A Source Book of Australian History Part 14

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

+Source.+--The State and Position of Western Australia, by Captain Frederick Chidley Irwin of H.M. 63rd Regiment; late Commandant of the Troops, and Acting Governor of the Colony, 1835, pp. 32-37, 42-46.

The settlement of Western Australia was undertaken in 1825, with the purely philanthropic idea of relieving the overcrowded population of Great Britain. The early difficulties were due to the ignorance of conditions in the country, and the unsuitability of the emigrants. Mr. Peel was chief promoter of the scheme.

The reader's attention will now be drawn to some of the mis-statements with respect to the colony, which have appeared in recent publications.

Under this head he would especially notice a work ent.i.tled "England and America." At page 33, Vol. 2 of the work in question, there is said to be, in Western Australia "abundance of good land and of land, too, cleared and drained by nature." After adverting to the amount of capital and live stock, and the number of labourers introduced by the first settlers, it is asked, what has become of all that capital, and all those labourers? Then comes the following pa.s.sage: "Why this failure with all the elements of success--plenty of good land, plenty of capital, and enough labour? The explanation is easy: In this colony there never has been a cla.s.s of labourers. Those who went out as labourers no sooner reached the colony than they were tempted by the superabundance of good land to become landowners."

The writer proceeds to state, that Mr. Peel (who, as he had been informed, had brought out a capital of 50,000 and 300 persons of the labouring cla.s.s) had been thus left without a servant to make his bed, or to fetch him water from the river; and that, in the absence of his people, his capital had perished. "The same thing," he adds, "happened in many cases." Further on, it is stated that some of the labourers, who had become independent landowners, died of hunger, at a period when a large supply of food had reached the colony, and that they were starved because where they had settled was not known to the Governor, nor even to themselves--"such," says this writer, "was the dispersion of these colonists, in consequence of superabundance of good land." It is added, that the settlers who remained had pet.i.tioned for convicts, though one of the chief inducements to settling in the colony was an undertaking, on the part of the English Government, that none should be sent thither.

If this writer's statement be correct, that labourers on their arrival, tempted by the superabundance of good land, did with impunity desert their masters, leaving their property to perish, and did themselves become landowners, it will be apparent, either that there were then no laws in the colony, or that they were not in force. The reverse, however, is the fact--there were laws, and they were enforced.

The following is No. 8 of the land regulations: "No grant of land will be made to servants under indenture; nor shall persons receive grants who shall appear to have come to the settlement at the expense of other individuals without sufficient a.s.surance of their having fulfilled the condition of any agreement under which they may have come." The author does not remember an instance of this regulation being relaxed; and it is manifest that destruction of property and the ruin of the capitalist must have been inevitable, had the Government not enforced it.

Equally without foundation is the statement that the indentured servant could desert his master with impunity. The indenture was binding equally on master and servant, and was strictly enforced by the colonial law. If the master failed to give the wages, food, or whatever else might have been stipulated for in the indenture, the servant, on establishing his complaint before a magistrate, obtained his discharge. On the other hand, if the master proved a breach of the indenture by the servant unduly absenting himself, refusing to work, etc., the magistrate was under obligation to imprison the servant. Also any person employing an indentured servant, without permission of the master, was subject to a very heavy fine.

Mr. Peel and his people were in this manner circ.u.mstanced. The author has read many of their indentures; in all of these Mr. Peel was bound to pay them daily wages (generally three shillings) out of which their food and clothing were to be deducted. The capital imported by Mr. Peel, though very considerable, was understood to consist chiefly of stores and live-stock. However this may have been, he found it convenient after a time, to grant most of his people permission to work for other settlers, reserving a right to recall them when he chose; but allowing them the alternative of their discharge, on their reimbursing him the expense of their pa.s.sage out. As his people could get higher wages when working for others, they gladly accepted the permission. Occasional misunderstandings took place between him and some of them, and it was not till after the Governor, accompanied by the Law-Adviser of Government, had more than once repaired in person to Mr. Peel's location, that an adjustment of those differences was effected. The author has known several servants of Mr. Peel to be imprisoned for breaches of indenture. A number of them, however, were excellent men, who would have conscientiously adhered to him, had he not given them the option of working for others.

It is but justice here to acknowledge the great benefit conferred on the settlement by Mr. Peel, in the introduction of men who were not only of good conduct, but well acquainted with farming pursuits or with trades.

For himself, the author feels happy in having this opportunity to express his sense of it, having had upwards of four years in his service, a family brought out by Mr. Peel. The father of this family is a man of intelligence and observation. Besides his own trade of brick and tile-making, he has a complete knowledge of farming, gardening, bricklaying, lime-burning, and brewing, in which various occupations he employs himself. Such is his industry that he has been seen working for hours in the garden by moonlight, after spending a long day at labour in the field. His wife is a regular dairywoman. One of the sons is a carpenter, and another a ploughman, besides having each a knowledge of their father's trade; and the rest of the family, down to the youngest, are training up habits of industry and labour.

Although, as has been shown, the conditions of the indentures were by the colonial laws enforced, it will nevertheless be manifest, that no law, in any country, can prevent an artful and unprincipled servant (anxious to be rid of his engagement) from acting in so vexatious a manner, that some masters, in preference to keeping such a one, would forgo any benefit the indenture might offer. Such a course has been adopted in the colony by some masters thus circ.u.mstanced. Those, however, who had been careful to bring out men of good character, and to whom they allowed an equitable compensation for their services, have rarely had cause for complaint; and, on the contrary, have generally been rewarded by the cheerful obedience of their servants.

The author is the more desirous of disproving the alleged lawless state of society in the colony, as the implied reproach is totally unmerited by the Governor, Sir James Stirling, who has been most indefatigable and self-denying in his exertions for the public welfare; and it is equally so by the magistracy, who have, from the outset, administered the laws with vigour and impartiality.

With reference to the a.s.sertion that some individuals had perished with hunger from not having been able to inform the Governor as to where they had settled, the author can only say, that he did not hear of any such circ.u.mstance while in the colony, and that he considers it very improbable; as, with the exception of the people connected with Mr.

Peel, the settlers at the period alluded to were located on the Swan and the Canning, by following down which rivers they could have reached in the course of a single day the towns of Perth or Freemantle.

He has also to confess his ignorance of the colonists having, as stated, pet.i.tioned for convicts--he knows that such a wish was not expressed in their memorial drawn up in 1832, and laid before His Majesty's Government by Sir James Stirling in person. The colonists having had before their eyes, in the neighbouring penal settlements, the serious evils inflicted on society by the employment of convicts (especially as indoor servants) have firmly resisted the temptation to seek such a remedy for their wants. The extreme difficulty, which it is notorious respectable families there experience, to sufficiently guard the morals of their offspring, and to secure their being brought up in the necessary principles of virtue and integrity, is alone a consideration which, it is believed, will keep the colonists in Western Australia stedfast on that point. No mere worldly prosperity whatsoever can compensate for the tremendous risk to which children in a penal settlement are exposed, as many a heart-broken parent can testify.

It now remains for the author to offer a few observations

1. On the failures that occurred among the early settlers.

2. On the origin of the reports so widely circulated to the prejudice of the country.

3. On the tardy progress of the colony, compared with what had been expected.

The following extract from one of the earliest despatches of the Governor (written in January 1830, and addressed to the Secretary of State) will serve to preface these remarks, as it bears immediately on the first point. Adverting to the circ.u.mstances under which the first settlers came out, he thus proceeds: "There could not be a great number with minds and bodies suited to encounter the struggle and distresses of a new settlement. Many, if not all, have accordingly been more or less disappointed on arrival, with either the state of things here, or their own want of power to surmount the difficulties pressing round them. This has been experienced, in the beginning, by every new colony; and might have been expected to occur here, as well as elsewhere. The greater part, incapable of succeeding in England, are not likely to prosper here to the extent of their groundless and inconsiderate expectations. Many of the settlers who have come should never have left in England a safe and tranquil state of life; and, if it be possible to discourage one set of people, and to encourage another, I would earnestly request that for a few years, the helpless and inefficient may be kept from the settlement; whilst, as to the active, industrious, and intelligent they may be a.s.sured with confidence of a fair reward for their labours."

If, after what has been said, it be granted that Western Australia, as far as natural advantages go, is well suited for the purpose of colonization, still it will be apparent, from the principle on which the colony was founded, that its success must be greatly dependent on the capital and exertions of the settlers. The charge of maintaining a military and a civil establishment being all His Majesty's Government was pledged to, every other expense was to be borne by the emigrant; such as his outfit, voyage, and settlement in the colony.

No arrangement prior to leaving England having been made by the emigrants to ensure the advantages of co-operation on the part of their friends at home, and among themselves in the colony, each depended on his own energy and resources for his success; and the foregoing description of many of the original settlers will account for the disappointments that ensued in various instances.

Few who abandoned the settlement under such circ.u.mstances, were willing to admit their failure was the result of their own want of exertion, or their unfitness for the enterprise in which they had embarked; accordingly, wherever they went, and in their letters home, the blame was laid on the country. Thus many of the evil reports respecting it, which were current at home and in the neighbouring colonies, may be traced to this source.

A prevalent cause of distress among the early settlers arose from their having generally brought out with them little ready money, compared with their other property. This was chiefly owing to the Government regulations admitting of land being a.s.signed to those only who introduced labourers, and various kinds of property required by farmers.

Many of the settlers, therefore, to the extent of their means, were in this way amply provided; but having understood in England that money would be of little use in a new country, numbers, without questioning what they wished to be true, incautiously expended most of their means in the property that would ent.i.tle them to obtain land in the colony.

However, when they had been some time in the settlement, they discovered that there, as in other places, money was needful; and on wishing to procure some by the sale of part of their property, they found it difficult to do so without loss, in consequence of most other settlers having brought out similar investments.

Another cause of depression, which has borne seriously on the settlers, has been the occasional high price of the necessaries of life. With a view of remedying this evil, cargoes of provisions have been repeatedly imported by the Local Government--the actual cost alone being charged to the settler. Even a shipload of bullocks and pigs was introduced from Java. But, numbers of the bullocks and pigs getting loose, soon became as wild and difficult to recapture as if they had been natives of the woods, whither they had betaken themselves.

Experience has shown that the system of free grants, which was the first adopted in Western Australia, is decidedly injurious to the prosperity of a settlement, from the facility it affords to persons possessed of comparatively little capital to acquire extensive tracts of land, the greater part of which, for want of means, they cannot use for agricultural or pastoral purposes. It also occasions the too wide dispersion of the settlers; thus necessarily increasing the expense of Government, and, at the same time, producing serious inconvenience to the farmer.

WAKEFIELD'S SCHEME OF COLONIZATION

+Source.+--A Letter from Sydney. E.G. Wakefield (Gouger, 1829), Appendix

The failure of the first attempt to settle Western Australia gave rise to much thought upon the theory of colonization. The ideas most generally accepted were those of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, who summarized his theory as follows:

OUTLINE OF A SYSTEM OF COLONIZATION

It is suggested:

Article I.

THAT a payment in money of---- per acre, be required for all future grants of land without exception.

Article II.

THAT all land now granted, and to be granted, throughout the colony, be declared liable to a tax of---- per cent. upon the actual rent.

Article III.

THAT the proceeds of the tax upon rent, and of sales, form an EMIGRATION FUND, to be employed in the conveyance of British labourers to the colony free of cost.

Article IV.

THAT those to whom the administration of the Fund shall be entrusted, be empowered to raise money on that security, as money is raised on the security of parish and county rates in England.

Article V.

THAT the supply of labourers be as nearly as possible proportioned to the demand for Labour at each Settlement; so that Capitalists shall never suffer from an urgent want of Labourers, and that Labourers shall never want well-paid employment.

Article VI.

THAT in the selection of Emigrants, an absolute preference be given to young persons, but that no excess of males be conveyed to the colony free of cost.

Article VII.

THAT Colonists providing a pa.s.sage for emigrant Labourers, being young persons, and equal numbers of both s.e.xes, be ent.i.tled to a payment in money from the Emigration Fund, equal to the actual contract price of a pa.s.sage for so many labouring persons.