Henry
Jordan, Queensland
Accordingly,
in late 1860, Henry Jordan was appointed Queensland
agent-general to Great Britain ,
tasked with encouraging immigration to Queensland
This was due
to a “censorious, pettifogging, and unreasonable attitude” by Queensland
authorities, who failed to appreciate the problems besetting Jordan
In
1864, the Queensland Jordan ,
as the agent-general, was blamed for this failure[9]
and accused of having a private financial arrangement with the shipping line
handling the transportation of immigrants to Queensland Jordan
resigned in 1864 and returned to Queensland
Returning
to London , Jordan
continued in office until 1866 when the Queensland
government, due to the ensuing financial crisis, ceased assisted immigration,
cancelled his appointment, and downgraded the London Jordan Jordan
it will take Mr. Douglas a good while to get into working
order as effective a system as that of his predecessor.[15]
It
had been hoped that Jordan
would encourage prospective English yeomen to aid the development of
agriculture in the colony, but this was not possible because of the
geographical isolation of Queensland and its
distance from England
compared to Canada and the United States Queensland
Instead, such
men wished to set up business as “their own masters.”[18] They were materialistic and ambitious, imbued
with a strong petit-bourgeois ideology and a striving to succeed.[19] By 1869, assisted immigration had been
suspended for over two years,[20]
and it was generally agreed that it should now recommence.[21] This resulted in the enactment of a new
Immigration Bill and Douglas’s appointment as agent-general.[22]
Douglas’s relocation to England
A farewell
banquet in the Brisbane Town Hall was held for Douglas
on 21 September 1869 .[24] The governor - noting that the Times newspaper in London
had written that, “Queensland wanted
population and England Queensland had plenty of land and England had plenty of people to live upon it,” -
hoped that Douglas would send “the proper kind
of people.”[25] In his reply, Douglas endorsed these
sentiments, expressed his pleasure at being appointed to the position, and
explained why he believed immigration was so important to the development and
progress of Queensland
the pursuit of the happiness which might be found in a
free and almost independent community - that happiness which, in this era of
the world, might be found by the adaptation of those vast waste countries which
God had prepared for the use and benefit of mankind to that purpose.[26]
Douglas’s
appointment as agent-general in London Queensland Douglas had
come to the colonies to:
combine a pastoral and patriarchal life with the making
of a little money, and the chance of visiting the old country when their flocks
and herds had increased and multiplied.[28]
However,
although unsuccessful as a pastoralist, he did marry and found his calling in
life as a politician in the service of his country. Along the way, he had become an
Australian. Now he was returning to his
birthplace, to the land that his compatriots fondly called home, to extol Queensland
The Douglases continued to be feted prior their departure.[29] John Douglas, his wife Mary, her daughter,
and their servant, left Brisbane on 30 September 1869 ,[30]
and arrived in London 9 December 1869 .[31] Here Douglas
immediately set about making his mark.
He saw himself primarily as the agent-general for Queensland
Douglas
also relocated the office from 2
Old Broad Street Charing
Cross .[32] The new location, opposite the Admiralty and
just above Whitehall , was in the same district
as most of the other colonial offices, raising the status of the Queensland Queensland Brisbane
thought of this is unknown, but it was the opening salvo in a drama of
increasing bitterness unfolding between the government and its agent-general in
London
Agent-general
in London
The Queensland government was well aware of the problems Jordan London
The Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland set
out in clear and unambiguous terms the responsibilities of the office and
contained instructions on the type of emigrants required, inducements to be offered;
associated charges; an injunction for Douglas to lecture; and to use only those
forms contained in the schedule of the Act.[37] Before his departure, Douglas had received
verbal instructions to terminate the existing shipping contract with Messrs.
Mackay, Baines, and Co[38]
and this Douglas did shortly after his arrival in London
Douglas
arranged for the printing and distribution of handbills that extolled the
virtues of emigration to Queensland Queensland
While
the charge under the Act was £8, in practice one free passage was granted for
each assisted passage. Instead of
continuing this practice, Douglas simply
charged everyone £4. Nevertheless, the
government interpreted what to Douglas was a
sound administrative arrangement that streamlined existing practices, as a
violation of the Act.[43]
Although
two months later Douglas reluctantly adjusted
the rate back to £8, that was not the end of the matter. Six weeks later, he was notified that, as 73
assisted emigrants on the Indus had been charged £4 instead of £8, the
difference, some £292, would be deducted from his salary.[44]
Why had Douglas not charged the fee as stipulated in the
Act? The explanation lies in political
developments taking place in Queensland Douglas
vehemently disagreed with the practice of charging £8 per single man. A man of strong principle, one used to
exercising his discretion and getting his own way, he simply ignored the
government’s instructions, aware that the colonial secretary, Charles Lilley, a
political ally, would support him if necessary.
Agent-general
for the Palmer ministry
However,
in April 1870 the Lilley ministry fell, replaced on 3 May by one led by Arthur
Hunter Palmer, the new premier cum colonial secretary.[45] Palmer, who had first entered parliament as
member for Port Curtis following Douglas ’s
move to the legislative council, was a conservative. He distrusted Douglas ,
convinced, despite the latter’s explicit denials, that he was still in
communication with the ousted Lilley and his erstwhile treasurer, Thomas
Blackett Stephens.[46]
This
distrust saw relations between Douglas and the
government deteriorate rapidly, exacerbated by ongoing problems, many of them
petty. As Douglas
later remarked, he now “received short, sharp, thoughtless and reckless
telegrams which brought things to a standstill.”[47] For instance, Douglas received instructions
not to “give free passages to any but female domestic servants”[48]
while requests to employ an immigration agent in Italy
Following
his arrival in London , Douglas had obeyed
instructions and terminated, with six months’ notice, the shipping contract
between the Queensland Douglas
retained their services.[52] He did this because he had insufficient funds
to enter into new contracts, a condition of which was “payment of the first
moiety in cash after the embarkation of the emigrants.”[53]
This
arrangement was rejected by the government, which argued that “the first moiety
of the passage-money could be paid by drafts on the treasury at thirty days
sight.”[54] Douglas was reluctantly
forced to cancel his arrangements with the existing shipping line, despite negotiating,
in good faith, an improved service at lower cost.[55] The government further insisted that he use
only “ships classed A1 at Lloyd’s,”[56]
but rescinded this instruction when Douglas
informed them that no mail steamers met these criteria![57]
Douglas
had to field numerous government complaints about medically-unfit passengers
including following the return to England Douglas
produced detailed testimonials and reports from their employers, householders,
surgeon, magistrate and minister, all indicating that these were not
pre-existing conditions.[59]
Problems
arose over the discovery of three cases of gonorrhoea and syphilis aboard the Flying Cloud, and Douglas was rebuked
for allowing these passengers to immigrate to the colony.[60] An incensed Douglas
then cabled this withering reply.
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.[61]
A
furious Palmer considered these remarks “a gratuitous impertinence, utterly
uncalled for.”[62]
Disagreements
continued to poison the relationship between the government and its agent-general. Douglas was
chastised for the way he exercised his discretion in arranging payment for the Flying Cloud, sending too many emigrants
on one ship,[63]
not supplying enough domestic servants,[64]
and using the incorrect form when issuing land-order warrants.[65] To this last criticism, Douglas
pointed out that the Act in question prescribed no particular warrant form.[66]
These
criticisms were not confined to Douglas , for
his predecessor, Henry Jordan, had endured similar difficulties.[67] Nevertheless, Douglas
found these petty criticisms and incessant carping frustrating. He was responsible to a government, on the
other side of the world, which plainly did not appreciate the difficulties he
faced in procuring a steady supply of suitable immigrants for Queensland Douglas ’s immediate successors,
Daintree and Macalister, also had these problems, the former being involved in
a bribery scandal implicating his staff and the latter having strained
relations with his office secretary, Thomas Hamilton, over tender
irregularities.[68] Indeed, the first four Queensland
Although the
Lilley government had also appointed Douglas agent for the colony of Queensland Singapore ,
Java and Queensland , Douglas travelling to The Hague Douglas consistently in this role was one of the main
reasons for his eventual resignation.[72]
German
migration
Other factors
beyond Douglas’s control also affected the performance of his duties, with the
difficulties besetting immigration from Germany Germany Hamburg 14 July 1870 ,
a few days before the Franco-Prussian War broke out.[75] The outbreak of hostilities led to a blockade
of the river and its port, Hamburg
This
greatly distressed Douglas, because many of the emigrants were from Switzerland London
God knows what will be the events of 1871. It seems rather like fiddling when Rome
Douglas ’s resignation
Despite
Douglas’s many differences with the Queensland Jordan Douglas was
therefore instructed by Lilley to promote emigration through lectures extolling
the benefits of the colony.[82] However, Douglas ignored this instruction,
claiming lecturing was no longer required, for people in England Douglas , to commence
lecturing forthwith.[85] This was the ‘final straw’ for Douglas, who
promptly resigned.[86] He had occupied the post for little over a
year.
There
were three reasons why he resigned: his inability to perform the duties of the
office effectively; his non-utilisation in the role of agent for the colony in England Douglas
further informed Palmer that his continuation in the post would lead to him
“compromising my own self-respect.”[88] His resignation was accepted,[89]
but he stayed on in the post until 24 April 1871 , when Archibald Archer finally replaced him.[90]
Instances innumerable have arisen, and will continue to
arise, tending to shew that unless a fair latitude of discretion is allowed to
an agent acting in England
Had Douglas not resigned over the issue of lecturing he could
have enjoyed a much longer term in the position. It is ironic that, while he criticised the
government for its inflexible application of the Act and associated
instructions, he was equally inflexible on the issue of lecturing. Despite this, Douglas had successfully
delivered to Queensland a steady stream of
immigrants from the British Isles and Germany
By
acting as the de facto ambassador for
Queensland , Douglas
had extended the duties and influence of the position,[93]
an approach welcomed by the British authorities and sanctioned by the Lilley
government. It was in this capacity that
Douglas corresponded with the Colonial Office regarding communications with the
colony, the Foreign Office over the French blockade of Hamburg Douglas
had “recognised and appreciated the need for a more imaginative, adventurous
and mature approach.”[95]
Unfortunately,
for Douglas , he set a standard the Palmer
government refused to countenance. That
Palmer had not appointed him meant the government watched his activities with
increasing suspicion and alarm. They did
not want a former opposition cabinet member strutting the world stage as a
self-appointed ambassador for their government,[96]
and it was only a matter of time before Douglas
fell foul of them. His principles and
stubbornness ensured this would be sooner rather than later, but if Palmer
thought the matter ended with Douglas ’s
resignation, he was mistaken.
Douglas
and his family left England
on 20 May 1871 ,
sailing from Liverpool[97]
and arriving in Brisbane 14 August 1871 .[98] Although Douglas
enjoyed his posting in the old country, he considered himself a Queenslander.[99]
Defending his reputation
Shortly
after his return, Douglas received a copy of
the Minutes of Proceedings of the
Executive Council, on 2
March 1871 , on the Subject of the Resignation of the Agent-General
for Emigration, Mr. John Douglas.[100] Forwarded to Douglas in London Douglas ’s letter of resignation, strongly criticising his
performance:
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.[102]
As
for Douglas not being utilised as agent for the colony in England , Palmer claimed that Douglas
had not been appointed at all, for this role was not explicitly mentioned in
the letter of appointment.[103] However, Palmer was subsequently informed by
Douglas’s successor in London
had not been many days here before I found out that the
agent-generals as administered by Douglas and
in fact by the agents of all the colonies, was more, or at least as much, of a
diplomatic character as that of agents for immigration.[104]
Palmer
was especially critical of Douglas ’s refusal
to lecture, considering his behaviour to be an inexplicable dereliction of
duty.[105] Palmer believed that Douglas
had accepted the post, “with his mind made up to disobey instructions.”[106]
Determined
to defend his good name, Douglas sent a
lengthy memo to Palmer strenuously and comprehensively rebutting these
accusations. He was particularly upset
that Palmer denied that he had been appointed to the position of agent-general
for the colony, for it had been a gazetted position, with official
correspondence addressed to him as the agent-general for Queensland. He also vehemently rejected accusations that he
had never agreed to lecture. Palmer’s
reply to Douglas’s memo was dismissive, suggesting that it was Douglas ’s “constant aim to make his appointment a
diplomatic one.”[107]
Palmer refused
to believe that Douglas’s motives were not political and denigrated the
latter’s efforts to raise the profile and standing of Queensland Douglas confiding to his son
Edward, on Palmer’s death in 1898, that he regarded him as little more than a
“glorified bullock driver ... arrogant and haughty in manner.”[109]
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.[110]
I served him faithfully, as I was bound to serve him,
when … he became my master. But ‘thy
servant is not a dog,’ and I surrendered my office when I found that I could no
longer consistently serve the country under such a master … I grudge to him
nothing of all he seems to have, yet he will not ‘let me alone,’ and still
pursues me with a stupid personal malice. [111]
Select committee
established
As
Douglas had been in the previous Lilley ministry, most of whose members were
now in opposition, it was inevitable that events surrounding his petition would
become politicised and the subject of heated debate, the more so as his
grievance was with the premier and colonial secretary.[115]
Several
members in the legislative council endorsed Douglas’s attempts to have
parliament investigate the matter, with the presenter of the petition, Eyles
Browne, reminding his colleagues that Douglas
was requesting that parliament
be his judges between him and the colonial secretary, and
the house should not refuse his request.[116]
Only Thomas
Murray-Prior and Louis Hope voted against the establishment of a joint select
committee to enquire into this matter.[117]
Opposition
member Samuel Walker Griffith championed Douglas ’s
cause in the legislative assembly. On
Douglas being surcharged £1,400 over discrepancies relating to the fee set for
assisted immigrants, Griffith demanded to know why Douglas was not (if he had
acted illegally), charged over this matter.[118]
After
spirited debate, the legislative assembly agreed to investigate this matter,
with four of its members joining the joint select committee.[119] This committee then interviewed Douglas, his
predecessor, Henry Jordan, and Thomas Blackett Stephens, the acting colonial
secretary when Douglas received his agent-general
commission and associated instructions.[120] Stephens confirmed that Douglas
accepted the position on the understanding that he would be crown agent,
resulting in “a notice being sent to the crown agents at home, to discontinue
acting for the colony.”[121]
In
his evidence, Douglas vigorously and
comprehensively rebutted all Palmer’s charges.
He provided evidence that he was the agent-general for the colony as
well as agent-general for emigration, quoting from correspondence in which
Governor Blackall had informed the secretary of state for the colonies that the
colony had only one representative in Great Britain
It
was the non-recognition of this post by Palmer that most angered Douglas and which drove him to clear his name and
maintain his honour. Asked why his
instructions had mentioned “agent for the colony” instead of agent-general, Douglas ’s comments were revealing:
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.[123]
In
defending his refusal to lecture, Douglas
informed the committee that he would probably not have accepted the position
had he known he would have to lecture.[125] He saw the post as a diplomatic one, and
therefore considered it personally demeaning to have to lecture, preferring a more
dignified approach to encouraging migration to Queensland
In
handing down its report, the committee found Douglas
had been appointed sole agent of the colony.
While finding that Douglas indeed erred
in reducing the amount asked from assisted passengers, it conceded that he
maintained the relative proportions of free and assisted passengers, resulting
in the Act being more effective. The
committee recommended that the government write off the non-collected funds
surcharged on Douglas .[127]
However,
they were not so forgiving about Douglas ’s refusal
to lecture. He had been instructed to
lecture and “no private opinion of his own
... justified his setting aside that instruction.” Nevertheless, they did not agree that Douglas had intentionally disobeyed instructions in this
regard.[128]
The
committee also noted 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
Thus,
Douglas was largely vindicated and exonerated
by the committee, which found he was appointed as the sole agent for the
colony, and that surcharging him was wrong.
That he had acted incorrectly in this matter would have been of minor
concern to Douglas , because he believed he had
acted honourably. Douglas believed that
his role was to ensure that enough suitable immigrants came to Queensland
Although the
report was tabled and adopted without dissension in the upper house,[130]
it received a very different reception in the lower one. There, after Griffith
moved its adoption, Palmer denigrated the report and its findings and accused Douglas of a personal vendetta against him. As far as Palmer was concerned, he simply
expected “every government officer to do his duty.”[131] Perhaps, but by this stage there was
certainly no love lost between the two political adversaries.
Palmer
continued to deny that Douglas had been
appointed sole agent for the colony, despite it having been explicitly
mentioned in the relevant Government
Gazette. Furthermore, Palmer doubted
Douglas ’s ability even to act as agent-general
for emigration, being of the opinion that he was “fully determined to disobey
his orders not to lecture.”[132]
The
opposition rallied in support of Douglas, with William Miles stating that this
“milk-and-water report” handed down by the committee had prejudiced Douglas ’s performance as agent-general.[133] William Henry Groom, in defending Douglas , considered him “a gentleman of whom any
constituency in the colony would be proud to have to represent it.”[134] He also prophetically observed that Douglas “would yet live to be a thorn in the side of
those honorable members who had cast such slurs on his character.”[135]
Although
a ‘milk-and-water’ report, it had substantially vindicated Douglas, both in the
parliament and in the colony, as this letter to the Brisbane Courier demonstrated:
I cannot understand how the government can make a charge
against the late agent-general ... he
was the right man in the right place, having been a long resident in the
colonies, and able to give all information from his own experience.[136]
Thus
yet another turbulent period in Douglas ’s life
ended. On his appointment, he has been
feted in Brisbane and had gone to London Queensland Douglas ’s penchant for independence and a stubborn
insistence on doing things his way, it is reasonable to assume that, even if
there had not been a change of government, there would eventually have been a
falling out between him and the authorities.
Returning
to Queensland , Douglas
had refused to accept the criticisms delivered by government members in
relation to his conduct in the position, successfully petitioning for a select
committee into the matter. It delivered
a report that, although somewhat hobbled by the bipartisan composition of its
members, largely vindicated Douglas, reserving its criticism of him to the
relatively minor charge of refusing to lecture.
Exonerated, and his name, reputation and honour upheld, Douglas again pursued a parliamentary career.
[1] Joyce (1978), p. 28
[2] Postmaster General.
“Immigration Bill.” Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9,
1869, p. 379. This figure did not include most of the indigenous population.
[3] Wray Vamplew, ed. Australian Historical Statistics. (Australians:
A Historical Library.) Sydney, Fairfax
[4] O’Donohue, p. 59; Lack, pp. 81-82
[5] Fitzgerald, pp. 127 & 305
[6] By 1864, the Queensland
[7] Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics. Official Yearbook of the Commonwealth of Australia
Containing Authoritative Statistics
[8] Lack, pp. 81-82
[9] Fitzgerald, p. 127.
Land-orders were worth £15.
[10] O’Donohue, p. 63; Joyce (1978), p. 28
[11] O’Donohue, p. 63
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid. However, Jordan 2
Old Broad Street , London Queensland Queensland Europe . That was at a time when they had a population
of 87,000, and the result of that was that the power of the country to absorb
such a large immigration was greatly overtaxed.” (Postmaster General. “Immigration Bill.” Queensland
Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 380)
[14] Lack, p. 86. Despite the
criticisms of his time in office, Jordan
had despatched 85 ships to Queensland
[15] Brisbane 18
September 1869 , p. 2
[16] Fitzgerald, p. 127
[17] Ibid.; Mary Pescott. The Land of Promise : Images of Australia Queensland
[18] A. A Morrison, “Queensland:
A Study of Distance and Isolation,” Melbourne
Studies in Education, 1960-61, pp. 195-96, quoted in Fitzgerald, pp. 304-5
[19] Fitzgerald., pp. 304-5. The
thriving trade in land-orders evidenced this.
A migrant recounted how, in the early 1870s, on emigrating from England , he and his fellow passengers sold their
land-orders: “These grants, by the way, were promptly disposed of to an agent
for £7 each on arrival in Brisbane Queensland Singapore
[20] Despite Douglas’s appointment to the position late in 1869,
immigration to Queensland Douglas . Queensland
[21] In the words of William Thornton, a member of the legislative
council, “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.” (Hon. W.
Thornton. “Immigration Bill.” Queensland
Parliamentary Debates, vol 9, 1869, p. 387)
[22] This was the Immigration Act of 1869
[23] Brisbane 31 August 1869 ,
p. 2
[24] Farewell Banquet to the Hon. John Douglas. Brisbane 22 September 1869 , p. 3
[25] Ibid. Douglas agreed, for
in a letter to the Times shortly after arriving in England 3 March 1870 , p. 6)
[26] Farewell Banquet to the Hon. John Douglas. Brisbane 22 September 1869 , p. 3. Douglas
expounded further on this at a Masonic banquet in his honour, informing those
present that he and his wife “both regretted leaving [and] fervently hoped they
might come back and resume their place again.”
(Masonic Banquet. Brisbane 5 October 1869 , p. 6)
[27] Farewell Banquet to the Hon. John Douglas. Brisbane 22 September 1869 , p. 3
[28] Torres Strait Pilot and New Guinea 28 November
1903 . I assume the
patriarchal reference meant he hoped to marry and raise a family in Australia
[29] Mary Douglas was presented with a silver salver by the governor in
recognition of her work with the Diamantina Orphanage, and John Douglas was
given a solid gold jewel by the Masonic fraternity and an illuminated address
by the All Saint’s Church congregation, which is reproduced at Appendix 3. (Weekly Epitome, Brisbane Courier, 25
September 1869 , p. 5; Brisbane 27 September 1869 , p. 3; Lecture by the Hon.
John Douglas. Brisbane 28 September 1869 , p. 3; Presentation to Mrs.
John Douglas. Brisbane 5 October 1869 , p. 6; Masonic Banquet. Brisbane 5 October 1869 , p. 6)
[30] “Shipping.” Brisbane 1 October 1869 , p. 2. The ship was the Florence Irving.
[31] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[32] Ibid., pp. 130-31. At 2 Old Broad Street Douglas had been sharing a room with the
emigration clerk on the fourth floor.
[33] Ibid., p. 131
[34] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[35] Ibid., p. 131
[36] Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland
[37] Ibid., p. 47. Among the
instructions was that Douglas would “carry out the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1869 and to do all in
his power to promote and encourage immigration to Queensland
[38] Ibid.
[39] Correspondence Between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas . Queensland
[40] Ibid., p. 132
[41] Ibid.
[42] Ibid., p. 133
[43] Ibid.
[44] Ibid., pp. 132-34. This sum
was never paid by Douglas , the debt being
written off due to his insolvency in 1872.
(“Report of the Auditor-General on Public Accounts for the Year
1870.” Queensland
[45] For more information see H. J. Gibbney, “Charles Lilley: An Uncertain Democrat.” In, D. J. Murphy and R. B. Joyce. Queensland University of Queensland
[46] J. X. Jobson. A Biography of Sir Arthur Hunter Palmer. BA Hons thesis. University of Queensland
[47] “Mr. Douglas at the Victoria Hall.”
Brisbane 24
October 1871 , p. 3
[48] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland Douglas
unsuccessfully protested that this measure would result in immigration to the
colony being “considerably diminished.”
[49] Ibid., pp. 136-38
[50] This was 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 of
passage money payment under that contract.
(“Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland
[51] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[52] “Correspondence between the Government and the agent-general for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[53] Ibid., p. 141
[54] Ibid.
[55] Ibid., p. 139
[56] Ibid., p. 141
[57] Ibid., p. 142
[58] Ibid.
[59] Ibid., pp. 143-44
[60] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[61] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[62] Ibid. It was left to the
clerk of the Queensland executive council, Albert Victor Drury, to couch
Palmer’s remarks in more diplomatic terms, tactfully and approvingly noting
that, “It appears to the colonial secretary that had it not been for the
resignation of the previous day, it is a piece of fine writing which would
hardly have been indulged in by Mr. Douglas.”
[63] Ibid., p. 154
[64] Ibid., p. 158
[65] Ibid., p. 155
[66] Ibid.
[67] Lack, pp. 82-83
[68] Ibid., pp. 89-94
[69] Ibid. While Douglas did receive instructions, these were vague and
ill defined, resulting in differences of interpretation.
[70] Queensland Government Gazette,
vol 10 no 95, 25 September
1869 , p. 1300
[71] See, “Proposed Submarine and Land Telegraph between Singapore Queensland
[72] Douglas expressed his
disappointment to Palmer as follows, “I am sorry you are going back to the
crown agents. They are very good people,
but, whether you retain me here or not, you must have somebody here who aught
to be able to do anything you require to be done. The agents for the other Australian colonies
- Vendon, Dutton and Maguire - do everything of that kind.” (John Douglas to Arthur Palmer, 2 September
1870, quoted in Jobson (1960), p. 51)
[73] “Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland Douglas .” Queensland Frankfurt .
[74] “Correspondence between the
Government and the Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[75] Ibid., p. 164
[76] Ibid., p. 172
[77] Ibid, p. 173
[78] “London Queensland
[79] “The Quetta New
Guinea 12 September 1903 ; John Douglas to
Arthur Palmer, 11 July 1870 . McIlwraith / Palmer Papers, John Oxley
Library, State Library of Queensland , OM 64-19/43
[80] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland Denmark and Scandinavia , for no German males between six and forty
years of age were allowed to leave during the war.
[81] Postmaster General.
“Immigration Bill.” Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9,
1869, p. 382
[82] “Instructions to the Agent-General for Immigration to Queensland
[83] Postmaster General.
“Immigration Bill.” Queensland Parliamentary Debates, vol 9,
1869, p. 382
[84] “Report from the Joint Select Committee on the Petition of Mr. John
Douglas, Together with the Proceedings of the Committee and the Minutes of
Evidence.” Queensland
[85] “Correspondence between the Government and the Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[86] Ibid., p. 184
[87] Ibid., p.184-85. “Additional
Correspondence between the Government and the Late Agent-General for
Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland Douglas
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.”
[88] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[89] Ibid.
[90] “Resignation of Mr. Archibald Archer as Agent-General for
Emigration.” Queensland
[91] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[92] Ibid., p. 104. In 1870,
Douglas dispatched to Queensland Queensland Queensland ,
OM 64-19/43)
[93] Barbara Atkins. The Problem
of Representation of Australia in England Melbourne
[94] Ibid. John Douglas. “Telegraphic Communication.” The Times, 14 January 1871 , p. 10
[95] Atkins, p. 122
[96] Ibid., p. 121
[97] Archibald Archer to Arthur Palmer, 19 May 1871. McIlwraith / Palmer Papers, John Oxley
Library, State Library of Queensland , OM 64-19/43
[98] The Douglas family first sailed to New York ,
where they undertook an extensive rail journey across America to San
Francisco Queensland , via Honolulu , New Zealand
and Sydney Queensland Queensland
Votes and Proceedings, 1872; Brisbane 15 August 1871 , p. 2; John Douglas to Thomas
Phillips, 3 September 1871 . Aborigines Protection Society Papers. Australian Joint Copying Project (AJCP),
M2426, C39/102; John Douglas to Frederick Chesson, 3 September 1871 . Aborigines Protection Society Papers. Australian Joint Copying Project (AJCP),
M2427, C133/15; John Douglas to Arthur Palmer, 7 August 1871 .
McIlwraith / Palmer Papers, John Oxley Library, State Library of Queensland , OM
64-19/68.)
[99] As Douglas wrote to an English colleague, “after all the wanderings
we are glad to find ourselves at home [Brisbane Douglas
to Thomas Phillips, 3
September 1871 . Aborigines
Protection Society Papers. Australian
Joint Copying Project (AJCP), M2426, C39/102)
[100] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[101] Ibid., p. 103
[102] Ibid.
[103] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[104] Archibald Archer to Arthur Palmer, 19 May 1871. McIlwraith / Palmer Papers, John Oxley
Library, State Library of Queensland , OM 64-19/43
[105] “Additional Correspondence between the Government and the Late
Agent-General for Emigration, Mr. Douglas .” Queensland
[106] Ibid.
[107] Ibid. pp. 103-5
[108] Ibid., p. 105
[109] John Douglas to Edward Douglas, 26 March 1898 .
Douglas Papers, John Oxley Library, State Library of Queensland , OM
89-3/B/2(B)/6
[110] Brisbane 13
June 1872 , p. 3: Archibald Archer to Arthur Palmer, 19 May
1871. McIlwraith / Palmer Papers, John
Oxley Library, State Library of Queensland ,
OM 64-19/43
[111] “Mr. Douglas’s Explanation.”
Brisbane 18
June 1872 , p. 3
[112]“Late Agent-General for Emigration.”
Queensland 27 June 1872 , pp. 418-24
[113] “Mr. John Douglas. “Late
Agent-General for Emigration.
(Petition.)” Queensland
[114] Ibid.
[115] “Late Agent-General for Emigration.” Queensland 27 June 1872 , p. 419
[116] Hon. E. I. C. Browne. “Late
Agent-General for Emigration.” Queensland 27 June 1872 , pp. 423-5
[117] Ibid. Members of the
committee appointed from the legislative council were Thomas Murray-Prior,
Henry George Simpson, Henry Bates Fitz and Eyles Irwin Caulfield Browne as
chairman. (“Report from the Joint Select
Committee on the Petition of Mr. John Douglas, Together with the Proceedings of
the Committee and the Minutes of Evidence.”
Queensland
[118] “Mr. John Douglas.” Queensland 4 July 1872 , p. 499
[119] “Report from the Joint Select Committee on the Petition of Mr. John
Douglas, Together with the Proceedings of the Committee and the Minutes of
Evidence.” Queensland Palmer Ministry Douglas . Fitz and Simpson had spoken in favour of
establishing the committee. Graham, the
member for Clermont, was new to the parliament, while Wienholt, a squatter
representing Western Downs , supported the
Palmer ministry. It was therefore not
surprising that the committee’s findings would not be unanimous.
[120] “Report from the Joint Select Committee on the Petition of Mr. John
Douglas, Together with the Proceedings of the Committee and the Minutes of
Evidence.” Queensland
[121] Ibid., p. 831
[122] Ibid., p. 812
[123] Ibid., p. 814
[124] Ibid., pp. 816-17
[125] Ibid., pp. 820-21. Several
years later, the 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)
[126] In the case of his parliamentary utterances, they are paraphrased
by third parties.
[127] “Report from the Joint Select Committee on the Petition of Mr. John
Douglas, Together with the Proceedings of the Committee and the Minutes of
Evidence.” Queensland
[128] Ibid.
[129] Ibid.
[130] “The Late Agent-general for Emigration.” Queensland 12 August 1872 , p. 840
[131] The Colonial Secretary.
“Petition. (Mr. John
Douglas.)” Queensland 15 August 1872 , p. 889
[132] The Colonial Secretary.
“Petition. (Mr. John
Douglas.)” Queensland 15 August 1872 , p. 889
[133] Mr. Miles. “Petition. (Mr. John Douglas.)” Queensland
Parliamentary Debates, 15
August 1872 , p. 890; Thomas Blackett Stephens believed this
occurred because the committee was “appointed by ballot, and they all knew that
committees appointed in that way were packed committees.” (Mr. Stephens. “Petition.
(Mr. John Douglas.)” Queensland 15 August 1872 , p. 890)
[134] Mr. Groom. “Petition. (Mr. John Douglas.)” Queensland 15 August 1872 , p. 890
[135] Ibid.
[136] “The Charges against Mr. Douglas.”
Brisbane 29
August 1872 , p. 5
