This article appeared in the Royal Historical Society of Queensland Journal Volume 17 No. 12, November 2001
John Douglas was born in London on 6 March 1828, a nephew of the Marquess of Queensberry. Educated at Rugby and Durham University, he emigrated to Australia in 1851, before purchasing Talgai, on the Darling Downs. He represented both the Downs and Camden districts in the NSW parliament before purchasing the property Tooloombah in the Rockhampton District. Elected as the member for Port Curtis in 1863, he became postmaster-general in 1866 and again in 1868, resigning to take up the post of agent-general for emigration to the colony of Queensland in England.
This paper explores how he performed this role, his relationship with the authorities in Queensland, and his attempts to clear his name after it soured. The appointment was officially announced in the Government Gazette on 25 September 1869, with Douglas
to be agent-general for emigration to Queensland, for the purposes of the Immigration Act of 1869, and to act as Agent for the Colony, in London, for such purposes as may from time to time be required by the government.
It was a post that Douglas had long coveted, for
He could not conceive of any more pleasing position than to be charged with the duties of agent-general in the mother-country.
As agent-general, his undoubted intellect and public speaking skills, combined with his aristocratic background, could be put to good effect in attracting immigrants to the colony and advancing the interests of his adopted country at the highest levels. He had left England as a young man seeking his fortune. Now, some eighteen years later, and at only 41 years of age, he was returning in triumph
Immigration was seen as critical to the success of the new colony of Queensland, consisting as it did of a vast geographical area and a very small population. Queensland’s first agent-general to Great Britain, Henry Jordan, had been appointed on 9 October 1860. His job was to encourage immigration to Queensland, thus ensuring its growth and development. This he did, for ‘new chums’ flocked to the colony at the rate of a thousand a month and over 50 000 by 1865. Some idea of the impact this immigration had on the colony can be ascertained from the fact that the net immigration, or excess of arrivals over departures for the period 1861 to 1865 was 52 855 people in Queensland, compared with only 11 562 in New South Wales, 5 656 in Victoria, 16 263 in South Australia, 4 165 in Western Australia and a decrease of 4 355 people in Tasmania during this period.
While successful in encouraging immigrants to come to the colony, Jordan experienced many difficulties and frustration in the conduct of his official duties; experiences which were to be very similar to that encountered later by Douglas and which demonstrated a “censorious, pettifogging, and unreasonable attitude” on the part of the Queensland authorities, caused by an “inability to understand and appreciate the problems which faced the agent-general in London, especially in connection with emigration.”
Jordan lectured frequently on the benefits of immigration to Queensland, but found the task onerous, being forced to raise funds in England so that passengers could be adequately equipped according to the regulations, having inadequate staff to handle requests for information and associated correspondence, and numerous complaints and accusations of deception from immigrants in Queensland dissatisfied on their arrival by inefficient reception and employment arrangements.
By 1864 the Queensland government had decided to abandon the land order system of immigration due to its high cost and its inability to create a small land-owning class, for both of which Jordan was blamed. He was also accused of having a private financial arrangement with the shipping line which handled the transportation of immigrants to Queensland. Jordan resigned on 26 January 1864 and, without waiting for government sanction of his actions, returned to Queensland to defend himself and clear his name. A select committee was appointed and largely cleared him of any wrongdoing, despite him being rebuked for his unauthorised return to Queensland.
Returning to London, Jordan continued in office until 1866 when the government was forced, due to the ensuing financial crises, to cease assisted immigration from Britain and to cancel his appointment and downgrade the London office. Jordan was bitter over his treatment, prophetically warning the colonial secretary that “my successor ... will find his task herculean, and to a great extent, necessarily unsuccessful.” By 1869, after assisted immigration had been suspended for over two years, it was generally conceded, in the words of William Thornton, a member of the legislative council, that
the time had arrived when there should be a renewal of immigration; and the statistics ... proved, that with immigration, the prosperity of the colony increased.
Accordingly a new Immigration Bill was drafted and passed by parliament, leading to Douglas’s appointment. The Brisbane Courier indicated its support, for
he is a believer in the future of the colony, and capable of an amount of enthusiasm that is essential to the success of such labors as an immigration agent will be called on to perform.
Douglas left Brisbane aboard the ship Florence Irving on 30 September 1869, arriving in England on 9 December 1869, where he immediately set about making his mark. He saw himself primarily as the agent-general of Queensland rather than merely for immigration, and accordingly changed the name of the Queensland Government Emigration Office to that of the Queensland Government Offices. He also moved the London office from 2 Old Broad Street to more appropriate premises at 32 Charing Cross.
The new location, opposite the Admiralty and just above Whitehall, was in the same district as most of the other Colonial Offices and would have had the effect of raising the status of the Queensland office, and its agent-general, in the eyes of the British authorities. In a portent of things to come, Douglas displayed his independence by not seeking authority or approval from the Queensland government for this move, merely informing it after the event. He also committed his government to three year’s rent for the premises at £260 per annum.
The Queensland government was well aware of the problems that had arisen between Jordan and itself and had no wish to see them repeated. They must also have been mindful of the fact that Douglas was renowned for his independence of thought and deed. He may have been on the other side of the world, in London, but the government was still keen to set the parameters and ensure that he did their bidding and carried out their instructions in a manner that contributed to the efficient discharge of his duties, while also ensuring that he did not cause any undue embarrassment or expense. Accordingly Douglas was issued with a comprehensive list of instructions as to how he was to carry out his duties in relation to emigration, drawn up after his appointment and sent to him at his London office on 28 December 1868.
Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland set out in clear and unambiguous terms the responsibilities of his office, among them that Douglas was to
carry out the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1869 and to do all in his power to promote and encourage immigration to Queensland, in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
He was also given instructions on the type of emigrants required, the inducements offered, and the associated charges. Included were specific instructions for Douglas to “lecture as frequently as other engagements will permit.”
Prior to departing for London, Douglas had been given verbal instructions to terminate the existing shipping contract which had been entered into with Messrs. Mackay, Baines, and Co in accordance with the 1864 Immigration Act and which had now been repealed. This Douglas did shortly after his arrival in London, with six months notice given.
On 23 February 1870 Douglas informed the Queensland government that he had had hand bills issued advertising and extolling the virtues of emigration to Queensland. Douglas had had these printed up in late December of the previous year. In contravention of the Act, Douglas advertised that the cost for a passage for single adult men would be £4 and not the £8 as stipulated under the Act. This action on Douglas’s part met with a swift reaction from the government, with the colonial secretary informing Douglas via telegram on 21 April 1870 as follows;
Re rates free and assisted passages, ... 23rd February, comply strictly with the letter of the Act, until further instructed.
Further instructions followed on 15 May 1870, with the Queensland Under Colonial Secretary H. H. Massie informing Douglas that
the Act ... leaves you no discretion in this matter; and that any alterations made ... will be considered as wholly unauthorised on your part.
In his reply Douglas informed the colonial secretary that the rate for single men, “in accordance with your instructions,” will be raised from £4 to £8. Douglas also set out his reasons as to why he had acted in this manner;
the assisted passage, under the Immigration Act of 1864, was fixed at £8. The practice, however, was to grant a free passage for every assisted passage. This, virtually, reduced the average to £4. After some experience of the working of this system, it was considered that a fixed charge of £4 in every instance would be preferable. This practice seems to have been sanctioned by the government, and has continued in force since the renewal of immigration in 1868.
Douglas’s explanation received short shift from the government, which tersely informed him that “any such reduction is in violation of the Act itself, and cannot receive the sanction of the government.” But worse was to follow. In a letter dated 5 September 1870, the under colonial secretary informed Douglas that 73 assisted emigrants on the Indus had been charged £4 instead of £8 and therefore,
I now have to inform you, that the amount short charged on account of the assisted passengers by the Indus, amounting to the sum of £292, has been made a surcharge against your salary.
The Indus set sail on 10 April 1870, some six weeks after Douglas was instructed to desist from this practice. In the quarter ended 30 June 1870, an additional sum of £724 was surcharged to Douglas, as was a further £300 in the quarter ended 30 September 1870 and £4 for the quarter ended 31 December 1870, a total of £1 320, or more than his annual salary of £1000.
It would appear that Douglas had simply ignored several government instructions from as early as 23 February 1870 to charge the fee as stipulated in the Act. The explanation for this extraordinary behaviour lay in political developments that took place in Queensland during this period. Douglas vehemently disagreed with the practice of charging £8 per single man. As a man of strong principle, independently minded, extremely stubborn and used to exercising his discretion and getting his own way, coupled with his position as agent for the colony of Queensland in England, he simply ignored the instructions, confident in the knowledge that the colonial secretary, Charles Lilley, a political ally, would not intervene.
However, at the end of April 1870 the Lilley ministry fell, having lost the confidence of the parliament, to be replaced on 3 May by Arthur Hunter Palmer as premier and colonial secretary. Palmer distrusted Douglas, convinced that he was still in communication with the ousted Lilley, despite Douglas’s explicit denials. Palmer’s fears meant that from the time of the appointment of his ministry, relations between Douglas and the government rapidly deteriorated, with a wide range of problems, some of which were of a trivial and trifling nature, arising in a number of areas. As Douglas was later to remark, “when the Palmer government came into power [I] received short, sharp, thoughtless and reckless telegrams which brought things to a standstill.”
On his arrival in London, Douglas had followed instructions and terminated, with six months’ notice, the shipping contract between the Queensland government and Messrs. Mackay, Baines and Co. The government suggested, via an executive minute, that the service be thrown open to competition, with tenders being invited for each shipment of emigrants. But Mackay, Baines and Co. was interested in continuing an arrangement with the government and therefore Douglas entered into detailed negotiations with them in order to ensure a continued service on terms favourable to the colony. Douglas did this rather than act on the suggestion to call for tenders
at a time when the funds at my disposal here do not admit of my complying with the ordinary conditions of such contracts, namely the payment of the first moiety in cash after the embarkation of the emigrants.
This explanation was summarily rejected by the government, with Douglas being informed by Massie that
I am instructed to request that you will take the necessary steps to carry out the views of the government ... by calling for tenders for the conveyance of each shipment.
Douglas was placed in difficulties by this instruction, informing Massie that, “previous to the receipt of your letter, I had made arrangements which may, perhaps, be considered binding on me.” Despite having made these arrangements in good faith, Douglas let the under colonial secretary know that,
I shall endeavour, however, to obtain a release from these engagements, in order the more speedily to give effect to the wishes of the government by calling for tenders.
Douglas had acted properly in this matter, as the executive minute was a suggestion only, and Douglas had been able to successfully negotiate, in good faith, an improved service at lower cost. Douglas would have been deeply disappointed by this instruction from his government, as he had previously advised the authorities that,
Under present circumstances this office can use its discretion as to the dispatch of ships, and is not bound to find a certain number of passengers on a certain date. Messrs. Mackay and Co. are also so well acquainted with the trade that, other things being equal, I should prefer to transact business with them rather than with strange shipping firms, who would have in each case to be instructed in the requirements of this office.
Douglas also had to respond to ongoing complaints in relation to medically inappropriate passengers. One case concerned the discovery that there were a “number of cases of gonorrhoea and syphilis” aboard the ship the Flying Cloud, leading Massie to inform Douglas “that there was a want of proper inspection before the emigrants were passed in accordance with the requirements of the Immigration Act.” These comments incensed Douglas, who remarked that
It is not stated whether the subjects of these diseases were male or female, passengers or crew; and in the absence of more full information, I feel merely called upon to remark that it would be most difficult to provide against the possible existence of these pernicious maladies.
No legal powers exist which would authorise me to secure an effectual personal inspection of the full-paying passengers and the crew. In the absence of such general powers, I decline to undertake the application of inquisitorial tests, of such a nature as would alone be adequate, to either the free or the assisted emigrants, who, if respectable males, or modest females, would, I trust, decline to accept any favors from the government of Queensland on the condition of being subject to such gross indignities.
Other criticisms by the authorities included Douglas sending too many emigrants on one ship, not supplying enough domestic servants, and using the wrong form when issuing land order warrants. To this last criticism Douglas replied that “no form of land order warrant is prescribed in the Act, yet clauses 6 and 7 distinctly provide for their issue, and the form adopted by me seemed to be such as was calculated to give proper effect to the Act.”
These criticisms were not confined to Douglas, as his predecessor, Henry Jordan, had endured a similar fate at the hands of the Queensland authorities. But there is no doubt that Douglas would have found these petty criticisms and incessant carping frustrating, the more so because he was responsible to a government on the other side of the globe which plainly did not appreciate the difficulties he was labouring under in order to ensure that a steady supply of suitable emigrants were landed on its shores.
In the Government Gazette of 25 September 1869 announcing his appointment, Douglas was also instructed to “act as agent for the colony of Queensland,” replacing the crown agents who till this point in time had undertaken these duties. It was a source of considerable dissatisfaction to him that this component of his appointment was comprehensively ignored by the Palmer ministry, for he was rarely called to exercise this role
Other factors beyond the control of Douglas or his government also caused major headaches for him. Chief amongst these concerned the problems surrounding German emigration. Douglas had been instructed to arrange for 1 500 emigrants from Germany in his first year, but the imposition of strict conditions by the North German Confederation caused delays. The first ship, the Humboltd, finally left Hamburg on 14 July 1870, only days before the Franco-Prussian War commenced. The outbreak of hostilities led to the Elbe river and its port, Hamburg, being blockaded by the French, resulting in some 900 engaged passengers, due to emigrate to Queensland in July and August, being stranded.
This caused Douglas great angst, for many of the emigrants
are from neutral Switzerland, and there are large families among them; on the strength of their intended embarkation they have disposed of their homesteads and furniture; they are now liable to suffer many hardships unless they could be forwarded at once.
Douglas prevailed on the British foreign office to intercede on his behalf with the French government to “allow the departure of the emigrants without vitiating the blockade,” but to no avail. He was in Scotland when the war broke out, and immediately sailed for Cologne, where “he saw the German troops crossing the Rhine,” but could do nothing to assist his stranded immigrants. There they remained until 12 November, when the Reichstag was able to sail from Hamburg, following the breaking of the blockade.
Despite these travails, it was a relatively minor dispute with the authorities over lecturing that was the catalyst for a frustrated Douglas resigning from the post. Henry Jordan had been known for his lecturing, with even Douglas acknowledging of him that
his lectures were very remarkable in their result ... and no doubt the success of the immigration system was mainly due to those lectures.
Douglas was instructed by Lilley to promote emigration “by means of lectures to be delivered by you in the market towns.” However Douglas had previously indicated in parliament that it was no longer necessary that “lectures should be given, as this colony was now becoming well known to those in the mother-country.” Douglas held the view that instead of lecturing there should be “a systematic and persevering explanation of the details of the [emigration] scheme, to afford every information.” This he did by visiting the principal agencies and publishing handbills and pamphlets promoting emigration to Queensland.
Douglas was nothing if not consistent in this matter, and flatly refused to lecture. In his defence he later noted that nowhere in the Act is “reference made therein to lecturing as one of his duties,” and therefore any such instructions were invalid as they “appear to have been issued without the authority of the governor in council.” The government, aware that no lecturing was taking place, reminded Douglas, in a letter dated 28 December 1870, that he should be “lecturing as frequently as other engagements would permit,” further noting that this is “an important part of the duties of the agent-general of Immigration, which, in your case, up to the present time, appears either to have been overlooked or disregarded.” The letter concluded by informing Douglas that, “in accordance with these instructions, you will commence and continue to deliver a course of public lectures on the subject of emigration to Queensland, at such time and in such places as may be found most convenient and conducive to the objects in view.”
This was the final straw for Douglas, and on the following day he informed the government of his resignation. He had been in the post for just over a year.
Douglas gave three reasons for his resignation. The first was that he believed he could no longer “promote immigration,” as his present instructions “are such that I cannot anticipate the possibility of giving effect to the Act on such a scale as would justify my retention of office for such a purpose.” The second was that he was not being utilised in the position of agent for the colony in England, noting that “it was obvious that they [the government] do not require my services in that capacity.” The third and final reason was that he was not prepared to lecture, informing the government that “I have judged that the circumstances in which I found myself placed, did not seem to justify the expediency of giving effect to this instruction.”
Douglas’s stayed on in charge of the office until replaced by Archibald Archer on 24 April 1871.  It is ironic that he criticised the government for its inflexible application on the Act and associated instructions, when he too was equally inflexible on the issue of lecturing. Nonetheless, Douglas would have been entitled to believe that he had made a reasonable fist of the position, having successfully commenced emigration from Germany and delivering a steady stream of immigrants from the British Isles in a manner that by and large fell within the requirements of the Act. But, as Douglas was to discover on his return to Queensland, this was a view not shared by the Palmer government.
Leaving England in May 1871, he arrived back in Brisbane on 14 August 1871. The following month he received a copy of the Minutes of Proceedings of the Executive Council, on 2nd March, 1871, on the Subject of the Resignation of the Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. John Douglas. This minute set out Palmer’s response to Douglas’s letter of resignation and was strongly critical of his performance in the post. In it, Palmer contended of Douglas that
it would appear that he imagined, not that he was bound to administer the Immigration Act, but that he has the power to override it, and do exactly as he pleased.
Instances of this action included charging £4 instead of £8, “neglect of instructions as to the numbers of immigrants to be sent by each ship, and his disregard of instructions to call for tenders for conveyance of immigrants.”
As for Douglas not being utilised in his position as agent for the colony in England, Palmer denied he had been appointed to this position at all, as there was no mention of this in Douglas’s letter of appointment. Palmer was especially dismissive of Douglas’s refusal to lecture, noting
He accepted his appointment, knowing that he was expected to lecture; and how he can now refuse to carry out these instructions, and refuse to perform what was certainly ... considered one of the most important of his functions, is ... inexplicable.
In recommending that Douglas’s resignation be accepted, Palmer had concluded that Douglas
accepted office with his mind made up to disobey his instructions, [and] there is no excuse for his conduct.
Douglas was determined to defend his good name and fired off a memo to Palmer the very same day in which he strenuously and comprehensively rebutted the “severity “ of the charges levelled against him, including “statements in reference to me which the facts do not justify.” This exchange between Douglas and Palmer was to further sour their personal relationship, with Douglas commenting on Palmer’s death in 1898, that “I was never an admirer of his and never regarded him as anything much more than a glorified bullock driver ... arrogant and haughty in manner.”
And that should have been the end of the matter, had not Palmer, several months later, in answering a question in the house on immigration, stated that Douglas had
thought fit to override an Act of parliament by taking £4 as the sum paid by assisted passengers instead of £8, as required by the law.
Douglas, who was actively attempting to resume his parliamentary career, had little choice but to respond to Palmer in an attempt to clear his name. He petitioned parliament, asking them to “enquire into these charges made against me.” Presented in the legislative assembly on 20 June 1872, it resulted in the establishment of a joint select committee.
In his evidence before the committee he vigorously and comprehensively rebutted all the charges against him, while insisting that he was most certainly appointed agent-general for the colony as well as agent-general for emigration, quoting from correspondence between Governor Blackall and secretary of state for the colonies, Lord Granville, in which Blackall had said
That the colony of Queensland has only one representative in Great Britain, namely the agent general for emigration, (John Douglas)
When asked why his instructions had mentioned him acting “as agent for the colony” rather than the more formal term agent-general, Douglas replied
I did not examine it specially, or take notice. I had claimed simply to be called agent. Agent-general is a very long-sounding name, which I really did not care a fig about; but I did care about the reality.
Douglas had been surcharged for undercharging passengers in contravention of the Act. He justified his actions by informing the committee that charging £8 instead of £4,
would materially interfere with the regular dispatch of ships and the supply of emigrants to the colony. I therefore determined to adopt the practice which had been, in my opinion, previously recognised, and abide by the instructions of the government
As for his reasons for allegedly initially ignoring instructions to desist from this practice,
I may have seemed to do so; but the explanation is this; - That with the vast ramification of agencies there is in England, throughout the country, it is impossible to put a stop at once to any system which is in operation.
Douglas was also quizzed at length over his refusal to lecture. In his defence he cited pressures of work and alternate means whereby he encouraged immigration, including visiting all the principal agencies throughout England, Ireland and Scotland, and publishing handbills and pamphlets promoting emigration to Queensland, although he did inform the committee that had he known that lecturing was to be an integral part of the position, that “in all probability I should not have accepted the office.”
The committee’s report was handed down on 30 July 1872. It found that Douglas “had reason for considering that he was appointed sole agent of the colony.” While finding that Douglas “was in error” in reducing the amount asked from assisted passengers, it conceded that “he was careful to preserve the relative proportions of free and assisted passengers,” thus resulting in the Act being more effective and leading the committee to conclude that the non-collected funds surcharged “may be fairly withdrawn.”
The committee was not so forgiving of Douglas’s refusal to lecture, noting that he “was certainly wrong in neglecting to perform this part of his duty.” He had been instructed to lecture and “no private opinion of his own ... justified his setting aside that instruction.” While the committee was of the opinion that Douglas evidenced “a strong disinclination to obey the instructions to lecture,” they did not believe that “he had an intention to disobey the general instructions which he might receive.”
The committee concluded its remarks by observing that Douglas
had great difficulties to contend with in carrying the Act into efficient operation, as, in consequence of the great commercial losses which had been suffered in Queensland, this colony was, at the time of his appointment and arrival in England, in great disrepute.
The committee had delivered a report that largely vindicated Douglas, reserving its criticism of him to the relatively minor charge of refusing to lecture. With his name, reputation and honour upheld, Douglas was now able to continue pursuing a parliamentary career, one that would see him elected to the seat of Maryborough in 1875, and the premiership in March 1877.
 Queensland Government Gazette, vol 10, no 95, 25 September 1869, p. 1300
 Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 874. Douglas was actually far more than just pleased. He later let it be known that he considered the position to be the “highest in the whole colony, for it was that of representing the whole colony in England.” (“Darling Downs Election.” Warwick Examiner and Times, 6 March 1875, p. 2)
 As the Brisbane Courier aptly expressed it; “To meet and mix with the best in the land will be Mr. Douglas’s right as a well-born and accomplished gentleman, and in such circles he will hold his place, and will do credit to this colony.” (Brisbane Courier, 3 September 1869, p. 2)
 Wayne O’Donohue. “First Agents-General: Development of the Office in London, 1860-1876, “ Journal of the Royal Historical Society of Queensland, vol 11 no 3, 1981-2, p. 59; Clem Lack. “Colonial Representation in the Nineteenth Century, part II. Some Queensland and Other Australian Agents-General,” Royal Historical Society of Queensland Journal, vol 8 no 1, 1965-6, pp. 81-2
 Ross Fitzgerald. A History of Queensland: From the Dreaming to 1915. Brisbane, University of Queensland Press, 1982, p.127
 By 1864 the Queensland population was 61 467 persons, increasing to 99 901 by 1868 and 120 104 persons by the 1871 census. (Wray Vamplew, ed. Australian Historical Statistics. Sydney, Fairfax, Syme & Weldon Associates, 1987, p. 26)
 Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics. Official Yearbook of the Commonwealth of Australia Containing Authoritative Statistics for the Period 1901-1920 and Corrected Statistics for the period 1877-1900: No. 14 - 1921. Melbourne, Government Printer, 1921, p. 1142
 Lack, p. 81
 Ibid., p. 82
 Land orders were worth £15, by which fifteen acres of land could be selected immediately, and a further twelve acres after two years. (Fitzgerald, p. 127)
 O’Donohue, p. 63; Roger Bilbrough Joyce. “George Ferguson Bowen and Robert George Wyndham Herbert: the Imported Openers.” In, D. J. Murphy and R. B. Joyce. Queensland Political Portraits. Brisbane, University of Queensland Press, 1978, p. 28
 O’Donohue, p. 63
 Ibid., p. 86
 Despite Douglas being appointed to the position late in 1869, immigration to Queensland had actually recommenced in 1868. (Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, p. 129)
 Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 387
 Brisbane Courier, 31 August 1869, p. 2
 Shipping. Brisbane Courier, 1 October 1869, p. 2
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, p. 129
 Ibid., pp. 130-1
 Ibid., pp. 130-1
 Ibid., pp. 47-8
 Ibid., p. 47
 Ibid., pp. 129, 135-6. The termination letter was dated 31 December.
 Ibid., p. 132
 Ibid., p. 133
 Ibid., p. 134
 Ibid. This sum was never paid by Douglas, the debt being written off due to his insolvency in 1872. This amount was not debited from his salary as “credit, however, will be given to you upon such of the undertakings of payment of the balances, due on account of passage money, as may be met within the prescribed period fixed by each respectively.” (Ibid.) Assisted passengers had twelve months to pay the balance of the cost of their passage (ibid., p. 132), but the outstanding £4 was never repaid by any of them.
 Ibid., p. 147
 Report of the Auditor-General on Public Accounts for the Year 1870. Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, pp. 442-3. Again, these debts were never paid and were eventually written off.
 For more information see H. J. Gibbney, “Charles Lilley: An Uncertain Democrat.” In, D. J. Murphy and R. B. Joyce. Queensland Political Portraits. Brisbane, University of Queensland Press, 1978, pp. 78-9
 J. X. Jobson. A Biography of Sir Arthur Hunter Palmer. BA Hons. Thesis. Brisbane, University of Queensland, 1960, p. 51
 “Mr. Douglas at the Victoria Hall.” Brisbane Courier, 24 October 1871, p. 3
 This was done due to the Immigration Act of 1864 being repealed, and therefore authority no longer existed to issue either land orders to ship-owners, or debentures, the two forms in which the passage money was paid under that contract (Queensland Legislative Council Journals, vol 16, 1871, p. 71)
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, p. 138. The exact wording of the minute was; “The Honorable the Vice-President submits to the Council that a letter be addressed to the agent-general for emigration, suggesting the advisability of trying for six months to open the conveyance of emigrants to Queensland to competition, and that tenders be invited for the conveyance of each shipment.”
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, pp. 139-41
 Ibid., p. 141
 Ibid., p. 142
 Ibid., p. 139
 Ibid., p. 180
 Ibid., p. 102
 Ibid., p. 154
 Ibid., p. 158
 Ibid., p. 155
 Lack, p. 82-3
 Queensland Government Gazette, vol 10, no 95, 25 September 1869, p. 1300
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, vol 16, 1871, p. 47
 Ibid., pp. 160-5
 Ibid., p. 164
 Ibid., p. 172
 Ibid., p. 173
 “The Quetta Club.” Torres Strait Pilot and New Guinea Gazette, 12 September 1903
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, p. 179. However most of the passengers were from Denmark and Scandinavia, “as no German males between six and forty years of age are allowed to leave the country during the war.”
 Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 382
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, vol 16, 1871, p. 47
 Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 382
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1872, p. 817
 Ibid., p. 104
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1871, p. 181
 Ibid., p. 184
 Ibid., p. 185
 In 1870 Douglas dispatched to Queensland, 2 527 immigrants, comprising 610 full-paying passengers, 1 121 assisted and remittance passengers, and 796 free passengers. (Ibid., p. 104)
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1872, p. 102
 Mason, p. 127. That Douglas and Palmer had differing views is confirmed by Douglas’s remark in October 1871 that he and Palmer “had never, upon any important discussions, been found sitting on the same side of the house.” (“Mr. Douglas at the Victoria Hall.” Brisbane Courier, 24 October 1871, p. 2)
 Brisbane Courier, 13 June 1872, p. 3
 Queensland Parliamentary Debates, 27 June 1872, pp. 418-24.
 Queensland Legislative Council Journals, 1872, p. 812
 Ibid., p. 814
 Ibid., p. 816
 Ibid., p. 817
 Ibid., pp.. 820-1. Several years later, he editorial writer for the Brisbane Courier made this sardonic observation in connection with Douglas’s refusal to lecture; “Mr. Douglas has a considerable gift of oratory, and (except during the time when he was specially committed to exercise it in the mother-country for our benefit) has generally availed himself of his opportunities for displaying his powers.” (Brisbane Courier, 23 April 1875, p.2)
 Ibid., p. 807