Calculating lives: the numbers and narratives of forced removals in Queensland 1859 - 1972 Mark Copland BA (Hons) Dip. Ed. (Aboriginal Education) Dip. Ed. (Secondary Education) A thesis submitted to Griffith University, School of Arts, Media and Culture for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy February 2005 2 “But there are other important side-issues in connection with the reserves and these are: Upon what grounds are we justified in removing Aboriginals to these reserves at all?” Walter Roth, Annual Report of the Northern Protector of Aboriginals for 1901, p. 18 STATEMENT I certify that this work is an original piece of research. It is based on primary sources and, except where otherwise acknowledged, the findings and conclusions are my own. All primary and secondary sources are acknowledged and correct to the best of my knowledge. The material contained in this thesis has not been submitted, in whole or part, for a degree at this or any other university. Mark Stephen Copland 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A number of people have made significant contributions to the writing of this thesis. I owe a great debt to my wife Amber. Without her support, patience and love, this project would never have reached a conclusion. My sons, Callum, Sean and Jonah have also been patient and added much-needed balance to my life during the years spent on the thesis. My parents, Richard and Margaret Copland, Robert and Vivienne Buckley, have given many hours of their time to enable me to research and write. My siblings, Michael, David and Julie, have also helped in a range of different ways. My supervisor Regina Ganter — whose dream this project has been — has given great guidance and support to me. I am grateful to her for this opportunity and appreciate the way that she has always responded to requests for assistance. Her advice and encouragement have been invaluable. Anna Haebich as associate supervisor has been another great source of support. I thank her for her wisdom, enthusiasm, friendship and belief in me. I also thank Sue Jarvis and the Centre for Public Culture and Ideas for their great assistance in the final stages of this thesis. On the statistics front, I would like to acknowledge the support of Len Smith, Brett Rangiira, David Copland and Shahjahan Khan. Fellow researchers Jonathan Richards and 4 Andrew Walker have shown great generosity in sharing their resources and I will always treasure the memory of hours of companionship at the Queensland State Archives. Owen Chandler gave great assistance in working with me to transform the data collected as part of this project into the maps included in this thesis. In Toowoomba, the St Anthony’ s community has provided physical space for the writing stage of this thesis to take place. Kath Olive, Glenda Sullivan and Trish Zeller have all helped to create a writing home for me. The staff of the Community and Personal Histories branch of the Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy have all given great assistance in helping me access relevant files for this thesis. I would especially like to thank Margaret Reid, Loris Williams and Kathy Frankland. Along the way, a number of historians have also helped out. I would like to thank Thom Blake, Mark Finnane, Bryan Jamison, Ros Kidd and John McGuire for sharing their wisdom and insight. I will always owe a great debt to Raymond Evans for nurturing and fostering my first love of Australian history and to Richard Buchhorn for constantly linking the truth of the past with the importance of the present. I would like to thank two friends: Chris Sarra for his inspiration and passion for a future for all of us, and Donna Moodie for her optimism and support always. Bishop William Morris and the members of the Social Justice Commission for the Catholic Diocese of 5 Toowoomba — Garry Hills, Celia Warr, Mary Otto, Pat Bundock, Camille Kelloway, Val Gray, Jocelyn Haylock and Nell MacQueen — have also given great support, allowing me to take leave from work to conclude this project A friend who has been instrumental in seeing this project through to the end is Peter Dorfield. His constant companionship, encouragement and very gentle pressure will never be forgotten. Finally I dedicate this to Lillian Holt and to all other people who have had to make sense of a policy which, for those of us who love humanity, can never really make sense. 6 ABSTRACT European expansion caused dramatic dislocation for Aboriginal populations in the landmass that became the state of Queensland. On the frontiers, violence, abductions and forced relocations occurred on a largely informal basis condoned by colonial governments. The introduction of protective legislation in the late nineteenth century created a formal state-directed legal and administrative framework for the forcible removal and institutionalisation of Aboriginal people. This became the cornerstone for policy direction in Queensland and remained so into the mid-twentieth century. This thesis traces the development of policies and practices of removal in Queensland from their beginnings in the nineteenth century through to their dismantling in the mid- twentieth century. There has been much historical research into frontier violence and processes of dispossession in Queensland. The focus of this study is the systematic analysis of archival data relating to the forced removals of the twentieth century. The study has its genesis in an Australian Research Council Strategic Partnership with Industry — Research and Training Scheme (SPIRT) grant. This grant enabled the construction of a Removals Database, which provides a powerful tool with which to interrogate available records pertaining to removals of Aboriginal people in Queensland. 7 Removals were a crucial element in the gathering and exploitation of Aboriginal labourers during the twentieth century. They also constituted a major form of control for the departments responsible for Aboriginal affairs within the Queensland administration. Tensions between a policy of complete segregation and the demand for Aboriginal labour in the wider community existed throughout the period of study. While segregation was implemented to an extent in relation to targeted sections of the Aboriginal population, such as “half-caste” females, employer insistence on access to reliable, cheap Aboriginal labour invariably took precedence. Detailed analysis of recorded reasons for removals demonstrates that they are unreliable in explaining why individuals were actually removed. They show a changing focus over time. Fluctuations in numbers of removals for different years reflect reasons not officially acknowledged in the records, such as the need to populate newly created reserves and establish institutional communities. They tell us little about the situation of Aboriginal people, but much about the racial thinking of the time. This study contributes to our knowledge base about the implementation and extent of Aboriginal child separation in Queensland. A comprehensive estimate of the number of separations concludes that one in six Aboriginal children in Queensland were separated from their natural families as a result of past policies. 8 Local Aboriginal Protectors (usually police officers) played a major role in the way that the policy of removals was implemented. Local factors often determined the extent of removals as much as policy direction in the centralised Office of the Chief Protector of Aborigines. Removals took place across vast distances, and the Chief Protector was often totally reliant on local protectors for information and advice. This meant that employers and local protectors could have a major impact on the rate of removals in a given location. Responses of both Protectors and Aboriginal people to the policy of removals were not always compliant. Some Protectors worked to ensure that local Aboriginal people could remain in their own community and geographical location. Aboriginal people demonstrated a degree of resistance to the policy and there are a numerous recorded examples of extraordinary human endurance where they travelled large distances in difficult circumstances to return to their original locations and communities. The policy of removals impacted on virtually every Aboriginal family in the state of Queensland and the effects of the dislocations continue to be experienced to this day. 9 CONTENTS Figures p. 10 Tables p. 12 Illustrations p. 13 Maps p. 13 Abbreviations p. 14 Introduction p. 15 Chapter 1: From Bullets to Blankets: the Emergence of a Policy of Removals p. 49 Chapter 2: The Removals Database p. 97 Chapter 3: Reasons for Removal p. 15 Chapter 4: Who’s Responsible? Removals from Batavia River 1932 p. 222 Chapter 5: Employment and Removals p. 258 Chapter 6: Taking the Children p. 291 Conclusion p. 38 Apendixes p. 398 Bibliography p. 416 10 Figures 2.1 Removals by Gender p.103 2.2 Proportion of Removals by Gender p.104 2.3 Age of Those Removed p.105 2.4 Paterns of Removal p.13 2.5 Proportion of Removals Under CPAs p.123 2.6 Removals from North and South Queensland p.147 2.7 Proportion of Removals from Regions p.148 2.8 Removals in Al Regions p.148 2.9 Destinations for Removal p.150 2.10 Destinations for Children described as “Half Caste” p.152 3.1 Stated Reasons for Removal p.156 3.2 Voluntary Removals p.158 3.3 Gender of Removals with Neglected as a Reason p.165 3.4 Removals with Neglected as a Reason p.165 3.5 Education as a Reason p.16 3.6 Care and Protection as a Reason p.167 3.7 Destination for Removals with Insanity as a Reason p.169 3.8 Removals with Old Age as a Reason p.176 3.9 Addicted to Opium, Mixing with Chinese and Other Races p.182 3.10 Removals Relating to Supply, Possession and Use of Opium p.187 3.1 Removals with Immorality as a Reason p.189 3.12 Gender of Removals with Immorality as a Reason p.190