eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781743430101 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Allen & Unwin Pty., Limited |
| Publication date: | 08/01/1996 |
| Series: | Australian Experience series |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| File size: | 2 MB |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Dispossession
Black Australians and White Invaders
By Henry Reynolds
Allen & Unwin
Copyright © 1989 Henry ReynoldsAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-86448-141-9
CHAPTER 1
WHITE AUSTRALIA: GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY?
A visitor to the Australian colonies in the 19th century remarked that the right to Australia was a sore subject among the settlers and that they sought to satisfy their conscience in a number of ways. He was a perceptive tourist. Concern about the morality of settlement has run like an undercurrent through Australian life for 200 years. It re-emerged strongly in 1988 the Bicentenary year when the country focused on its past. It has always influenced white attitudes to the Aborigines and black attitudes to the settlers and their descendants. The large moral issues involved have also been linked with Australian attitudes to the Asian and Pacific environment — to our insecurity in being a European outpost in a non-European world. The documents to follow illustrate the debates which have punctuated public life since the 1820s.
The Problem Stated
Some of the most interesting comments on the moral problems associated with Australian settlement were made by a settler who, in 1826, wrote a report for the London-based Methodist Missionary Society.
A LETTER FROM A GENTLEMAN IN NEW SOUTH WALES, METHODIST MISSIONARY SOCIETY, IN CORRESPONDENCE: AUSTRALIA, 1812–26, AJCP.
New South Wales October 1826
Dear Sir,
In venturing to state my Sentiments respecting the Aborigines of New South Wales, I am sensible that opinions formed during so short a residence must be more or less liable to error; — that I must, in some respects, betray a want of knowledge, which a more prolonged intercourse with the tribes of Natives could alone supply; but, as I know your competency to correct mistakes and to supply deficiences, I shall merely commit to paper such thoughts as have arisen in my mind during my late excursion in search of land ... When we look back on the past history of this unhappy race we find nothing to afford us consolation. If to the future, nothing to relieve the fearful foreboding ... as to what will be if some expedient be not adopted to stay the waste of human life, which for now forty Years past has been diminishing such of the Aborigines as have been within the bounds of our population. Yes Sir, strange to say, Civilization has been the scourge of the Natives; Disease, Crime, Misery and Death, have hitherto been the sure attendants of our intercourse with them. Wherever we trace the steps of white population we discover the introduction of evil, the diminution of numbers, the marks of disease, the pressure of want, the physical and moral ruin of this people. If we inquire where are the tribes that once inhabited the places where Sydney, Parramatta, Windsor and other Towns now flourish, what will be the answer? Their existence is but a name. Assemble them and You will find a few miserable Creatures, Scarcely human in appearance, rise to bear witness that these spots were once peopled by Aborigines.
Could we but trace each poor individual's history, the lingering wretchedness of their conditions, what a tale would it unfold! Sir, it is a sad truth to assert that our prosperity has hitherto been their ruin, our increase their destruction. The history of nearly forty years seals the veracity of this declaration.
With such recollections as these fresh in our minds with what pleasure can we possibly survey the rapid encroachment of the Whites on these unhappy people. With what feelings can we look forward, but with those of deep regret, when we are assured that every new step which advances our interests is fatal to their existence. That every acre of land reclaimed by our industry is so much wrested from that pittance which Providence has bestowed on them.
If such be the truth the ruin of the Aborigines is inevitable, unless some expedient be devised to stay those evils. Tribe after Tribe must successively endure the same measure of sufferings until the total annihilation of the Natives of New Holland winds up the sad Catastrophe.
Should such a state of things be realized what will future generations think of our boasted Christianity, of our lauded Philanthropy, when our posterity read in the early page of Australia's history the misery and ruin which marked our adoption of this land; — when they find recorded that our proprietorship of the soil has been purchased at such a costly sacrifice of human happiness and life.
Truths like these, if recorded against us, will present a hideous picture of the present times! A picture which Mercy and Justice, Humanity and Religion would shudder to contemplate. And this guilty conduct we have reason to fear, will draw down the divine vengeance on the people who have so outraged the law of 'doing unto others what they would should be done unto themselves' ...
Justice demands what humanity dictates and Christianity requires, that we should not usurp the possession of another's rights, however advantageous such may be to ourselves or however easy of accomplishment. Now we have usurped the rights of others in possessing ourselves of their land without even the offer of an equivalent. And we have thus done, also, at the heaviest possible cost to the rightful proprietors, viz. their certain ruin. We are therefore deeply indebted to this unhappy people; debtors beyond what money can repay or restitution compensate, for Property may be returned, but life cannot.
Deeply then are we in arrears to these injured Beings at whose expense we live and prosper. Their lands we have converted to our own use; their means of support we have destroyed, Kangaroos, and Oppossums, etc. have fled at the noise of the Axe, and the busy hum of civilized man. Have such a people then no cause for complaint, — No demand on our assistance? Can they not upbraid us with a want of principle, and for the evils we have introduced? Well may they adopt such language as this — 'Where are our Ancestors'? 'Where is our Food'? 'Where are our Possessions'? ... None can defend our Conduct towards the New Hollanders upon principle; let us not therefore persist in it, and let them yet receive from our hands some reparation for the wrongs we have done them.
* * *
The colonists discussed the issues involved in private and public, in conversation, speeches, letters and diaries. A young man living on a pastoral station on the frontiers of settlement in southern Queensland in 1844 described an argument he had with three of his friends, in a letter to his mother and sister in England.
HENRY MORT TO HIS MOTHER AND SISTER, CRESSBROOK, 28 JANUARY 1844, MARY E. MCCONNELL, JOURNAL FOR MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN, MSS, OXLEY LIBRARY.
Had a very animated discussion on the 'Moral right of a Nation to take forcible possession of a Country inhabited by savages'. John and David McConnell argued that it is morally right for a Christian Nation to extirpate savages from their native soil in order that it may be peopled with a more intelligent and civilized race of human beings etc. etc.
F. McConnell and myself were of the opposite opinion and argued that a nation had no moral right to take forcible possession of any place. What is your opinion on the subject? Don't you think it a most heinous act of any Nation however powerful, however civilized & however christianized that Nation may be — to take possession of a country peopled by weak & barbarous tribes, merely for the purpose of aggrandising the Christians at the expense of annihilating the unoffending & ignorant & Perhaps less avaricious savages? Yet I would say, let England increase her Colonial possessions, let her commerce be extended & let the Ministers of her Church carry out the sacred torch of civilization & religion so that the darkest & most remote recesses of heathen barbarism may be illuminated thereby.
* * * * *
Harry Mort appeared to be having a bet each way. Over 40 years later a North Queensland miner, John Cook, had more definite ideas.
JOHN COOK TO S.W. GRIFFITH, 26 AUGUST 1891, QUEENSLAND STATE ARCHIVES, COL/A674, 11522 OF 1891.
Now I am not a bumtious [sic] sort of an individual and have stood a good deal of abuse from people on account of defending black people or the rightful owners of Australia — for even if we are born in Australia we are only usurpers here for if we take away the peoples' property without paying for it it does not matter much how we beautyfully [sic] try to cloak it it is and always must remain stolen property.
Subdue the Earth
The most popular justification for the settlement of Australia during the first part of the 19th century was to refer to the Bible and to God's instruction to humanity in the Old Testament to go forth and multiply and subdue the earth — or as the colonists argued — engage in agriculture.
C.P. HODGSON, REMINISCENCES OF AUSTRALIAETC., LONDON, 1846, P. 75.
Thus far the Creator of the universe is just, in that he allows the superiority of civilization over barbarism, of intellect over instinct or brutish reason; thus far man is right, in that he has a legal right to improve the gifts of nature, and to convert barren and hitherto useless country into fruitful and productive territories; the world was made for man's enjoyment and created not as a beautiful spectacle, or spotless design, but as a field to be improved upon to the general interests of its inhabitants.
* * *
Similar views were put forward by the famous radical clergyman, J.D. Lang, in a speech to a meeting of the Moreton Bay Friends of the Aborigines.
MORETON BAY COURIER, 19 JANUARY 1856.
They were certainly debtors to the Australian Aborigines, for they had ceased [sic] upon their land and confiscated their territory. In doing that, he did not think they had done anything wrong. God in making the earth never intended it should be occupied by men so incapable of appreciating its resources as the Aborigines of Australia. The white man had indeed, only carried out the intentions of the Creator in coming and settling down in the territory of the natives. God's first command to man was 'Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth'. Now that the Aborigines had not done, and therefore it was no fault in taking the land of which they were previously the possessors.
* * *
A prominent Sydney barrister, Richard Windeyer, advanced similar arguments at a meeting of the Aborigines Protection Society in Sydney in 1838.
THE COLONIST, 27 OCTOBER 1838.
He entirely disagreed with the sentiments ... that the natives had been usurped by fraud and violence by the Europeans, without paying any regard to the just rights of the natives. He could not look upon the natives as the exclusive proprietors of the soil. Nor could he entertain the ridiculous notion that we had no right to be here. He viewed colonization on the basis of the broad principle laid down by the first and great Legislator, in the command He issued to man 'to multiply and replenish the earth'. The hunting propensities of the natives caused them to occupy a much larger portion of land than would be necessary to their support, if it were under cultivation, and the only way to make them cultivate it, was by depriving them of a considerable portion of it. He thought the natives had no right to land. The land, in fact, belonged to him who should first cultivate it. Captain Sturt stated that he had travelled 300 miles, and only met one family. Now, he wished to know, whether these 300 miles belonged to this one family? No. He only had a title to lands, who first bestows labour upon it ... He was himself a large landholder, and he certainly considered he had a good title to it. If we have no right to be here, we have nothing to do but to take ship and go home ...
* * *
Similar views were advanced by John West in his famous history of Tasmania written in 1852. In a section on the Aborigines he discussed the morality of settlement.
J. WEST, HISTORY OF TASMANIA, 2 VOLS., LAUNCESTON, 1852, II, PP. 92–6.
The original occupation of this country necessarily involved most of the consequences which followed: was that occupation, then, just? The right of wandering hordes to engross vast regions — for ever to retain exclusive property in the soil, and which would feed millions where hundreds are scattered — can never be maintained. The laws of increase seem to suggest the right of migration: neither nations nor individuals are bound to tarry on one spot, and die. The assumption of sovereignty over a savage people is justified by necessity — that law, which gives to strength the control of weakness. It prevails everywhere: it may be either malignant or benevolent, but it is irresistible. The barbarian that cannot comprehend laws or treaties, must be governed by bribes, or by force. Thus, that the royal standard was planted, need occasion no remorse ...
It is common to speak of the guilt of this community; sometimes in variance with reason and truth. That guilt belongs only to the guilty; it cannot contaminate those who were helpless spectators, or involuntary agents. The doctrine of common responsibility, can only be applicable where all are actors, or one is the representative of all. The colonist may say, 'I owe no reparation, for I have done the native no wrong; I never contemplated aiding in his destruction: I have seen it with horror.' May the lesson of his sufferings become the shield of his race! Those who impute guilt to this colony, forget that its worst members are not stationary, and that many have borne away their guilt with their persons. That Being, who makes requisition for blood, will find it in the skirts of the murderer, and not on the land he disdained.
No man can witness the triumph of colonization, when cities rise in the desert, and the wilderness blossoms as the rose, without being gladdened by the change; but the question which includes the fate of the aborigines, — What will become of them? — must check exultation. The black will invade rights he does not comprehend; seize on stragglers from those flocks, which have driven off his game; and wound the heel which yet ultimately treads him to the dust. Such is the process — it is carelessly remarked, that the native is seen less often; that it is long since he ventured to cross the last line, where death set up landmarks in the slain. At length the secret comes out: the tribe which welcomed the first settler with shouts and dancing, or at worst looked on with indifference, has ceased to live.
If the accounts of discoverers have been too flattering to the native character, they are explained rather than contradicted by the early colonists. These describe with exultation, their new acquaintance, when writing to their friends: how peaceful, light-hearted, and obliging. They are charmed by their simplicity; they sleep among them without fear: but these notes soon changed; and passing from censure to hatred, they speak of them as improvident, importunate, and intrusive; as rapacious and mischievous; then as treacherous and blood-thirsty — finally, as devils, and beasts of prey. Their appearance is offensive, their proximity obstructive: their presence renders everything insecure. Thus the muskets of the soldier, and of the bandit, are equally useful; they clear the land of a detested incubus.
It is not in the nature of civilization to exalt the savage. Chilled by the immensity of the distance, he cannot be an equal: his relation to the white can only be that of an alien, or a slave. By the time astonishment subsides, the power of civilized men is understood, and their encroachment is felt. Fine houses garrison his country, enclosures restrict his chase, and alternately fill him with rage and sadness. He steals across the land he once held in sovereignty, and sighs for the freedom and fearlessness of his ancestors; he flies the track of his invaders, or surprises them with his vengeance; — a savage he was found, and a savage he perishes!
* * *
Mitchell Library, State Library of NSW. This illustration suggests that the artist felt considerable sympathy for the fate of the Aborigines, and that much may have been lost with the encroachment of neat huts and ploughed fields. 'The Old Camping Ground Revisited', Illustrated Sydney News, 12 November 1875.
When the conservative historian H.B. Turner reviewed relations between Aborigines and settlers at the beginning of the 20th century he had little difficulty in justifying colonization. He had dispensed with the appeal to the edicts of the Almighty and argued that Victorian progress alone was sufficient justification.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Dispossession by Henry Reynolds. Copyright © 1989 Henry Reynolds. Excerpted by permission of Allen & Unwin.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Contents
Illustrations,Abbreviations,
Acknowledgements,
Introduction,
1 WHITE AUSTRALIA: GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY?,
2 THE FRONTIER! PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OR BRUTAL CONQUEST?,
3 THE LAND QUESTION: ARE WE A COMMUNITY OF THIEVES?,
4 THE IMAGE OF THE ABORIGINES: BLACK BROTHERS OR DEGRADED SAVAGES?,
5 ABORIGINES IN WHITE SOCIETY: CITIZENS OR OUTCASTS?,
6 MISSIONARIES: SAVIOURS OR DESTROYERS?,
7 GOVERNMENT POLICY: ASSIMILATION OR SEGREGATION?,
Bibliography,
Index,