly be expedient to contract non-European migration

132

THE CURRENT DEBATE

(and also European) in the unlikely event of another depression. We are, however, confident that the number of non-Europeans allowed in could safely be increased. For one thing, after the initial period, kin migration would play an increasing part, and the establishment of

satisfactory relations by those who came here would be proportionately easier.

.

It is impossible at this stage to state figures as to the number or proportion of non-Europeans whom Australia could absorb eventually. The whole trend of our argument should indicate this. 1We are not fencesitting; we have been very explicit about the factors which experience shows to be relevant. But it is one thing to suggest which dials to look at, and another to say what the dials will show in twenty or thirty years' time.

All we ask for at this stage is a small annual intake (1,500) and a public announcement signifying that the differences between European

nations and non-European nations, and between one non-European nation and another, will be treated in the same way as the differences between one European nation and another. All such differences have

some legitimate bearing on our immigration policy. They may still have a legitimate bearing for a very long time. \Athat we object to is putting a ring round most of the world's peoples and saying: Whoever you are,

and however you might fare when you get here, keep out! That is the policy which draws such ceaseless, bitter attacks. That is the policy which the rest of the world regards as so intolerant and so unfair.

(ii)

...

'AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION POLICY' This defense of Australian policy was written by the late SIR _JOHN LATHAM, former Chief Justice of Australia, for Quadrant, vol. v, Autumn 1961, pp. 3-8. It is republished here with the permission of the editor of Quadrant.

The immigration policy of Australia has recently been the subject of criticism, particularly in academic and clerical circles. No one would

contend that Australian policy should not be open to full criticism. But all should agree that criticism should be based upon an accurate statement and a proper understanding of the policy. If criticism, how-

ever honest, is not so based, it may, especially when published abroad and when dealing with such a controversial subject as immigra son, do much harm to the reputation of Australia and may prejudice our relations with other countries. The subject may well be considered i n relation to a pamphlet entitled Control or Colonr Bail? which presents, strongly and enthusiastically, the

case for far-reaching changes in the present immigration policy. The pamphlet is published by The Immigration Reform Group at the

University of Melbourne.

It contains a reasoned examination and

criticism of Australian Immigration law and policy and an argument that changes, described as 'reforms', should be made by the Australian

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

153

Government offering to all non-European countries agreements under which some of their nationals would be admitted into Australia as permanent settlers. The present policy should, it is contended, be changed because it is 'regarded, rightly or wrongly, as one of rigid exclusion' of coloured persons-particularly of nationals of Asian countries with which, it is rightly said, it is important, from every point of view, that Australia should be on really friendly terms. The pamphlet is based upon the view that the present policy is in

effect that of 'the absolute exclusion of Asians' (to use words quoted from the Singapore Straits Times) and that in lieu thereof there should be 'control' of immigration. This control should be exercised in accordance with agreements made between Australia and non»European countries, and not by means of quotas merely fixing numbers of immigrants. Occupation, health, age, etc., and possibility of assimilation in a reasonable sense into the Australian community, should also be taken into account. It is true that the term "White Australia' has become-or has been made--offensive to some of the few Asians who know anything about Australia, I agree that the term should be discarded-for the reasons that it is a very inaccurate description of Australian policy, and that it leads to misunderstanding and misrepresentation. (Before I went to Japan as Minister for Australia in 1940, I obtained an undertaking from the

Government that this term would no 1ongeE" used in any governmental or official statements or publications. The undertaking, unfortunately, has not proved to be very effectual.) "" In 1918 at an Imperial Conference

(at which I was present in a

subordinate capacity) a resolution was passed unanimously. (India was

represented-but was then under British rule.) It states and approves a fundamentally important principle, applicable not only between countries of the Commonwealth, but between all countries. The resolution was. 1. It is an inherent function of the Governments of the several communities of the British Commonwealth, including India, that each should enjoy complete control of the composition of its own population by means of restriction on immigration from any of the other communities. 2. British citizens, domiciled i n any Britislg country, including India, should be admitted into any other British country for visits, for

the purpose of pleasure or commerce, including temporary residence for the purpose of education. The conditions of such visits should be regulated on the principle of reciprocity. . . The authors of the pamphlet sympathize with Asian students who

.

have come here as students and then want to settle here permanently and have not been allowed to do so. It is diiiicult to share this sympathy, for the simple reason that all the students knew before they came to Australia that they would be here for a definitely limited period. They

134

THE CURRENT DEBATE

need not have come, subject to this condition, unless they chose to do so. The Australian policy is not based on race or c o l o r , but on difference. Ours is a European civilization. Are we not entitled to keep it so if we wish-just as other countries are entitled to preserve their traditional and preferred civilization? Colour and race are not tests of character or quality. But Oriental civilizations are very different from European civilizations. Asian countries differ from Australia not only in c o l o r and race and language, but also in tradition and history and loyalties, in social and political outlook and organization, in religion (except for minorities), in manner of living, and in standards of living. At a press conference in Japan, I found no difficulty in dealing with Australian immigration policy. I asked my forty interrogators why Japan imposed restrictions, amounting to prohibition, upon immigration of Chinese

and Koreans into Japan. They knew that Japan was protecting a standard of living and a manner of life. They were not prepared to contend that Australia could not properly do the same thing. Reference has already been made to India. Immigration of aliens is also controlled, and restricted, by law in Pakistan, Burma, Ceylon, Malaya, Singapore, Cambodia, Vietnam and Japan. In all these countries entry can be allowed or prohibited a t the discretion of the Government. In the Philippines and in Thailand there are quota systems. The laws of these Asian countries are not distinguishable in substance from the Australian law. The effect of them depends, as in Australia, upon the exercise of sninistcrial.. discretion. At the present time these Asian laws do not, i n practice, matter much to Australians-ibut Austral

Hans would soon see that they had real significance if a few hundred Australians, instead of a few individuals, sought to enter Asian countries for the purpose of permanent settlement. The pamphlet does not suggest that any Asian government has thought it proper to ask for a change in the Australian law with respect to immigration. No such government is in a position to make such a request. in China l met no diiliculty about immigration for purposes of settlement: the Chinese were engaged i n getting rid of foreigners.

The pamphlet pleads for much greater Asian immigration on the ground that it would 'enrich our culture'. I n fact the present Australian

policy, as recently stated by the Honourable A. R. Downer, Minister for Immigration, provides 'specially for the entry of distinguished and highly qualified Asians to the Australian community. Thus, for example, an Indian philosopher, a Pakistani professor, a Ceylonese diplomat, a Malayan statesman, a n Indonesian jurist, a Thai doctor of specialized knowledge, a Chinese internationalist, all would be freely accepted by my Department, and would, I know be acclaimed in any Australian

capital city. People in these categories are already here, and we are delighted to see them iii our midst." 14 .December 1959-quoted in pamphlet p. 8) Leading Asians come to Australia for international conferences of all kinds. A successful seminar on Asian Constitutions was recelltly held

iN

Cax1l7aerr'a_ II; wons attentiefi lay h i g h l y cltlnliifziefl jurists

and political scientists from several Asian countries.

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

135

I t was reported on 8 September 1960, that in the twelve months ended 30 June 1960, Australian citizenship was granted to free hundred Asians, mainly Chinese and Japanese who had completed fifteen years residence in Australia. This docs not looks li§§i 'absolute exclusion

Asians'. The pamphlet describes as 'the blackest pessimism' the opinion that admission of much larger numbers of Asians would probably result iIi racial tension. But is it really pessimism-or common sense? It is fair to say* that there is no significant racial tension in Australia as the bresent time. Why? Because in fact the number of persons of non~Ettropean race here who are permanent residents is small, and no difficulties arise. If the number became substantial, there is every reason to fear that racial tension, now so happily absent, would develop. It is a matter of experience and common sense. Consider the Negroes in the United States, the Indians in Kenya and South Africa and Fiji-and even Notting Hilland Puerto Ricans in New York. Consider what is happening to the Chinese i n Indonesia. It is foolish to ignore such facts. It is not 'blackest pessimism' to recognize realities-even when they are to be deplored. A general homogeneity of population (in which Australia is highly fortunate) has valuable practical advantages which, on balance, may reasonably be considered to outweigh the specul alive benefits i n enrichIneI1t of culture which might possibly be derived from the intermingling of very different races in a. single society. It is prudent, in the interests both of Australians and of immigrants, not to incur the risk of

creating another festering sore of racial hatred. The proposal of the pamphlet is that Australia should take the initiative in overing to all non-European countries agreements for the admission into AUstralia as permanent residents of people from these countries.

There are now sixty-four non-European nations which are members of the United Nations. They naturally have their own outlook and their own ideas of importance and prestige as compared with other countries. 1/ the Australian Government went out of its way even to discuss with all of them how many of their people they would like Australia to take as settlers annually, the Government would, it may be suggested, simply be asking for trouble. The Government might even discover that millions of people in Africa believe strenuously in a "Black Africa". 'Would the Government undertake a campaign to get them to change their ideas? A man can have many friends without inviting them all to come into his home. If a person says that he has a right to be invited-or at least to complain because he has not been invited-there will not be a good prospect for friendship. If a person goes so far as to say that he has a right to come into the home of a friend (or of anyone), whether he has been invited or not-and to stay-then friendship will be impossible. The title of the pamphlet suggests that Australian inmiigration policy

consists in a mere 'Colour Bar' with no form of intelligent and friendly 'Conttoli This is not the case. When tIC policy is fairly stated and

understood it forms no obstacle to genuine friendship with Asian

136

THE CURRENT DEBATE

peoples. Australian policy is, in principle, the same as theirs. It is not based on colour prejudice or upon any idea of racial superiority. It is based upon a recognition of real differences which exist between persons belonging to European civilizations and others which have substantial social, political and economic significance, and upon a realization of the danger of running the risk of creating conditions which, as men and women are actually constituted, may bring about a racial intolerance in Australia §roln which, at present, we are so fortunately free.

Sir John Latham's article provoked a controversy that may be followed in the replies and 1-ejoinders appeariIrg in subsequent issues of Quadrant, in Spring 1961 and Summer 1962. The Immigration Reform Group included a chapter 'Answers [O Objectors' in its book Immigration: Control or Colour Bat, recently republished by

Melbourne University Press. (iii)

-=.-*-

...

CHANGING WHITE AUSTRALIA. OUR FUTURE RELATIONS WITH NEW GUINEA The article by .]. R. Kerr from which these extracts were taken was published in New Guinea, vol. i, June-july 1965, pp. 31-6. The author, a former Principal of the Australian School of Pacific Administration, is now a judge of the Commonwealth Industrial Court and

President of the I a w Association for Asia a n d the

\*Vestern Pacific. I wish to thank Mr. Justice Kerr and the Council on New Guinea Affairs for granting permission for this reprinting-

'The Debate That Wasn't' by Charles Rowley (New Guinea, MarchApril, 1965) was an interesting introduction to a discussion of the White Australia policy as it affects New Guinea and New Guinea policy. In essence the article set out to make the point that the New Guinea territories are being precipitated towards independence because the alternative policy-incorporation in Australia as a seventh State-did not get fully considered.

The reason for this was, so the author says, that the White Australia policy, with all its unmentionable ramifications, stood in the way of a really full and serious debate.

.

..

The real purpose of this contribution . . is to raise the . immediate question of the impact of the White Australia policy upon relations between ourselves and the New Guineans. There is, I think, much truth in what Rowley says, namely, that the drift to independence as a polio has really taken place without much discuss& of incorporation Australia because: the whole question of White Australia would have been involved and, of course, an open rejection of the Papuans on obviously racial grounds would not have done us much good internationally; especially while we were busy explaining that our immigration policy has noth-

ing to do with race.

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

137

Rowley, however, admits that for any of the parties to have raised this question in Australia could, as a matter of internal politics, have

been political suicide. He says that one of the arguments for the Melanesian Federation had been that it was simply too risky to propose a seventh State and then to have it rejected, or to adopt the seventh State policy, encourage New Guineans to migrate to Australia and then see them insulted and rejected. Although there was not much of a debate in the late fifties about the seventh State policy it was not because the issue had not been raised. I joined issue with mccAuley on the practicability of a seventh State policy and related my disagreement specifically to the White Australia policy. Rowley may be right about the reasons why no real support developed for the seventh State idea, but amongst those involved in controversy on the future of New Guinea in those days the connection of the problem with the White Australia policy was well understoodIn my 1958 paper, in disagreeing with mccAuley, I said:

.

Statehood would . . involve, ultimately, equal voting rights for the newly incorporated people, equal employment conditions and freedom to reside in any part of Australia. The economic cost would be very great. In order to encourage the bulk of the New Guinea people to remain in New Guinea and not to exercise their legal right to Hood into Australia, thus creating a serious racial problem inside Australia, it would be necessary, at enormous cost, to make New Guinea equally attractive economically to its inhabitants. The political and economic consequences of such a policy would seem at i-irst sight to make it impracticable. It is also unlikely that an Australian Govermnent

would accept the responsibility, when we remember the strong "White Australia' sentiment in this country, for the racial consequences of

such a policy. Not only the Australian award structure would have to be extended to all the New Guinea people but also, as i n the ease of the relatively few aborigines, the social service scheme with old age, widows, invalid pensions, unemployment relief and so on. In addition to full economic development at the Australian standard and as part of Australia, Australian economic capacity would have to support an enormous lift in the economic situation of 2,000,000 New Guineans. This, in itself, was not practical politics apart altogether from the White Australia policy.

The interesting point in current politics is that, leaving aside incorporation of New Guinea into Australia as a seventh State and accepting that this is not now practical politics, nevertheless, the possibility of migration from even an independent New Guinea must be faced. On

this point I said, in 1958: 'We must ensure full, unrestricted educational and research opportunities in Australia for those capable of benefiting from them. We must also carefully consider the possibility of adopting a graduated

immigration policy under which employment opportunities would be

THE CURRENT DEBATE

138

found in Australia for quotas of New Guinea citizens. We could certainly use the manpower in our own development. If 'we are to relax the White Australia policy-and this is not entirely impossible -there is no more sensible point a t which to do so than in respect OE our New Guinea friends. The genuineness of our announced aspirations could well be demonstrated

by careful and controlled action i n

this Held. W'e should avoid the consequences of uncontrolled flooding but in fixing the quota should not engage in the mere making of an empty gesture. Until very recently, as Rowley has said, the New Guinea peoples have been themselves silent O11 this and related points. However, some New Guineans spoke up about migration to Australia at the recent seminar conducted by the Australian Association for Cultural Freedom. Professor J. D. B. Miller, according to the Press, predicted a t that seminar that it would he the ambition of many New Cuineans to work in Australia where they could earn more for doing the same job. He said that he did not expect Australia to be confronted suddenly

by solid organised demands, but argued that the pressure will build up and will, of necessity, strain the existing nature of the connection between the two countries. He said, too, that the White Australia policy was a barrier to incorporation of New Guinea into Australia as a seventh State. He made the

point that Britain's experience showed the social problems created by the immigration of colored people a t the wage earning level, and added 'with our stronger tradition of opposition to colored immigration as such, the same would happen here too'. After this paper was delivered Mr. Dirona Abe, a n elected member of the Papua-New Guinea House of Assembly and the parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, said at a Press conference that Australia should grant Papuans full Australian citizenship with immigration rights, and Mr. Henry Roberts, a 4th year New Guinea Economics student at Sydney University, criticised the immigration ban on Papuans and New Guinea peopleMr. Oala Oala Rarua, the President of the Port Moresby Workers'

Association, in a recent television interview, agreed with Mr. Abe. He outlined the procedures which had to be followed to enable him to get permission to visit Australia. We are pretty obviously going to have to create Papua-New Guinea citizenship separate from Australian citizenship even before independence is achieved if we are going to avoid the application of the stigma

'second class citizen' to Papuans. On the assumption that we have really elected for a policy of independence for New Guinea, and on the assumption that we are not going to allow the New Guinea people to elect themselves into the Commonwe:iI|;f1 of Australia, New Guinea's political development

from this

will be separate

COUI1t1IV.

Whatever is done, following the World Bank Report or for other

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

139

reasons, to give assistance to the New Guinea economy, it will be a separate economy and wages and salaries, social services and so On in New Guinea will reflect and depend upon that economy and not directly the Australian economy. \'Ve have a basic policy of assimilation in relation to the aborigines. This kind of policy would, on the seventh State hypothesis, have to be extended to New Guineans too. As Australian awards are gradually extended to cover aborigines, their remuneration, subject to proper work value assessments, will be based upon the capacity of the Australian economy. But this, together with a

policy of assimilation into the Australian community, would never have

been practicable in the case of New Guineans. This point about the aborigines is mentioned in passing because there is a growing tendency in international debate for our policy towards New Guinea, our policy towards the aborigines, and our immigration policy, to be connected and to be regarded as all, in one way or another, demonstrating a tendency to discrimination and racialism in Australia. In is not without interest that some aspects of this problem are emerging i n the Field of industrial arbitration where the Australian Council of Trade Unions may be expected to be directly or indirectly involved. An intriguing point, however, is that the trade union movement has close institutional links with the Australian Labour Party which still has the W'llite Australia policy as part of its platform* The trade union movement years ago radically adjusted its immigration policy and accommodated itself to considerable European immigration, whilst ensuring that this immigration did not have an adverse elteet upon employment conditions and opportunities of Australians. I said in my 1965 paper to the Industrial Relations Society that: a big question is going to be whether the new experience gained by the trade union movement in relation to resistance to South African

apartheid policies, the terms and conditions of employment of aborigiries, and the terms and conditions of employment i n New

Guinea of the indigenous people there will help it to see the problem of Asian iininigration and perhaps New Guinea immigration in better perspective.

I went on to argue in that paper that the trade union movement could give a very important lead as to limited non-white immigration whilst protecting its own standards of living. The matter is not one only for the l a b o r and trade union Il1OVEIll€I1lLS. Yet, to the extent that our immigration policy is currently rationalised in economic terms, it is primarily a matter for the trade union movement more than any other group 1.0 lay down the conditions for its acceptance of limited non-white immigration (including New Guinea immigration) of the kind that will enhance and not imperil our prospects of economic growth. * T h e Australian Labor Party dropped its 'While Australia' plank a t the

Federal Conference in June 1965. Sec document (v) [EcL].

140

THE CURRENT DEBATE

It is to be assumed that our labour and trade union movements would not like to be on the receiving end of international attacks of the kind

that they are supporting against South Africa. On the other hand, we do not want our immigration policy, or our New Guinea policy, to lead, in Australia, to serious troubles such as have arisen in the United States from unres tricted Puerto Rican immigration and in the United Kingdom from unrestricted West Indian immigration. We have to Find a middle way. Gestures will not be enough, but we are entitled to avoid the worst kinds of tension arising from introduced racial troubles.

The debate that did not take place in the 'liities certainly is going to take place in the 'sixties and 'sevellties. The debate is going to be of a much broader character when it does take place, than would have been the case in the 'Fifties. As more and more Tom Mboyas come to Australia, linking 'White Australia, aboriginal policy and New Guinea policy together, it will become increasingly difficult not to deal with New Guinea immigration as part of immigration policy in general. Indeed, dramatic attention may be directed to the implications of our general immigration policy precisely because of the international consideration given to New Guinean affairs. Whilst the Labour Party, and indeed the Government parties, insist upon keeping the White Australia policy as a fundamental matter in Australian politics, we are going to have a bad time in international debates. The real question is not whether we are going, in the long run, to be forced to retreat from this policy, but rather how far are we going to retreat?

Should we be aiming at a kind of multi-racial society in this country? Or are we going to try to make our second line of retreat a mere ficti tious and token quotas stem?

__

_*

New Guinea policy will be something of an experiment for us in this touchy racial field. It may help us to work out a middle position. Even such a middle position based on controlled but not token New Guinea immigration will cause resentment enough in New Guinea with which

we shall have to learn to live, the big decision will be, can we mitigate

...

...

resentment and decide that 'there could be no more sensible point at which to relax the White Australia policy than in respect of our

New Guinea friends'. After all, there is, understandably, a lot of pro-New Guinea sentiment in Australia and this could be mobilised in support of some change in our immigration policy in favour of New Guineans. If we can bring ourselves to do this and thus to gain useful experience in handling multi-racial immigration in a sensible but controlled way, we may he able to move quickly, indeed almost concurrently, towards a

more sensible general immigration policy, It would be better if we could handle things the other way round and make our New Guinea immigration policy an aspect of a new general approach to immigration, but this is perhaps to ask too much.

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

(iv) MR.

141

MINISTERIAL POLICY STATEMENT

[Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, 9 March 1966, pp. 68-70.] OPPERMAN (Curio-Minister for Immigration)-by leave-As the

Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Holt) has already informed the House, the Government has reviewed the operation of immigration policy affecting non~European people, taking into account the experience and changing circumstances of recent years. I wish to give the House details of the decisions and to discuss their significance. W'hen in 1956 the Government reviewed the policy, which had been followed since Federation, of not admitting persons of non-European origin for permanent residence, it introduced several significant reforms. Those people already settled here became eligible to be naturalised; the admission for permanent residence of immediate relatives of Australian citizens was authorised, and it was made possible for highly qualified people to come here for indefinite stay, though under temporary permits. Then in 1957 it was decide that non-Europeans who had been admitted on temporary permits could be naturalised after 15 years' stay. In 1964, the rules governing the entry of persons of mixed descent were eased. The Government has now decided upon :we further measures which

the House will recognise as important but as not departing from the fundamental principles of our immigration policy. First, it has been decided that norm~European people who are already here under temporary permits but are likely to be here indefinitely, should not have to wait 15 years before applying for resident status and for Australian citizenship, but should be able to apply after five years' residence, so ending a situation often criticised for its effect on individuals and families. This does not of course mean that everyone admitted to Australia for limited temporary residence is entitled to stay here indefin-

itely. Every country makes separate provision for temporary entry as distinct from the entry of settlers. For example, I must emphasise it would be quite wrong and most unfair to the development of countries whence they came to offer to the 12,000 Asian students in Australia the

right to settle here after time years' study. The objective of admitting these young people, to use educational facilities which are both expensive to the Australian Government and in great demand, is to help the

students' homelands by increasing their numbers of qualified people. The GovernmentS decision, therefore, does not relate to people

expected to leave Australia after limited temporary residence but does apply to those who have been here for long periods or who arc likely to be allowed to stay indefinitely. The two main examples of people affected by the elimination of the Fifteen-year rule are the highly qualified Asians admitted in recent years for 'indefinite stay' but on temporary entry permits, and Chinese admitted before 1956 who, if they left Australia, could go back only to Communist China. By a decision of the Government in 1956, they were allowed to stay on but, lacking the status of settlers and citizens, have been unable to bring their wives and

children here. I am very glad to say that one important benefit of the

THE CURRENT DEBATE

142

GovcrnmeI1t's decision to abolish the so-called iiftecn-year rule will be to enable many families who have been separated for some years to be J

reunited much sooner than would have been possible under the previous rule. The second decision is that applications for entry by well qualified people wishing to settle in Australia will be considered on the basis of their suitability as settlers, their ability to integrate readily, and their possession of qualifications which are in fact positively useful to Australia. They will be able after five years' stay on temporary permits to apply for resident status and citizenship. They will be able to bring their

immediate families with them on first arrival. No annual quota is contemplated. The number of people enteringthough limited relative to our total population-will be somewhat greater than previously, but will be controlled by the careful assessment of the

individual's qualifications, and the basic aim of preserving a homogeneous population will be maintained. The changes are of course not intended to meet general l a b o r shortages or to permit the large scale admission of workers from Asia; but the widening of eligibility will help to till some of Australia's special needs. Examples of those who, under the new decision, will be admitted in numbers greater than previously are persons with specialised technical skills for appoint tments for which local residents are not available, persons of high attainment in the arts and sciences, or of prominent achievement in other ways; persons nominated by responsible authorities or institutions [or specific important professional appointments, which otherwise would remain unfilled, execu times, technicians, and other specialists who have spent substantial periods in Australia--for example,

with the branches here of large Asian companies-and who have qualihcations or experience in positive demand here: businessmen who in their own countries have been engaged in substantial international trading and would be able to carry on such trade from Australia, persons who have been of particular and lasting help to Australia's interest abroad in trade,

OI'

in other ways; and persons who by former residence

iIx Australia or by association with us have demonstrated an interest in or identification with Australia that should make their future residence here feasible. Applications by such persons and others in comparable circumstances will be eligible for consideration O11 as individual basis. Those admitted will be able to apply for resident status and citizenship after five years'

stay. Where the Goverinmeilts of other countries may be concerned over loss of qualified people, there will be appropriate consultation, as Australia must not contradict the aims of the Colombo Plan and other

efforts to help such countries' development. llfith the same objective, the progt'alllme of allowing young people to come from other countries as students will continue. Greater eEort is to be made to ensure that courses undertaken will be of recognised value to the students' homelands when they return there. I n view of the need to ensure most effective use of

scarce places at our universities and other institutions, the intending

143

SECTION SIX DOCUMENTS

student's ability to undertake his course successfully will be examined carefully a t time of application for entry, and his progress will be assessed annually. Honorable members on both sides of the House have frequently and generously stressed that luunanity and discretion have marked the handling of individual cases in the immigration field generally. This, I can assure the House, will be continued always with Australia's interests in view, always in the hope of showing sympathy and consideration to men and women in difficulty, and always avoiding unnecessary disclosure of private confidences or misfortunes. Representations from any respond sible source will be carefully considered. Every country has not only a right to its own immigration policy but a heavy duty and a vital responsibility to administer it i n the interests of its own people. Our n e i g h b o r s and friends all have immigration policies that are based on their own interests and are intended to benefit their own people and future. All include elements of control of entry a n d residence, some with strict numerical and national limitations. No government is to be reproached for aspects of its immigration system

developed for its needs and derived from its social history, political traditions and constitutional arrangements. No responsible government condones illegality or deceit, which are poor gateways indeed for the

entry

of new settlers.

Our programme and policies have likewise emerged from our history, our respect for law and order and our response to our special needs. Our primary aim in immigration is a generally integrated and predominantly homogeneous population. A positive element in the latest changes is that which will admit selected non-Europeans capable of becoming Australians and joining in our national devf:10P1I1€11t. Both the policy a n d the rules and procedures by which it is effected cannot remain static and must be constantly reviewed. Though redefined from time to time, they must be administered in accordance with the law, on principles decided by the Government, with justice to individuals and for the future welfare of the Australian people as a whole. These will continue

to be the main elements in Australia's immigration policy.

(v)

TH E LABOUR. PARTY'S AppR()\/ AL This extract from the speeds of Mr.

T. M.

Daly, Chairman of the

Labour Party's Immigration Committee, begins with the text of the Party's new policy on immigration, adopted by the Federal Confer-

ence in .Tune 1965. Commonwealth March 1966, p. 575ma. DALY (Grayndler) . . .

Parliameruary Debates, 24

_

. _

Cotwinced that increased population is vital to the future development of Australia, the Australian Labour Part will so port and uphold a vigorous and expanding prograntmf

".i.Q§~;

1

sympathy,

understanding and tolerance. The basis of such policy will be:

144

THE CURRENT DEBATE

(a) Australia's national and economic security, (b) the welfare and integration of all its citizens; (c) the preservation of our democratic system and balanced development of our nation, and (d) the avoidance of the difficult social and economic problems which may follow from a n influx of peoples having different standards of living, traditions and cultures. This should be interpreted as a clear, concise and unobjectionable statement of our policy, free of any taint of racial discrimination or superior-

ity, based on the principle and ideal that the composition of our population will be such as to ensure the integration of all people sharing our freedom, independence and way of life. This policy is not one of the 'open door' or of the 'quota system'. It maintains the principle of

Australia's established immigration policy which has been endorsed by all governments since Federation. At the same time it recognises, as the Minister's statement does, the need for administrative action, tolerance and understanding to meet changing circumstances and to avoid illiounded criticisms, in the administration of policies having a bearing on

a great human problem. Let me now state our attitude to the proposals that the House is now discussing. The Opposition does not oppose the proposals, and we accept the assurance given by the Minister that there is to be no departure from the accepted and established principles of our immigration policy and that this policy will be administered with understanding and

tolerance.

(iv)

AN IMMIGRATION REFORM GROUPER'S REACTION This passage by DR. KENNETH RIVETT is quoted, with the author's permission, from his article 'New Criteria for Immigration', Crux, April-May 1966, p. 5.

The fact that Mr. Opperman's reforms have been favourably received within Australia as well as abroad has left the Government free to make generous and imaginative use of its newly-defined categories. It is good that in the near future Japanese technicians, and relatives of ethnic Chinese now in Australia, will be allowed to settle. But is is also desirable for Australians to learn to live with brown-skinned and black skinned immigrants-and for the world to hear that we are willing to do so. The prematurely complacent should also be reminded that the brothers, sisters, working parents and adult children of non-European citizen.S are still ineligible to settle in Australia, unless, of course, they qualify on some ground other than blood relationship. Thus friends of immigration reform must not think that all is won. In future as i n recent

years, they should ask regularly for oflieial figures showing how far the old barriers have been lowered, a n d should subject these Ilgurcs to

critical (as distinct from cynical) scrutiny.

Basic Secondary Sources Myra Willard, History of the White Australia Policy, Melbourne, 1923, remains the standard work. It has recently been republished by Melbourne University Press. Other titles from the same press are A. T. Yarwood, Asian Migration to Australia. The Background to Exclusion 1896-1923, Melbourne, 1964, and A. C. Palfreeman, The Administration of the White Australia Policy: the first looks at the sudden widening of the exclusionist movement in the 1890's and analyses the determination of policy u p to 1923, Ebb which time the changes set in motion during &Vorld 'War I had worked themselves

chiefly wi §\"orld 'Nar II.

out; the second is concerned

affluences shaping the administration of policy since

Charles A. Price has edited a comprehensive and up-to-date reference work, Australian Immigration. A Bibliography and Digest, Canberra, 1966-Section P, ' "`White Australia", Restrictive Immigration Policy and

Non-Europeans' lists almost every book and journal article published with a bearing on this subject in the past sixty years, and includes references to the major debates in the Commonwealth Parliament. The following books make major contributions to the subject: G. C. Bolton, A Thousand Miles Away: a History of North Queensland to I920, Brisbane, /963 (contains an indispensable study of Pacific Island l a b o r ) , YV. D. Borrie ed., A White Australia: Australia Population

Problem, Sydney, 1947 (arguments for changes in the tradi tonal policy), P. C. Campbell, Chinese Coolie Emigration to Countries within the British Empire, London, 1923; I. Clunies-Ross ed., Australia and the For East, Sydney, 1935 (chapters on history and international relations), VJ. K. Hancock, Survey of British Commonwealth Agairs, vol. l , London, 1937 (a recently republished work with a masterly chapter

'India and Race liquality'}, W. Levi, American-Australian Relations, Minneapolis, 1947, and Auslroliais Outlook on Asia, Sydney, 1958, O. YV. Parnaby, Britain and the Labour Trade in the Southwest Pacific, Durham N.C., 1964 (offers a sound general study of the recruitment and use of Pacific Island l a b o r in the nineteenth century) , K. Rivett ed., Immigration: Control or Colour Bar? The Background to 'White Australia' and o Proposal for Change, Melbourne, 1962, G. Serie, The Golden Age; a History of the Colony of Victoria, 185/-186/, Melbourne, 1963 (has a brilliant chapter on 'The Chinese Minority') ; J. Shepherd,

Australia? Interests and Policies in the For East, New York, 1939. Other books expressing valuable insights are: R. G. Casey, .Friends anal Neigh bours.

t a l i a and the World, Melbourne, 1954; T. A.

Cog flan, Labour and Industry in Australia, 4 vols., London, 1918; B. 145

_ 146

BASIC SECONDARY

SOURCES

Fitzpatrick, The Australian Commonwealth: A Picture of the C0111mutiity 190/-1955, Melbourne, 1956: A. B. Keith, Responsible Government in the Dominions, Oxford, 1918. In addition to the journal articles from which extracts have been reprinted in this book, the following may be usefully consulted. The Australian rot iv Carlotta Kellawav National

zirwterly published a series of articles that debated the expediency of the 'llfhite Australia' policy: "Nliite Australia-I-low Political Reality became xxv, .June 1953; B. C. Mansfield, 'The Origins of

vol. xxii, December 1954, K. M. Dallas, 'The "\'Vhil.e Australia B. Nairn (see Origins of White Australia', vol. x x i i , March I955; Section 4), A. C. Palfreeman, 'Some Implications of Asian Inlmigrzltiorl', vol. xxx, March 1957, and 'The End of the Dictation Test', vol. xxx, March 1958, A. T. Yarwood, 'The Dictation Test: Historical Survey', vol. xxx, June 1958. Articles in the Australian Journal of Politics and History include A. T. Yarwood, 'The "X-Vliitc Australia" Policy: some administrative problerfls-lqill-l92U', vol. vii, November 1961; I. H. Nish, 'Australia and the Anglo-_Japanese Alliance, 1901-1911', vol. ix, November 1963;

Alan Birch, 'The Implementation of the White Australia Policy in the Queensland Sugar Industry 1901-I2', vol. xi, August 1965. Articles in H1°.s°to:'£cftl Studies: Australia and New Zealand include A. T. Yarwood, 'The "White Australia" Policy. A Re-interprctzltiolu. of its

.

Development in the Lute Colonial Period', vol. 10, November 1962; and J. P. S. Bach, 'The Pearlshelling Industry and the "White Australia"

I'olicy', vol. 10, May 1962. The Royal Australian Historical Society's journal has articles

nu

subject by Myra Willard, 'The History of! "White Australia" Policy', 1860-l861'- nlnin vol. 8, 1922: D. L. Carrington, 'Riots a t Lambing l 46, October 1960, and Russel Ward, 'An Australian Leeencl', December 1961. Articles in Round Table (London) that bear on 'W'hite Australia' are exhaustively listed in Charles Price's Austraficm. Irnmigrrttion.

A

BIblIograpl1_11 and Iligert, mentioned above. Two of the more irnportztnt are 'The Anglo-japanese Alliance', vol. 1, February 1911; and 'White Australia', vol. 11, March 1921. Finally, 8us'ine.ss 41'chivc=s and History has a n article by Alan Birch, 'The Organization and Economics of Pacific Island Labour in the Australian Sugar Industry 1863-i906', vol. vi, February 1966.

Irzclex Aborigi nes 139, Anglo-japanese Iiancc 108, 119 Anglo-Ja ancse Treaty Emf Com-

I m e r c c _ 108 Australian nationalism '72-6, 81, 99-103, Australian

- , 19.

Raf

termly (periodical)

324-

Australian Steam Navigation Company 83-88, 97 Barton, Sir Eflmurld '75, 102-104, 106, 119 Birch, Dr. Alan 5 Bolton, Professor Geoffrey 50, 57 Bourke, Governor Sir Richard 4 Brisbane Courier (newspaper) 49-50 Broughton, Bishop `W. G. 13-15 Buckland River 20, 2829 Bulletin (Sydney) 97, 10611, 11312 Calv ell, Arthur A. 116, 130 Carrington, D. L. 4 Chamberlain, Joseph 82, 97-99, 102, 118

restrictions on entry, 20-27, 3139, 70-77, 91-96, 100, 103, 13-1 riots against, 20, 27-32, 36-38 Clark, Professor C. M. H. 3-4-

Coghlan, Sir Timothy 53 Colonial office 4, 52 and Australian restrictive legisla»

_

son 21-22, 38-39, 43-45, 50, 71, 72-73, 75, 80-82, B9-93, 9596, 100, 102, 118-120, 126 Commonwealth of Nations (British Empire) 6 and Australian immigration rcstrictions 112-113, 118-120, 133 Communist Party of Australia 114, 115 Coolie l a b o r and tropical Australia 15-17, 40-48, 104-105 as deterrent to European migration 9-10, 12, 14-15, 46-49 as substitute for convict l a b o r 13-16 effect on status of manual l a b o r 12, 14-15, 105 its virtual extolled 11-16, 105

Cheong, C. H. 80n

Clue 144

China relations

Current Ajhirs Bulletin (Sydney) 19, I 24:

with Britain, 7-8, 33,

89-92 Chinese immigrants absence of female, 24-26, 35, 39, 78, 83, 86

criticism of, 24-27 31-32, 34-36, 39, 77-79, 83, 85-89 defence of, 25-27, 30-31, 33-34, 37-38, 83, 90, 93-95 on gold Holds, l , 4-, 19-33, 70, 78-79, 84, 92-93 i n other occupations,

3, 61-62,

70-72, 77-80, 83-85, 92-95

Dallas, K. M. 2 Davidson, J, E. 62 Deakin, Alfred 75-76, 99, 103

Defence problems, see White Australia policy and defence

Dibbs, Sir George 2, QUO Dictation (education) text 75, 8082, 102-103, §= Eggleston, Sir F.

w.

120

English Review (periodical) 120

55, 53"

Fawkner, John .Pascoe Federation, and White iusiraiia

5, 36, 57-58, 70-74, 76, 88, 90-91, 99, 103 Fiji 5, 17, 52, 105, 135

Kanakas see Paciflc Island Labour-

ers Kerr, Mr justice

J. R.

136

King, Captain P. P. 8, 12

Knaplund, Professor Paul 9

Fitzgerald, T. H. 45, 46-47 Forbes, Archibald 66 Foreign A§alrs (New York) 107

Gipps, Governor Sir George 4, 8, 10, 12, 89 Glenelg, Lord 12

Labour movement see White Australia and Iabour movement Lambillg Flat 4, 27-31, 35-38, 86 Lane, W'i1Iiam 23 Latham, Sir John 6, 115, 132

Lawes, ]. B. 63

Gold fields see Chinese on gold

League of Nations 111

fields Grey, Earl 8 GrifiClth, Sir Samuel T.-Valker 48, 5456, 6266, 92-93 Groom, L. E. 75-76

Levin, Ross 48, 52 Macalister, A. 46-47 Mcllwraith, Sir Thomas 48, 54-55,

92 Nlackay, John 8, 11-12

Historical Studies: Australia and Were Zealand '77

i n . Louis 50 . Hughes, W. M. 106n, 108411

Immigration,

Minister for, policy

statement, 2, 6, 134, 141

Macrossan, John Murtagh 47-48 Mansfield, B. E. 2 Maxwell, Dr. Walter 67

44,

Moles, Ian 5, 40 Molesworth, B. H. 5, 48, 53:1 Monthly Review (periodical) 117

Immigration Reform Group 2, 112, 128, 130-132, 154, 144 Restriction Act Immigration (Commonwealth) 80, 82, 103104, 106, 118-120 Immigration Restriction Bill

Nairn, N. B. 2, 5, 70 Natal 5, 17, 82 New Guinea 136-140 New South \»'Vales immigration restriction by 21,

(Commonwealth) 74-77, 99-105

31, 33-39, 72-73, 80-82, 90-92,

Imperial Conferences 112-113, 133 Indian immigration 80-82, 102, 112-113, 133 Indian indentured labour 10»I7, 40-48, 54, 60-66, 105, 112-113 Intercolonial conferences 90-92

_

domestic disabilities Q8-39, 113,

Japanese immigration 2, 73, '75,

-; 102-103, 106-112 , 134-135, 117-120, diplomatic aspects 75, 80-82, 102117-120 I 107-112, Johanson, David 112

-

__

94-97

Legislative Council, Select Committee 7, 9, 12-18 Non-Europeans in Australia absence of female I, 24-26, 35, I 39, , 78,

|

I

135, 141-142 statistical details 56, S 8, 78, 80 Northern Territory 91, 104-105

Oddie, Dr. Geoffrey '7'7

Opperman, Mr H. 141-144

Pacific Island labourers 43-69, '74, 75-76, 103-105, 124 Palfreernan, A. C. 124 Parkes, Sir Henry 9, 15-18, '72, 88-

92, 94-97 Pastoralists and cheap l a b o r 4-5,

an 40, Philp, Sir Robert 58 I Piesse, Major E. L. 107 }

_

paper) 29, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 104, 106n, 115n

Syrians I

_

Times, ToI (newspaper) 106 Town and Country journal 8388 Towns, Captain Robert 15, 17,

48-50 Trade unions see White Australia

N

87

policy and l a b o r movement R e p o r t on (Molesworth Committee) 4-5, 13 Treaties of Nanking 8 of Tientsin 21, 89, 92

immigration restrictions by 2122, 90, 92-93

United Nations Organization 135

laborers Polynesian Pacific Island labourers Quadrant

see

132, 136

(Periodical)

Queensland 5, 9, 40-69, 75-76, 83,

Racial questions see White AusChinese immigration, tralia, coolie l a b o r Reid, Sir George 74, 81-82 Roberts, Sir Stephen 7 Rivett, Dr. Kenneth 112, 150, 144 Rorke, .John 19

Rowley, Charles 136, 137, 138 Royal Australian Historical Society journal 4 Roy al Historical Society of Queensland journal 40, 48

Sandeman, George 16

_

Sastri, Srinavasa 112 Seamen ,

Ste

M

_ .....

Chinese

against use

8, 97 crews 71~72, 83, Serlg Professor Geoffrey 3

SmiE, Bruce 99-101 Social Darwinism 3, 81 South Africa, Union of, 105, 106, 113, 135, 140 W

Southern European immigration

55-56, 71 Spence, W- G. 79

_

United States of America, example of 5, 10, 69, 82, 86, 89, 98, 101, 102, 105, 110, 122-123, 128, 135

Victoria

Limmigration restrictions by 1920, 36, 77-80 Legislative Council, Report of Select Committee 23-27

Watson,

J. C.

'74, 101

Wentworth, V\7ilIiam Charles 8 Western Australia 5, 90-91 Westgarth, William 27 White l a b o r 54-67, 83-88, 103-106 White Australia policy 1-6, 9-11, 19, 23, 67-77, 81-82, 99-106, 108144 see Australian Nationalism White Australia 1

international . §

.

relations 2, £81-82, 89-

-

90, 99-101, 106-120, 127, 131133 . @and labour movement 51, 53, 57, 70-75, 83-89, 93-97, 102-106, 11 . , 139-140, 142143 and party politics 72-76, 96-97, 102-106, 113-114, 128-129, 137, 139

Snead, Alfred 117

Stephen, I James 9-11 Sugar industry 5, 41-69 Sydney Morning d

Transportation,

(news~

and race superiority 12, 27, 35-36,

76, 81-82, 90, 93-94, 97-99, 101, 105-106, 110-112, 115-117, II deface aspects 59, 62, 81-82, 9192, 105-123 religious aspects 24-27, 34-35, 39, 73, 94-95, 115-116, 124-126, 129

"§Vi1Iard, Myra 3, 80, 38n, 91 Worker, `h.c Brisbane (news-

paper)

w

World "War I 108-113

Yarwood, A. T. Quiz., 80, 102 Young, Rev. W. 27, '77, 78n, 79