# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite recognising Pemulwuy as "a brave and independent character", Governor King offered a reward for his death or capture and issued a government order than any Aboriginal people seen near Parramatta should be shot on site. Pemulwuy was shot dead in 1802, and his head was removed and sent to Sir Joseph Banks in England for his collection, however its current whereabouts are unknown.

Musquito

Musquito was born on the northern shore of Port Jackson and by 1805 had begun raiding settlements in the Hawkesbury region. A warrant was then issued for his arrest and he was captured and gaoled in Parramatta. He was later exiled to Norfolk Island where he remained for eight years before being sent to Launceston, Tasmania.

By 1817 he was working as a tracker, hunting down bushrangers including Michael Howe; however he eventually became known as a bushranger himself. After Indigenous people were increasingly pushed out of the main settlements he retreated to the bush and formed a gang. The group of 20-30 conducted raids on farms, killing several stockkeepers on the East Coast between 1823 and 1824. Musquito was wounded and captured in 1824 and later charged with aiding and abetting the murder of a stockkeeper. He was hanged with another Aboriginal man, Black Jack, at Old Hobart Gaol in 1825.

Windradyne

Windradyne, a Wiradjuri warrior, was a key resistance figure in the Bathurst War in 1824. When Governor Brisbane came to power the pace of settlement greatly increased west of the Blue Mountains, placing competition on traditional food sources. Windradyne began leading attacks on small farming outposts using guerrilla warfare techniques. In December 1823 he was blamed for the death of two stockmen. Soldiers were dispatched to capture him and it reportedly took six men to subdue him.

After he was released, the hostilities continued to escalate with Aboriginal women and children being killed and seven stockmen attacked in the Wyagdon Ranges. The town of Bathurst was finally placed under martial law in 1924 and a reward issued for Windradyne's capture. However he avoided arrest and was later pardoned by the Governor when he appeared at the annual feast in Parramatta.

Yagan

Born around 1795 Yagan was the son of Midgigoroo, an influential Noongar elder in the area south of Perth. After a young boy was shot near the homestead owned by Archibald Butler, the Noongar man retaliated by spearing one of his servants, labourer William Gaze. Yagan was captured and sentenced for Gaze's murder in 1832, spending six weeks detained on Carnac Island before escaping. Despite having no knowledge of boats, Yagan and two others managed to steal one and steer it the 13km back to shore.

After his return he eluded capture for another year and became a well-known figure in the Perth colony. Robert Lyon, a minister who studied the local Indigenous people and pleaded to save Yagan from the death penalty, described him as "the Wallace of the age" in the Perth Gazette. Yagan was killed in an ambush by brothers William and James Keates in 1833 and his head was taken to England where it was kept in the Liverpool Museum. His remains were finally repatriated and buried in 1997. A new development in Perth is being named Yagan Square to honour him.

Jandamarra

A Bunuba man, Jandamarra was born about 1870 in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. As a youth he spent time living on a remote station and became a good horseman but he later returned and became an initiated man of the Bunuba people. Though he was captured for killing sheep the charges were later dropped when he agreed to care for the horses at the police station. He later became a stockman and joined the police as a tracker, charged with capturing his own people who had been spearing stock.

He was given an ultimatum by the Bunuba and so he subsequently shot his police partner Constable Richardson while he slept and freed the detained Aboriginal people at the station. For the next three years Jandamarra lead his people in resistance to the settlers. Fifty painted warriors fought against the settlers in the ' Battle of Windjina Gorge', which left Jandamarra with severe wounds. He later raided his former police station twice before being shot dead by another Aboriginal tracker in 1897.

Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner

Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner, along with 14 other Tasmanian Aboriginal people, were brought to Melbourne in 1839 by the 'protector of Aborigines', George Robinson. Two years later the two men, along with three women, stole two guns and waged a six-week guerilla-style campaign in the Dandenongs and on the Mornington Peninsula, burning stations and killing two sealers.

They were eventually caught and while the three women were acquitted Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner were found guilty of murder and were sentenced to hang. Their bodies are buried under what is now the Queen Victoria Market.

Tarenorerer (aka Walyer)

Born in Tasmania around 1800, it is believed that Tarenorer was sold to white sealers on the Bass Strait Islands in her teens after being abducted by Aboriginal people of the Port Sorell region. She quickly learnt to speak English fluently, and also learnt how to firearms during her time with the sealers.

In 1828 she escaped from the sealers and returned to her country, where she gathered men and women from different groups to initiate warfare against the invaders. She personally trained her warriors in the use of firearms and in effective battle tactics against the slow to load guns of her enemies, and introduced guerrilla warfare strategies of killing livestock. She believed to have said 'she liked a luta tawin (white man) as she did a black snake'.

After conflicts with other Aboriginal groups she escaped to Port Sorrell with two of her brothers and two sisters, but was again abducted by sealers and taken to Bird Island. She hid her identity and was known to the sealers only as 'Mary Anne'. In 1830 she was taken to Swan Island after it was believed she was plotting to murder one of the sealers, and her true identity was soon revealed. 'Protector of the Aborigines' George Robinson was elated at her capture and believed it a 'most fortunate thing that this woman is apprehended and stopped in her murderous career'. She was kept in isolation for fear that she would incite a revolt on the island, and she became ill and died of influenza on 5 June 1831.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 war heroes you didn't learn about in school

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite recognising Pemulwuy as "a brave and independent character", Governor King offered a reward for his death or capture and issued a government order than any Aboriginal people seen near Parramatta should be shot on site. Pemulwuy was shot dead in 1802, and his head was removed and sent to Sir Joseph Banks in England for his collection, however its current whereabouts are unknown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recognition, listening and better results. Vote Yes on October 14.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 27th of May marks the anniversary of the 1967 Referendum in which Australians voted overwhelmingly to amend the Constitution to allow the Commonwealth to make laws for Aboriginal people and include them in the census. The referendum put the following question to the Australian people: Do you approve the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'An Act to alter the Constitution so as to omit certain words relating to the people of the Aboriginal race in any state so that Aboriginals are to be counted in reckoning the population'? The proposed law (Constitution Alteration (Aboriginals) 1967) sought to give the Commonwealth Parliament power to make laws with respect to Aboriginal people wherever they lived in Australia. It also sought to make it possible to include Aboriginal people in national censuses. The amendment deleted part of section 51 (xxvi) of the Constitution and repealed section 127.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 27th of May marks the anniversary of the 1967 Referendum in which Australians voted overwhelmingly to amend the Constitution to allow the Commonwealth to make laws for Aboriginal people and include them in the census.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Pilbara strike of 1946-49 is one of the most dramatic moments in Australia's indigenous history. Aboriginal people not only defied the owners of pastoral stations in North-West Western Australia by demanding better wages and conditions, but also sought to win independence from their colonial masters.

# data[].attributes.headline
Aboriginal People Protest Against Nazi Treatment of Jews

# data[].attributes.subject
Aboriginal People Protest Against Nazi Treatment of Jews

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Normal text size Larger text size Very large text size

The German government has officially apologised after its consulate in Melbourne refused 82 years ago to accept a letter of protest from the Australian Aborigines' League about the Nazi persecution of the Jews.

Aboriginal activist William Cooper.

On Sunday Felix Klein - the Commissioner for Jewish Life in Germany and the Fight against Anti-Semitism - issued the historic apology via video link on behalf of Chancellor Angela Merkel's government.

The apology was screened at an event marking the anniversary of the 1938 delegation of the Australian Aborigines' League - led by Aboriginal spokesman William Cooper - to the German consulate in Melbourne.

According to The Argus newspaper, the delegation wanted to convey a resolution voicing "on behalf of Aborigines of Australia, a strong protest at the cruel persecution of the Jewish people by the Nazi government of Germany, and ask that this persecution is brought to an end".

The Australian Aborigines' League, which used Mr Cooper's home in Footscray as its meeting place, drew a parallel between the treatment of Aboriginal people and a pogrom against Jews carried out by the paramilitary wing of the Nazis on November 9-10, 1938, that became known as Kristallnacht.

The league felt moved to protest at the violence from the other side of the world, and a delegation walked from Footscray to the German consulate in Melbourne on December 6, 1938.

But the consulate refused to admit the delegation.

"Officially, on behalf of the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel, we are sorry that the 1938 Consul General in Melbourne would not accept the letter of the Australian Aborigines' League, nor forward it onto the political leadership here in Berlin as would have been the right and morally correct thing for a consulate official to do," Dr Klein said on Sunday.

Yorta Yorta activist and educator Lois Peeler said she was happy to accept the apology on behalf of her people.

"It's a long time coming but we accept the apology," she said.

Dr Lois Peeler (in yellow) during a Culture Day at Worawa Aboriginal College in Healesville, where she is principal. Credit:David Callow

Dr Peeler said Mr Cooper - who in the early 1930s founded the Australian Aborigines' League to advocate for a fairer deal for Indigenous Australians and campaigned to repeal discriminatory legislation - was an "amazing leader".

"I think what motivated him was the similarity between the persecution of the Jewish community at that time and what was happening to our people. It was about human rights."

William Cooper Legacy Project convenor Abe Schwarz, who has spent years educating people about this little-known chapter of history, said he was pleasantly surprised when he heard Dr Klein apologise on the video link.

William Cooper Legacy Project convenor Abe Schwarz. Credit:Paul Jeffers

"The more I thought about it, I was ecstatic. I said: 'Is this as big as I think it is?' "

Mr Schwarz learnt about Mr Cooper in the early 2000s when asked by a Yorta Yorta elder in Echuca if he was "from that Hebrew mob". "I've always wanted to meet someone from the mob that my mob tried to save," he was told.

Mr Schwarz rang the Jewish Holocaust Centre in Melbourne and asked if they had heard of a bloke called Cooper.

In 2002, the Jewish Holocaust Centre held an event honouring Mr Cooper, at which Mr Schwarz met Mr Cooper's grandson, Uncle Alfred "Boydie" Turner.

Uncle Alfred "Boydie" Turner in 2012 Credit:Angela Wylie

"When many countries around the world would not act ... he did," Uncle Boydie, who is now 92, wrote in 2017.

Mr Schwarz accompanied Uncle Boydie to Israel and in 2017 to Germany, where Uncle Boydie presented the German government with a replica of the 1938 resolution.

"He knew his job was to complete his grandfather's unfinished business. He just asked if he could basically tell Germany, via the German government, of what his grandfather tried to do," Mr Schwarz said.

Germany's ambassador to Australia, Thomas Fitschen, said Mr Cooper's letter showed the Aboriginal people of Australia were "keenly aware of the terrible events in Germany".

Uncle Boydie with a statue of his grandfather, William Cooper, in 2018.

"We owe sincere gratitude to ... Alfred Turner, known as Uncle Boydie, for nurturing lasting remembrance of the victims of persecution and those who stood up against it," Dr Fitschen said in a statement.

The German embassy in Canberra said German honorary consul-general in Melbourne Michael Pearce would attend the online event to mark the 82nd anniversary of Mr Cooper's delegation.

In 1934, Mr Cooper launched a petition asking King George V for a representative for Indigenous people in Federal Parliament, to help address injustices.

Then prime minister Joseph Lyons failed to pass it on and the petition never reached the king.

Mr Cooper, along with other Aboriginal leaders from Cummeragunja Aboriginal Reserve, was instrumental in the 1938 Aboriginal Day of Mourning to coincide with the 150th anniversary of the landing of the First Fleet.

In 2018, the federal electorate of Cooper, which takes in Melbourne's northern suburbs, was named in honour of the Indigenous activist.

The electorate's geography mirrors almost entirely the former electorate of Batman, named after John Batman.

The renaming followed a campaign that argued Batman was involved in the massacre of Aboriginal people in Tasmania before he helped found Melbourne in 1835.

Mr Cooper is honoured in Israel by a memorial in Jerusalem's Yad Vashem Holocaust museum and 70 trees planted across two forests.

His legacy also lives on locally in the naming of the William Cooper Justice Centre, the William Cooper footbridge at Footscray station and the William Cooper Cup, a football match between Victoria Police and an Indigenous All-Stars team.

Start your day informed

Our Morning Edition newsletter is a curated guide to the most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up to The Sydney Morning Herald's newsletter here, The Age's here, Brisbane Times' here, and WAtoday's here.

Jewel Topsfield is social affairs editor at The Age. She has worked in Melbourne, Canberra and Jakarta as Indonesia correspondent. She has won multiple awards including a Walkley and the Lowy Institute Media Award.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Germany sorry for snubbing Aboriginal protest at persecution of Jews

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Normal text size Larger text size Very large text size The German government has officially apologised after its consulate in Melbourne refused 82 years ago to accept a letter of protest from the Australian Aborigines' League about the Nazi persecution of the Jews.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It was once a ‘taboo subject’ — the scars of the Pinjarra massacre still linger 185 years on

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Almost two centuries on, families in Western Australia’s south-west are still waiting for proper recognition of one of the state’s bloodiest days — but they hope change will come about soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Monday 21 February
Grafton: on the border between the Bundjalung and Gumbaynggir people

'We heard a tape prepared by a Mr Miles, from the ABC. It described the conditions of aborigines on the far north coast, really exposed the complexities of the problem and suggested concrete solutions. There were many recordings of aborigines expressing their views. The tape was prepared two years ago but had never been used - it was too hard-hitting for the ABC.' - Ann Curthoys

Tuesday 22 February
Lismore and Cabbage Tree Island: home of the Bundjalung people

'Cabbage Tree Island was very interesting but the reserve was really very much like any other reserve. The co-op shop was OK and so were some of the houses, but others did not have water or electricity. The manager seemed to be a real bastard.' - Ann Curthoys

Wednesday 23 February
Bowraville: home of the Gumbaynggir people

'We'd hardly arrived when this woman, the president or secretary or something of a local Aborigines Welfare Committee, assured us there was no discrimination in Bowraville, and told us all about how wonderful her committee was.

'A group of us went out to the reserve which was about one and a half miles out of town. It was controlled by the Welfare Board but didn't have a manager... The conditions were very bad. The houses were weatherboard, very run down, and hadn't been looked after for 15 years (the houses were 26 years old). They were extremely overcrowded.

'The general picture we got from talking to the people on the reserve was one of extreme lack of job opportunity... The discrimination in the town was absolutely shocking - by far the worst we'd encountered.

'We learnt there was a partition in the picture theatre separating the aborigines from the whites. The aborigines had to buy their tickets separately and could only enter the theatre after the picture had started.

'We learnt of a number of segregated pubs and cafes, and of instances of segregation in the school about 6 years earlier. The two populations were almost completely separate. At first we weren't sure where to start - the town was just so bad. We thought the press could blow up a big story about it, but they refused, obviously instigating us to put on a demonstration.

'We decided to first go up to the manager of the picture theatre, who had previously told Hall that he would let no aborigines in the back of the picture hall, including Charlie Perkins. We went up to see him but he refused to answer the door. The press got a photo of him opening the door slightly and shut it.' - Ann Curthoys

Thursday 24 February
Kempsey: home of the Dhanggati people

'The general picture in Kempsey re discrimination was that everything was fair (a cafe here and a pub there excepted), but the segregation of the swimming pool was the most outstanding thing.

'We took about 10-15 kids with us to the swimming pool. They weren't allowed in and neither were Charlie or Gary. Absolutely blatant.

'Charlie was very emphatic about the success of it because of the publicity, but most of the rest of us thought it an absolute flop because we had failed to force the issue within Kempsey itself. We all realised Kempsey had ignored us, which was precisely what we didn't want. - Ann Curthoys

Friday 25 February
Taree: home of the Birpai people

'Stopped at the Purfleet reserve for half an hour, talking to the people there.' - Ann Curthoys

Saturday 26 February
Sydney: home of the Eora people

'We got all tense etc near the end, because of the press conference. Had tea at Hornsby and then drove on to Uni. When we arrived there was Ted Noffs, a few pressmen, some parents etc. and that's about all. No aborigines or other supporters. We found out later that Noffs had deliberately not told anyone where and when we were arriving.' - Ann Curthoys

Aftermath

Charles Perkins reported the events to a crowd of 200 people at the 1965 Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI) conference in Canberra. 'The problem is out in the open now', he told them. He called for necessary follow-up work such as the building of relationships with local Aboriginal groups and improved services and access to education for Aboriginal residents in western New South Wales towns. Conference goers heard that one positive result of the students' activities was that the NSW Aborigines Welfare Board publicly announced that it would spend sixty-five thousand pounds on housing in Moree.

Later in the year, Harry Hall, president of the Walgett Aborigines' Progressive Association, appealed to Perkins and other Aboriginal activists to return to Walgett to assist in the fight against the colour bar being applied at the Oasis Hotel. Perkins and others returned to help.

The SAFA engaged in further visits to country towns later in the year but, by the end of 1966, it was finished as a political force.

The 1965 Freedom Ride through New South Wales towns and the publicity it gained, including in overseas newspapers such as the New York Times, illuminated to the world the racial discrimination happening in Australia. While the life of the SAFA was relatively short, the Ride had a lasting impact and served to strengthen the campaigns that followed to bring about greater equality and recognition for Aboriginal people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Monday 21 February Grafton: on the border between the Bundjalung and Gumbaynggir people 'We heard a tape prepared by a Mr Miles, from the ABC. It described the conditions of aborigines on the far north coast, really exposed the complexities of the problem and suggested concrete solutions.

# data[].attributes.body
Took the Children away

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Archie Roach - Took The Children Away  (Official Music Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lang Hancock's solution to the 'Aboriginal problem' (1984)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Warriors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listed below are some of the better-known Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander warriors who defended their lands in the 19th and early 20th centuries and examples of where you can find information about them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration

# data[].attributes.subject
Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A mixture of information on Aboriginal resistance fighters from the start of colonisation, the recent past and today.

# data[].attributes.body
Remembering the Pilbara Strike

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On 1 May 1946, over 800 Aboriginal stockmen walked off their jobs in a coordinated strike against their employment conditions on pastoral stations across the Pilbara. While the strike officially lasted until August 1949 many stockmen never returned to their former employment in the pastoral industry.

The impetus for the strike grew out of the lack of freedom and the poor working conditions of Aboriginal pastoral workers who were systematically denied cash wages and paid instead in tobacco, flour and other supplies. Many were also denied adequate housing, instead forced to live in corrugated iron humpies without lighting, sanitation or cooking facilities.

Historian Deborah Wilson pointed to the need for 'white-level wages' during World War Two as a factor which also encouraged the strikes. 'When the war finished there was knowledge.... the Aboriginal workers were acutely aware that they were just as entitled to an equal wage as the white man was in the workplace,' she told the .

In 1942, a meeting of representatives from twenty-three different language groups resolved to take positive action in order to improve the circumstances of the pastoral workers. They appointed Nyangumarta man Dooley Bin Bin and Nyamalmen Clancy McKenna and Peter 'Kangkushot' Coppin as representatives. They also authorised white unionist Don McLeod to negotiate on their behalf.

The timing of the strike was chosen for its symbolism and effect. The 1 May marks International Workers' Day and falls at the beginning of the shearing season, one of the busiest times on the Pilbara stations.

In 1945 Dooley Bin Bin journeyed from station to station by foot, rail and even bicycle to organise the official action, distributing calendars so that illiterate workers could effectively and consistently time their strike.

Nyamal elder, Peter Kangkushot Coppin spoke for the strikers when he proclaimed: "We said, 'No. We're not going back to the station no more. No more. We're not going back.'"

The strikers lived in camps for three years, surviving off the land and subsidiary income from selling skins and surface mining.

By 1949, two of the 25 stations agreed to improve workers conditions and increase their pay, which became a standard that other stations were eventually held to.

While the strike itself was only the beginning of the fight for fair wages for Indigenous Australians, it is seen as a landmark event in the Australian labor movement. It is also believed to have inspired the later and better-known Wave Hill walk-off of the Gurindji people in the Northern Territory in 1966.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Remebering the Pilbara Stockmen's Strike

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On this date, 1 May, 71 years ago, stockmen walked off their jobs on the pastoral stations of the Pilbara and vowed not to return until they were fairly treated. The Pilbara Stockmen's Strike became one of the longest industrial disputes in Australia's history and was a landmark push for equality by Indigenous Australians.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chair for the Study of Resistance during the Holocaust, in tribute to William Cooper

# data[].attributes.subject
Chair for the Study of Resistance during the Holocaust, in tribute to William Cooper

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Sunday, December 12, 2010, Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd will visit Yad Vashem.

The Foreign Minister will participate in a memorial ceremony in the Hall of Remembrance and visit the Children's Memorial. Following the ceremony, he will participate in an event to mark the establishment of the Chair for the Study of Resistance during the Holocaust, in tribute to William Cooper. The Chair, part of the International Institute for Holocaust Research at Yad Vashem, will support the study of the phenomena of resistance against Nazi Germany and its collaborators during the Holocaust. Israeli Minister of Education Gideon Sa'ar will participate in the event.

The Chair is established with the support of the Australia Israel Cultural Exchange, who wanted to express their appreciation of William Cooper, leader of the Australian Aborigines League protest against the Nazi German government in the wake of the Kristallnacht pogrom against Germany's Jews in 1938. Following are media arrangements for the visit.

Media interested in covering the visit MUST RSVP with the Media Relations Department at Yad Vashem: 02 644 3410 or estee.yaari@yadvashem.org.il .

19:30: Memorial Ceremony: Hall of Remembrance: Open with prior registration

19:45: Children's Memorial: Closed to Cameras

19:50: Signing of the Yad Vashem Guest Book: Open with prior registration

20:00: Event marking the establishment of the Chair for the Study of Resistance during the Holocaust, in Tribute to William Cooper: Open with prior registration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Australian Foreign Minister to Visit Yad Vashem Sunday and Participate in Event Marking Establishment of Chair for the Study of Resistance during the Holocaust, in Tribute to William Cooper

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Sunday, December 12, 2010, Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd will visit Yad Vashem.The Foreign Minister will participate in a memorial ceremony in the Hall of Remembrance and visit the Children’s Memorial.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heritage Council of WA - Places Database

# data[].attributes.body
The Children came back

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Briggs - The Children Came Back ft. Gurrumul & Dewayne Everettsmith (Official Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ABC News: Paul Keating Redfern Speech (1992)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This past week marked 250 years since Captain James Cook's first voyage across the Pacific, a pioneering expedition marked by the "discovery" of Australia.

As reflection on the impact of first contact and subsequent colonisation continues, there have been renewed calls to recognise those at the forefront of Aboriginal resistance.

Historians have often argued about its true nature and extent but one person who is clearly linked to that resistance is Pemulwuy.

Considered a "clever man" - with supernatural powers - he is a revered figure within the Indigenous community.

An Aboriginal Warrior

Pemulwuy (a Dharug word meaning earth or clay), also known as Pimbloy, was born in about 1750 north of the Georges River, not far from Botany Bay.

Historians have identified Pemulwuy as being part of the Bidjigal clan and Dharug language speaking group.

Pemulwuy was said to be well-built and muscular and he had two distinctive physical features: his left eye had a "speck" or blemish, and one foot was clubbed.

Some believed his clubbed foot indicated his status as a carradhy or "clever man".

Pemulwuy's War

Pemulwuy began a valiant campaign against colonisation shortly after the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788, starting a 12-year guerilla war against the British in 1790.

In December 1790, Pemulwuy speared convict and gamekeeper, John McIntyre.

McIntyre was known for killing Aboriginal people and was feared and hated by the Eora.

As a result, Governor Philip King ordered the killing of six Indigenous men from Pemulwuy's tribe and the capture of two for execution.

Dr Ian Coates, head of the Shared Histories Curatorial Centre at the National Museum of Australia, says from 1792, settlers reported Pemulwuy as leading a series of Aboriginal raids on colonists, mainly to the west of Sydney at Prospect, Toongabbie, Georges River, Parramatta, Brickfield Hill and the Hawkesbury River.

David Collins, the head of the colony's system at the time, described him as "a most active enemy to the settlers, plundering them of their property and endangering their personal safety".

"Raids were made for food, particularly corn, or as 'payback' for atrocities: Collins suggested that most of the attacks were the result of the settlers' 'own misconduct', including the kidnapping of Aboriginal children," Dr Coates said.

A measure of Pemulwuy's success in raiding settlers can be seen in the Governor's proclamation outlawing Pemulwuy and offering a reward for his capture or death.

In March 1797, Pemulwuy led a raid of 100 Aboriginal warriors on the Toongabbie government farm.

It's known as "the battle of Parramatta".

"A punitive party was formed by soldiers and settlers and they followed Pemulwuy's group to Parramatta. There they fired on them, killing some and seriously wounding Pemulwuy," Dr Coates said.

"As a sign of respect for him, the settlers took him to the hospital, where he recovered."

An untimely death

In May 1801, Governor King issued an order that Aborigines near Parramatta, Georges River and Prospect could be shot on sight.

Later that year, he issued a proclamation outlawing Pemulwuy and offering a reward for his capture or death.

On June 2, 1802, Pemulwuy was shot dead.

Often dubbed "Australia's oldest murder mystery", it's not known who shot the fatal blow.

Pemulwuy's head was removed from his body and sent to Joseph Banks in London, accompanied by a letter from Governor King, who wrote: "Although a terrible pest to the colony, he was a brave and independent character."

"It was placed in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons. The whereabouts of Pemulwuy's head remains unknown, but it is likely that it was disposed of in the 1830s," Dr Coates said.

Dr Coates said, "for many years Aboriginal people were absent or on the periphery of history of the Sydney colony."

"The story of Pemulwuy's role in leading resistance against the settlers, fighting for his land, is important for all Australians to know."

As Bidjigal elder Vic Simms has said: "It means a lot to us, and me in particular, that at last there's a true recognition of a true hero in Aboriginal folklore and history."

Storytelling as resistance

Artistic Director of the Sydney Festival Wesley Enoch is one of Australia's most respected playwrights.

He admits he has often struggled with the narratives around Captain Cook, British settlement and Aboriginal Australia and how best to communicate these stories to an audience.

He believes they [the stories] have too often been told from the perspective of the coloniser and remains baffled by the angst which is often placed upon highlighting Aboriginal resistance.

"The conversation about us being in this landscape for thousands of years is always seen as a political act and first contact is seen to be the beginning of history, because that's the colonisers' view of what history is," Enoch said.

In 2012, Enoch directed a production titled I AM EORA.

A combination of performance, film, literature and music, the large-scale piece focussed on three central figures in the history of Aboriginal Sydney: the warrior Pemulwuy, the resilient nurturer Barangaroo and the reconciler Bennelong.

Mr Enoch recalls it was the story of Pemulwuy which he was drawn to the most.

"There was a magical narrative around him that set him apart in many ways, he was the ultimate magical figure of resistance and his ability to galvanise people around him, that action was really quite powerful."

Mr Enoch said continuing to tell stories like Pemulwuy's can be seen as its own form of modern-day resistance.

"Every act of storytelling is resistance because we're saying that the colonial process did not win, we're still here."

Walking Together is taking a look at our nation's reconciliation journey and where we've been and asks the question: where do we go next? Join us as we listen, learn and share stories from across the country, that unpack the truth-telling of our history and embrace the rich culture and language of Australia's First People.
More stories from Walking Together:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The ultimate magical figure of resistance', Aboriginal warrior Pemulwuy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Historians often argue about the nature and extent of Aboriginal resistance to European settlement but one person who is clearly linked to that resistance is Pemulwuy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Constitutional recognition does not have to exclude the future prospect of a treaty for indigenous people, Stan Grant says.

Mr Grant has been appointed to the Referendum Council to advise the government on a way towards a referendum on recognising Australia's first people in the constitution and removing racist clauses.

But on Friday morning at the first national conference on preventing indigenous suicide he was challenged by Dr Marcus Woolombi Waters from Griffith University.

"We don't want it (constitutional recognition), we don't want to be recognised by the perpetrator of the violence," Dr Waters said, calling instead for a treaty "that gives us the right to negotiate as a sovereign people".

There has been a growing chorus of resistance to constitutional recognition, with some indigenous people feeling it will erase the possibility of a future treaty.

"It's an advisory council, not an advocacy council, it's an important distinction," Mr Grant said.

The constitution affects the daily lives of all Australians, he said, and it is "ludicrous" to pretend it doesn't touch indigenous people.

"There are clauses in that constitution that have allowed our children to be taken away, that have allowed our homes to be invaded, that have told us who we can marry and where we can live. Brother, you can't seriously want those clauses in the constitution, do you?" he asked.

"If we want to remove racist clauses from the constitution, then we can't sit outside and say we don't want to be part of the process."

The form of change and what words will be used are still being negotiated, and it's still not known how many Australians will support the referendum, Mr Grant said.

Only eight of 44 referenda have been successful in Australia, needing the majority of voters in a majority of states to vote yes in order to pass.

Mr Grant pointed to Victoria, whose state constitution recognises indigenous people and which is now opening negotiations for a treaty.

If recognition is not meaningful and did not support and protect the preservation of indigenous people and their culture, "then I'm with you, it's not worth doing," Mr Grant said.

"But we don't do it from the outside, we don't pitch a tent anymore, we don't do it from hurling stones."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recognition doesn't exclude treaty: Grant

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stan Grant has been challenged over his backing of constitutional recognition at an indigenous conference in the Northern Territory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Dreaming embraces time past, present and future, a substantively different concept from populist characterisations portraying it as "timeless" or having taken place at the so-called "dawn of time". Unfortunately, even in mainstream Australia today, when and where we should know better, schmaltzy, quasi-New Age notions of "The Dreaming" frequently still hold sway. The Australian anthropologist W.E.H. Stanner conveyed the idea more accurately in his germinal 1956 essay The Dreaming, in which he coined the term "everywhen": "One cannot 'fix' The Dreaming in time: it was, and is, everywhen" wrote Stanner, adding that The Dreaming " ... has ... an unchallengeable sacred authority". Stanner went on to observe that: "We [non-Indigenous Australians] shall not understand The Dreaming fully except as a complex of meanings".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Dreaming embraces time past, present and future, a substantively different concept from populist characterisations portraying it as "timeless" or having taken place at the so-called "dawn of time". Unfortunately, even in mainstream Australia today, when and where we should know better, schmaltzy, quasi-New Age notions of "The Dreaming" frequently still hold sway.

# data[].attributes.body
...trailer

# data[].attributes.body
(documentary)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BUSHRANGER Ned Kelly, who famously defied the colonial authorities and was hanged for murder in 1880, is an iconic figure in Australian history. But few Australians know the story of indigenous resistance fighters Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner, who were the first men publicly executed in Victoria, in 1842.

Anarchist Joseph Toscano, who yesterday convened a commemoration ceremony to mark the 167th anniversary of the execution opposite the City Baths, is lobbying Melbourne City Council to erect a monument to acknowledge their place in the state's history.

"Theirs is a great Melbourne story of love, resistance, passion and violence, which is much more significant, in my opinion, than the story of Ned Kelly," Dr Toscano said.

"Everyone in Australia knows about Geronimo and Sitting Bull because of crappy TV, but no one knows about this country's indigenous fathers."

Dr Toscano said Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner were among 16 Tasmanian Aborigines who were brought to Melbourne in 1839 by the protector of Aborigines, George Robinson, to "civilise" the Victorian Aborigines.

In late 1841, the two men and three women, stole two guns and waged a six-week guerilla-style campaign in the Dandenongs and on the Mornington Peninsula, burning stations and killing two sealers.

They were charged with murder and tried in Melbourne. Their defence counsel was Redmond Barry, who questioned the legal basis of British authority over Aborigines. (Thirty-nine years later, Barry would sentence Ned Kelly to hang.)

The women were acquitted and the men found guilty, although the jury made a plea for clemency on account of the "peculiar circumstances".

Judge Willis ignored the request and the men were hanged in front of 5000 people — a quarter of Victoria's white population — from gallows erected on a small rise near what is now the corner of Bowen and Franklin streets. Their bodies are buried under the Queen Victoria Market.

"Every town in Australia has a monument to remember people who died fighting other people's wars, but nowhere in this country do we see monuments to indigenous people who fought to defend their country and way of life," Dr Toscano said. "In order to begin reconciliation, the coloniser needs to acknowledge what happened."

Lord Mayor Robert Doyle said he did not know the story of Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner until he met Dr Toscano, who also stood for lord mayor, on the election trail.

"We often don't know these stories right in the midst of our own city," he said at the commemoration ceremony. "Awareness of our indigenous history is vital to our understanding of ourselves. It is OK to focus on things which are admirable ... but we also need to look at things that are shameful squarely in the eye."

Melbourne City Council will consider a monument as part of its indigenous heritage study, to be conducted this year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Aboriginal resistance fighters gain recognition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BUSHRANGER Ned Kelly, who famously defied the colonial authorities and was hanged for murder in 1880, is an iconic figure in Australian history. But few Australians know the story of indigenous resistance fighters Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner, who were the first men publicly executed in Victoria, in 1842.

# data[].attributes.headline
Constitutional Recognition must involve more than symbolism. It must involve structural change. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Constitutional Recognition must involve more than symbolism. It must involve structural change. 

# data[].attributes.body
Recognition can come in a weak form, such as symbolism. (It’s weak because it does not change the status quo.) Or it can be a strong form, such as designated parliamentary seats, a voice or even an autonomous region.

Ken Wyatt's proposed 'voice to government' marks another failure to hear Indigenous voices

https://www.pm.gov.au/media/address-closing-gap-statement-parliament

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Further learning about Mabo Day, the legal fiction of Terra Nullius and the Doctrine of Discovery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Remembering the Pilbara walk-off that blazed a trail for Indigenous rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When West Australian sheep station workers went on strike for fair wages and decent conditions, they wrote one of the most important chapters in Australia’s history.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Little Things Big Things Grow | Paul Kelly & Kev Carmody

# data[].attributes.body
(movie)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In addition, some articles contain terms or views that were acceptable within mainstream Australian culture in the period in which they were written, but may no longer be considered appropriate.

# data[].attributes.headline
Recognition doesn't exclude treaty: Grant

# data[].attributes.subject
Recognition doesn't exclude treaty: Grant

# data[].attributes.body
We don't want it (constitutional recognition), we don't want to be recognised by the perpetrator of the violence," Dr Waters said, calling instead for a treaty "that gives us the right to negotiate as a sovereign people".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How Aborigines Made Australia

Paperback Edition Number: 1
Published: 1st June 2012
ISBN: 9781743311325
Number Of Pages: 384

When will this arrive by?
Enter delivery postcode to estimate

Earn 31 Qantas Points on this Book

Explodes the myth that pre-settlement Australia was an untamed wilderness revealing the complex, country-wide systems of land management used by Aboriginal people.

Across Australia, early Europeans commented again and again that the land looked like a park. With extensive grassy patches and pathways, open woodlands and abundant wildlife, it evoked a country estate in England. Bill Gammage has discovered this was because Aboriginal people managed the land in a far more systematic and scientific fashion than we have ever realised.

For over a decade, Gammage has examined written and visual records of the Australian landscape. He has uncovered an extraordinarily complex system of land management using fire and the life cycles of native plants to ensure plentiful wildlife and plant foods throughout the year. We know Aboriginal people spent far less time and effort than Europeans in securing food and shelter, and now we know how they did it.

With details of land-management strategies from around Australia, The Biggest Estate on Earth rewrites the history of this continent, with huge implications for us today. Once Aboriginal people were no longer able to tend their country, it became overgrown and vulnerable to the hugely damaging bushfires we now experience. And what we think of as virgin bush in a national park is nothing of the kind.

About the Author

Bill Gammage is a historian and adjunct professor in the Humanities Research Centre at the Australian National University. He is best known as author of the ground-breaking The Broken Years: Australian Soldiers in the Great War.

Industry Reviews

"A beautiful and profound piece of writing, one that has importance for us all." --"Age"
"This bold book, with its lucid prose and vivid illustrations, will be discussed for years to come." --"Australian Book Review"

Contents

Illustrations

Thanks

Sources

Abbreviations

Definitions

Foreword by Henry Reynolds
Australia in 1788
Introduction: The Australian estate

1. Curious landscapes

2. Canvas of a continent
Why was Aboriginal land management possible?
3. The nature of Australia

4. Heaven on earth

5. Country
How was land managed?
6. The closest ally

7. Associations

8. Templates

9. A capital tour

10. Farms without fences
Invasion
11. Becoming Australian

Appendix 1: Science, history and landscape

Appendix 2: Current botanical names for plants named with capitals in the text

Notes

Bibliography

Index

ISBN: 9781743311325
ISBN-10: 174331132X
Audience: Tertiary; University or College
Format: Paperback
Language: English
Number Of Pages: 384
Published: 1st June 2012
Publisher: Allen & Unwin
Country of Publication: AU
Dimensions (cm): 24.5 x 17.2 x 3.18
Weight (kg): 1.04
Edition Number: 1

This product is categorised by

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How Aborigines Made Australia Paperback Edition Number: 1 Published: 1st June 2012 ISBN: 9781743311325 Number Of Pages: 384 When will this arrive by? Enter delivery postcode to estimate Earn 31 Qantas Points on this Book Simply link your Qantas Frequent Flyer membership number to your Booktopia account and earn points on eligible orders.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What happened?

On 23 August 1966, the Gurindji people of the Northern Territory made history with the Wave Hill Walk-Off. The landmark event made their names widely known across Australia and inspired national change.

200 Gurindji stockmen, domestic workers and their families at Wave Hill cattle station went on strike. They demanded wages and a return of some of their traditional lands which was bought by international meat-packing company Vestey Brothers in 1914. They were led by Vincent Lingiari, elected leader of the Gurindji communities.

The stockmen "walked off" the job and refused to be bribed back until they received justice through land rights. The demand was rejected, but they continued to camp on their traditional land at Daguragu, leading to a seven-year dispute.

"You can keep your gold. We just want our land back," Lingiari famously said.

The campaign was supported by people across Australia, and eventually the Gurindji won the title to part of their land. In doing so, they put land rights on the political agenda and took the realities of decades of oppression and colonial injustice into the living rooms of urban Australia.

What was the impact?

The Wave Hill Walk-Off inspired national change in the form of equal wages for Aboriginal workers, as well as a new land rights act.

The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act was the first attempt by an Australian government to legally recognise First Nations land ownership. It put into law the concept of inalienable freehold title - meaning that the land cannot be bought, acquired or mortgaged. The legislation allowed First Nations people to claim land title if they could prove a traditional and strong relationship with the country.

In 1974 Prime Minister Gough Whitlam gave the Gurindji people a lease to part of the vast Wave Hill property - a symbolic day for First Nations people and supporters, but only a vital first step.

As Gurindji Elder Vincent Lingiari said at the time: "They took our country away from us, now they have brought it back to us ceremonially."

The Gurindji people worried that without perpetual title, the government could take the lease away again - a fear that was realised in 1979 when the Northern Territory Government said they must surrender the title.

It wasn't until two decades after the Wave Hill Walk-Off, in 1986, that the Gurindji people became one of the first to reclaim their traditional lands, when the government at last handed over the inalienable freehold title deeds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ongoing Legacy of the Wave Hill Walk-Off

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On 23 August 1966, the Gurindji people of the Northern Territory made history with the Wave Hill Walk-Off. The landmark event made their names widely known across Australia and inspired national change. 200 Gurindji stockmen, domestic workers and their families at Wave Hill cattle station went on strike.

# data[].attributes.body
(documentary)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
KANYINI is a story told by an Aboriginal man, Bob Randall, who lives beside the greatest monolith in the world, Uluru. Based on Bob’s own personal journey and the wisdom he learnt from the old people living in the bush, Bob tells the tale of why Indigenous people are now struggling in a modern world and what needs to be done for Indigenous people to move forward.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the 110 th anniversary of her death, the National Trust of Western Australia welcomes the opportunity to share the extraordinary life of Fanny Balbuk Yooreel.

Arguably the most important Whadjuk woman of the 19 th century, this traditional Swan River woman lived through the British colonisation of Perth. Her powerful story and response to the relentless development of Perth has been shared in new ways by Elder Whadjuk women, by talented quilters and the community during the 2017 Australian Heritage Festival.

Supported by Lotterywest and partners City of Perth, ARC Centre of Excellence for the History of Emotions and the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, the National Trust of Western Australian has produced a self guided tour, documentary and new publication to mark Fanny Balbuk Yooreel's life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fanny Balbuk: Perth Resistance Fighter - National Trust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the 110th anniversary of her death, the National Trust of Western Australia welcomes the opportunity to share the extraordinary life of Fanny Balbuk Yooreel. Arguably the most important Whadjuk woman of the 19th century, this traditional Swan River woman lived through the British colonisation of Perth. Her powerful story

# data[].attributes.headline
Constitutional Recognition needs to be more than just symbolic

# data[].attributes.subject
Constitutional Recognition needs to be more than just symbolic

# data[].attributes.body
https://theconversation.com/constitutional-recognition-for-indigenous-australians-must-involve-structural-change-not-mere-symbolism-131751

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians must involve structural change, not mere symbolism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Australians have been working towards meaningful change for almost a decade. That cannot be derailed by reverting to symbolic recognition.

# data[].attributes.body
study guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teaching and study resources for teachers, lecturers, students and parents

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction - In this two-part essay I will endeavour to place the life of the Tasmanian Aboriginal resistance fighter William Lyttleton Quamby into the context of his place and time. Part 1 describes what is known about Quamby's life; and Part 2 using contemporary nineteenth-century maps of land grants to British settlers will show how the traditional Aboriginal fire-farmed plains on either side of Quamby's Brook at Westbury were handed over to the settlers by the colonial government over a period of about 10 years from 1824. This was the same decade in which Aboriginal retaliations for loss of their land escalated into the Black Wars.
The current and controversial debate about the location of a new prison in northern Tasmania near the village of Westbury shows little or no understanding or consideration of Tasmanian history. It is salutary to reflect upon some of the issues from the past which resonate directly with the present. For it is in the centre of this ancient fire-farmed Aboriginal landscape of Blake's Plains and Emu Plain divided by Quamby's Brook, now overlain by an Anglo-Irish farming landscape that stretches from Hagley to Deloraine, that a prison is proposed to be built by the Tasmanian government.

Westbury adjoins these two plains to the south and survives virtually intact as planned in 1826 with its magnificent bluestone Roman Catholic church, a village green and a grid pattern of streets laid out by Lieutenant Thomas Shadforth of the 57th Regiment. It has direct connections with the history of Irish settlers, some of whom took up five-acre land grants in the town in the early-nineteenth century after being discharged from the British Army or as freed convicts, or like Richard Dry and William Bryan received large grants. Scottish settlers had already taken up farming land to the south in the Hamilton and Bothwell districts and on to Lake Echo, leaving the Irish and others to seek land then being opened up in the north-west of the island along the Western River (Meander), Mersey and Quamby's Brook.

Four white settlement Tasmanian estates either adjoin, surround or are part of the ancient Aboriginal hunting grounds which the settlers renamed Blake's Plains and Emu Plain. These two former fire-farmed landscapes are divided by Quamby's Brook which runs from Quamby's Bluff to the Meander River. The four estates were created by the Dry family at Belle Vue (later Quamby), the Field family at Westfield, William Bryan at Glenore and Lieutenant William Lyttleton at Hagley and they all contribute to the creation and appearance of the Westbury landscape as we know it today.

In the eighteenth century, many young Africans and Indians were taken from their places of origin, often through the slave trade, to work as household attendants for wealthy families in Britain. Their duties were not necessarily onerous; their chief function was to look decorative. Serving as the human equivalent of a fashion statement, they were considered exotic ornaments complementing the porcelain, textiles, wallpapers and lacquer which the British were importing from India and the Far East.

Many slaves who came to Britain were brought back by planters, government officials or military and naval officers returning from service overseas. One example was Captain Lachlan Macquarie, later Governor of New South Wales, who married his first wife Jane Jarvis while stationed in Calicut, India, where he purchased from the slave market in Cochin a five-year-old boy for 85 rupees. He named his slave George Jarvis and Jarvis travelled with him as his soldier-servant throughout India, on to Egypt, to Scotland, to Australia and back again to the Isle of Mull in the Scottish Hebrides over a period of twenty-seven years.

The tragic story of the Indigenous girl Mathinna (1835-1852) and her association with Lady (Jane) Franklin, wife of Sir John Franklin, Lieutenant-Governor of Van Diemen's Land (1837-43) is well known in Tasmanian history.

Mathinna was taken from her own people as a young child and exposed to the luxurious but alien environment of Government House in Hobart, Mathinna experienced both the best and the worst conditions faced by Tasmanian Aborigines in the mid nineteenth century.

Jane Franklin, wife of the governor of Van Diemen's Land, had developed an interest in the Tasmanian Aborigines. Like almost all the British, she believed in the 'great chain of being', a ranking of races that predated evolutionary theory, with Europeans at the top and everyone else in descending order according to their degree of observable 'civilisation.'

Indigenous people were seen as scientific curios and Franklin wanted to learn as much as she could about them. It was this thinking that led Europeans to take children in 'for their own good', creating the first generation of stolen children. Franklin was one of the earliest Europeans to try her hand at Europeanising Indigenous children. 1

Twenty-four years before Mathinna was born, two Aboriginal children were baptised by the Reverend Robert Knopwood at St John's Church, Launceston on 18 March 1811. One was given the names 'William Lyttleton Quamby'. 2 The Sydney Gazette of 4 May 1811 (see extract above) reported on the ceremony, adding that that he had 'been picked up on Quamby Plains' hence his naming. From this it would seem that Quamby was found or 'collected' probably in late-1810 or early-1811 and taken to the farm of William Lyttleton at Hagley in the vicinity of Westbury near the brook which still bears his name. The ages of the two boys were not given in the Gazette report.

This first mention of the boy Quamby is significant for a number of reasons, not least because it provides the Tasmanian Aboriginal community with a reason to protect what later became known as Quamby's Brook which still divides the two former Aboriginal fire-farmed plains where it adjoins the suggested site of a new prison in northern Tasmania.

From the Baptism register of the Parish of St John's, Launceston, 1811: baptism no. 39: ' Charles Mountgarrett a native boy of VDL'; and no. 40 ' William Lyttleton Quamby a native boy of VDL ', both on 18 March 1811, the 213th and 214th children baptised in the colony of Van Diemen's Land. 3

The two other children baptised on this day were William and John Brumby, children of James and Elizabeth Brumby who were also married on the same day, one of the witnesses being Lieutenant William Lyttleton. All these ceremonies were conducted by the Reverend Knopwood. It could perhaps also be surmised that Lyttleton had passed William Lyttleton Quamby into the care of James and Elizabeth Brumby whose farm was in the same district as Lyttleton's.

Marriage register of Parish of St John's Launceston recording the wedding of Irish-born ships' surgeon Jacob Mountgarrett and Bridget Edwards on the same date, 18 March 1811, as the other baptisms and marriages described here. Note that Lyttleton and Brumby were the witnesses. Mountgarrett was the guardian of the other Aboriginal boy, Charles Mountgarrett Launceston, baptised at the same time as William Lyttleton Quamby.

James Brumby was born in 1771 in Lincolnshire, England and died in 1838 at Longford, Van Diemen's Land. He was a former soldier in the New South Wales Corps who came to Van Diemen's Land with Lieutenant-Colonel Paterson's detachment, landing at Port Dalrymple in November 1804. After his discharge from the British Army in December 1808 he remained as a settler and landowner in Van Diemen's Land until his death. He married an ex-convict Elizabeth Annesley (or Ainsley or Ainslie), also from Lincolnshire, on 18 March 1811 at St John's Church, Launceston - the same day as the baptisms - with William Lyttleton as one of the witnesses. The Australian Dictionary of Biography entry for James Brumby states that:

... James Brumby through his own efforts progressed from a private soldier to a well-to-do landowner. He was always ready to help others ... and there are instances of his kindness to the Aboriginals ... 4

James and Elizabeth had six children, of whom William (1804-1841) and John (1807-1825) were baptised on the same day as the two young Aborigines. The immediate circumstances of the two Aboriginal children after their baptisms are unknown but both would almost certainly have learned English and remained at least for a time with their adoptive families.

Also part of this closely connected group of settlers from the Westbury and Cressy districts were the Irish ex-convict political prisoner Richard and Ann(e) Dry who witnessed the marriage of Thomas Howard and Elizabeth Mills at Launceston on 12 March 1811. 5 Thomas Howard, the second witness at the Brumby marriage, was a free settler with a substantial business at the time selling meat to the government store in Launceston.

Knopwood's visit in March 1811 was his first to the north of Van Diemen's Land and over a three-week stay he christened 31 children and married 26 couples. 5 On a later visit Knopwood officiated at the confirmation of the marriage of Lieutenant William Lyttleton to Ann Hortle (or Hortell), daughter of an ex-convict, a private in the New South Wales Corps, on 21 March 1814 at Port Dalrymple. Jacob Mountgarrett had previously solemnised the marriage on 14 January 1811 in his capacity as J.P.

A clue about William Lyttleton Quamby's ultimate fate can be found in a report published in the Hobart Town Courier dated 18 March 1829. This was at the height of the Black Wars, in this part of the island waged between the Pallittorre people of the fertile Mole Creek and Meander fire-farmed plains and the British settlers pushing westwards in increasing numbers using the supply routes to the extensive land grants of the Van Diemen's Land Company.

This extract is of particular significance in that it describes an attack by a group of Aborigines of whom "many ... spoke good English but their words were extremely indecent ... four men a woman and a black child were killed." It is very likely that the murdered Aborigines included the English-speaking William Lyttleton Quamby, possibly wearing the stolen stock-keeper's red coat, together with his extended family. As this report describes, the massacre took place at Bullock's hunting ground at Nunamara, gateway to the picturesque St Patricks River valley, located between Mounts Barrow and Arthur.

As a result, the numbers of surviving Pallittorre were decimated.

In an ironic quirk of fate, Premier Peter Gutwein's family settled at Nunamara on their arrival in Tasmania in the 1960s and it will fall to him to decide upon the possible placement of a prison at Quamby's Brook with twenty per cent of its inmates of Aboriginal descent.

In the ﬁve years between 1827 and 1832 Malcolm Laing Smith, Police Magistrate for the Western Rivers, made a total of seventeen reports about Aborigines in his jurisdiction. In 1827 four stockmen were killed in separate incidents. This is a small number but a high percentage in terms of those working in such isolated locations. Between 1828 and 1831 thirteen separate incidents were reported, mainly robberies, and in two cases stockmen were assaulted or severely injured by Aborigines. 6

In March 1828, Governor Arthur informed the Colonial Secretary that 'it is necessary that a military station should be permanently established in the vicinity of the Western [i.e. Meander] River [at Westbury]. This was part of the governor's response to the escalating conflicts between white settlers and the Aboriginal inhabitants. 7

Henry Hellyer was a surveyor who explored most of the rugged North-West of Tasmania for his employer, the Van Diemen's Land Company (VDL Company), and wrote extensive journals and reports which are now held in various archives. Overall, it seems clear that Henry Hellyer accepted the VDL Company view that their royal charter from King George IV made the Aboriginal people of North-West Tasmania trespassers on company land.

In August 1830, while building a footbridge over the River Wey near its junction with the Hellyer River, Hellyer's camp at Weybridge was visited by George Augustus Robinson with his 'Friendly Mission' whose intent was to investigate claims of killings, including the Cape Grim massacre by VDL Company employees, and to remove all Aboriginal people from their land then relocate them to an offshore island. The party who visited Hellyer's camp included Truganini and her husband Wooredy.

In his diary entry for 12 August 1830 Robinson refers to Quamby as a freedom fighter when an unnamed person (probably Henry Hellyer) informed me of a stockkeeper called Paddy Heagon at the Retreat who had shot nineteen of the western natives with a swivel-gun charged with nails; and that a native named Quamby had disputed the land occupied by the whites and that he had successfully driven them off, but was he was afterwards killed with others. 8

The Retreat was a property on the outskirts of Deloraine granted to Hobart solicitor Galamiel Butler. Today the Ashley Youth Detention Centre is located on this property. It is remarkable that Hellyer gave Robinson the name of the aggressor, Heagon, that he knew about and could identify and name the Aborigine, Quamby, and also state that he was afterwards killed. Hellyer's account concurs with the date and circumstances of Quamby's death in March 1829 as reported in the Hobart Town Courier.

Lyndall Ryan in her ground-breaking book, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, refers to Quamby, a leader of the Pallittorre people, as being shot in the district in July 1830. 9 Lloyd Robson in his History of Tasmania, also repeats the story of the heroic Aboriginal resistance fighter, Quamby who disputed the land occupied by the colonists near Westbury. 10

Quamby's memorials are the Brook and the Bluff which continue his name and respect his memory, for those who know his story.

1. lison Alexander, 'Mathinna (c. 1835-?)', People Australia, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://ia.anu.edu.au/biography/mathinna-29655/text36623, accessed 19 March 2020.

2. Keith Windshuttle, The Fabrication of Aboriginal History: volume one: Van Diemen's Land 1803-1847 (2002). See also Windshuttle's article in , p. 24. http://www.kooriweb.org/foley/resources/pdfs/197.pdf.

3. Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, Hobart, registers of baptisms, RGD 32/1/1.

4. A.W. Campbell, 'Brumby, James (1771-1838)', Australian Dictionary of Biography , National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/brumby-james-1840/text2125, published first in hardcopy 1966, accessed online 29 March 2020.

5. See TAHO, RGD36/1/1 for relevant registers of marriages.

6. N.J.B. Plomley (ed.), Friendly Mission: the Tasmanian journals and papers of George Augustus Robinson , 1829-1834 (1966), p. 197.

7. Lloyd Robson, A History of Tasmania, volume 1: Van Diemen's Land from the earliest times to 1855 (1983).

John Hawkins has lived in Tasmania for 17 years. He has recreated with his wife Robyn a 19th century landscape over the Bentley Estate at Chudleigh. He is interested in the Tasmanian way of doing business. John was commissioned into the Diehards from Sandhurst in 1962. JOHN HAWKINS: A Proposed Prison at Westbury - Introduction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
William Lyttleton Quamby, Tasmanian Aboriginal Resistance Fighter - Part 1 - Tasmanian Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Introduction - In this two-part essay I will endeavour to place the life of the Tasmanian Aboriginal resistance fighter William Lyttleton Quamby into the context of his place and time.

# data[].attributes.headline
Australian Committee to discuss how to implement Uluru Statement from the Heart

# data[].attributes.subject
Australian Committee to discuss how to implement Uluru Statement from the Heart

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Former federal Indigenous affairs minister Fred Chaney has warned a push to recognise Aboriginal people in Western Australia's constitution will not make a major contribution towards reconciliation unless more people in the community have their say.

A bipartisan parliamentary committee is examining a recognition bill introduced by the Labor Member for the Kimberley Josie Farrer last year.

Public submissions closed last week and the committee is due to report in March.

Mr Chaney said while he supported the aim of the bill, more time was needed to consult with Aboriginal people across the state.

"I think the mistake we've made over the whole 50-plus years that I've been following this, is we set a timetable that suits us and we tend to leave the Aboriginal people behind," he said.

"Real consultation, really sharing views takes time.

"I think Josie Farrer is a very authentic voice for her people, but there are many Aboriginal voices and many Aboriginal tribes."

Mr Chaney's view was supported by Central Desert Native Title Services, which represents native title claimants across more than 800,000 square kilometres of land in the Goldfields, Pilbara and Kimberley regions.

In his submission to the committee, the services' chairman Terry Grose said he was concerned about the process and the timeframe.

"My understanding is that it is not practicably possible to get on the ground to canvass the issue until late February or early March due to a combination of school holidays, law business, the weather and availability of staff," he said.

"Central Desert applauds you for asking the question but we urge you to consider our concerns and would be pleased to work with you to find a workable way to meet your needs."

However, others support Ms Farrer's bill as it stands.

In its submission Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation said it was consulted as part of the drafting process.

"It is simple and without any legal controversy. It is important and long overdue," wrote the corporation's chief executive Simon Hawkins.

"Even symbolic constitutional changes like the ones in the bill are important to have as one of the tools with which we can continue to fashion a strong and permanent reconciliation between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities."

Premier Colin Barnett said he agreed that the process should not be rushed.

"Aboriginal people have a right to have a say, particularly about the wording of that recognition, and indeed some groups might not support the whole concept," he said.

"That's why I had some hesitation when the Labor Party tried to rush this in through Parliament.

"It's an important measure, it's a proper measure, but it needs to be done properly."

Ms Farrer was not available for interview but Labor spokeswoman Rita Saffioti said the bill was already overdue and needed to be made a priority.

"Aboriginal people have been waiting long enough," she said.

"I think it's something that has broad community support and we should all just get on with it.

"Labor did significant consultation on the bill and the Premier has an obligation to take this seriously and act quickly on it."

Posted 23 Jan 2015 Fri 23 Jan 2015 at 8:55am, updated 27 Jan 2015 Tue 27 Jan 2015 at 2:14am

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
‘Real consultation’ needed on WA Indigenous recognition bill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Former federal Indigenous affairs minister Fred Chaney warns a push to recognise Aboriginal people in Western Australia’s constitution will not make a major contribution towards reconciliation unless more people in the community have their say.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This picture is taken in the early 1900s at the Wyndham prison. Wyndam is the oldest and northernmost town in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. It was established in 1886 as a result of a gold rush at Halls Creek. However the circumstances and the story behind this picture remain unknown. The Aboriginals could have been arrested under the various local laws passed that forbid them from entering or being within a certain distance of named towns. They could also have been arrested for drinking or owning firearms which was illegal for them at various times. It's also possible that they have been rounded up to be moved to a reserve areas which were being created at the time and that these individuals did not want to move. It could even be a staged picture for tourists/publicity reasons.

In the 19th century Australia each prisoner carried an iron chain around his neck (weighing approximately 5 pounds - 2.3 kg) in the open where temperatures usually ranged between 35 and 45 degrees Celsius. It was secured by a padlock and individual prisoners were then chained to another man. Chains of prisoners had as many as nine or ten men attached to each other. Later a new method of chaining Aboriginal prisoners was decided upon. They were to be chained from the ankles, the chain was to pass inside the leg of the prisoners trousers and supported by a heavy belt around the waist. Prisoners could then be chained in pairs and "allowed" to work outside the prison walls. There were iron rings bolted to the walls of some jail cells where prisoners were believed to be chained for chained for prison discipline.

While the Indigenous people of Australia were subject to forced labor and experienced slavery like conditions, there was no slave trading. By the time that the British effectively subdued the indigenous Australian population slave trading was already illegal in the British Empire. Moreover there was no need. While there was a manpower shortage in the early colonial settlements, the colonial government responded by making convict labor available to private individuals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Australian Aborigines in chains at Wyndham prison, 1902

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This picture is taken in the early 1900s at the Wyndham prison. Wyndam is the oldest and northernmost town in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. It was established in 1886 as a result of a gold rush at Halls Creek. However the circumstances and the story behind this picture remain unknown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This site includes images, quotes and references to people who have passed. We have included them to acknowledge, honour and pay respect to their contribution and efforts to our struggles, our progress and achievements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This site includes images, quotes and references to people who have passed. We have included them to acknowledge, honour and pay respect to their contribution and efforts to our struggles, our progress and achievements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Equality and equity is one of the five key dimensions of reconciliation.

In the State of Reconciliation in Australia Report, equality is defined as 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples being in control of their life choices - enabling them to participate fully in the social, cultural and economic opportunities enjoyed by the wider Australian community.'

In the same report, equity refers to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians unique rights as First Peoples and their ability to freely exercise these rights.

It's important to acknowledge both equality and equity.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP):

affirms that Indigenous peoples are no less equal to all other peoples

recognises the rights of all peoples to be different and to be respected.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UNDRIP work together to promote humanity and diversity. When these declarations are recognised, respected and upheld, you can shape equal and equitable settings in learning environments that are free from discrimination and where all cultures feel welcome.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
recognise respect rights aboriginal torres strait islander reconciliation action plan rap narragunnawali schools early learning education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Equality and equity is one of the five key dimensions of reconciliation. In the State of Reconciliation in Australia Report, equality is defined as 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples being in control of their life choices - enabling them to participate fully in the social, cultural and economic opportunities enjoyed by the wider Australian community.'

# data[].attributes.headline
1938 Jan 26 150 years after the anniversary of British Settlement.  Day of Mourning.

# data[].attributes.subject
1938 Jan 26 150 years after the anniversary of British Settlement.  Day of Mourning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dispossession

The Gurindji people had lived on their homelands in what is now the Victoria River area of the Northern Territory for tens of thousands of years when in 1883 the colonial government granted almost 3,000 square kilometres of their country to the explorer and pastoralist Nathaniel Buchanan.

The Gurindji would have had no appreciation that someone from outside their community 'owned' part of their country.

In 1884, 1,000 cattle were moved onto the land and 10 years later there were 15,000 cattle and 8,000 bullocks. This put incredible pressure on the environment, and the system of land management the Gurindji had developed over many millennia started to break down.

This pattern was repeated across Australia as pastoralists took possession of First Nations lands and stocked them with cattle and sheep.

Traditional ways of life came under intense pressure in this clash between Western and First Nations land usage. First Nations peoples generally wanted to stay on their land; their lives were so connected to the environment there was an existential need for them to remain on Country.

This necessity to stay played into the hands of pastoralists as the cattle and sheep stations required cheap labour, and over the next 70 years First Nations peoples became an intrinsic but exploited part of the cattle industry across Northern Australia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
1966: Gurindji strike (or Wave Hill Walk-Off) led by Vincent Lingiari

# data[].attributes.body
of Indigenous Peoples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and good faith in the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by States in accordance with the Charter,

# data[].attributes.headline
1938 - Jack Patten's 10 Point Plan - Published in the Abo Call 

# data[].attributes.subject
1938 - Jack Patten's 10 Point Plan - Published in the Abo Call 

# data[].attributes.body
Jack Patten published the 10 Point Plan following the 1938- Day of Mourning- in response to the celebration of January 26, 1938.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"From little things, big things grow": Paul Kelly, Kev Carmody remember Gough in song

# data[].attributes.body
Racial discrimination – what’s that? a child's view

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite discrimination and exclusion, thousands of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have served in the Australian Defence Forces since the 1860s and possibly earlier.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While many people think that the Referendum gave Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples the right to vote, this wasn’t the case.

# data[].attributes.body
3 biggest myths of the 1967 referendum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1967, 90.77 per cent of Australians voted yes for a change that they believed would improve the lives of Indigenous peoples.

But as with any historic moment, there are myths and mysteries about the referendum - and about what people hoped it would accomplish and what it actually achieved.

Myth: The referendum gave Aboriginal people citizenship rights and the right to vote

Perhaps the greatest myth that persists about the 1967 referendum is that it resulted in Aboriginal people getting the right to vote or becoming citizens.

In fact, it did neither of these two things.

The two changes that did occur were, firstly, that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were to be included in the census, and secondly that the Federal Government was given the power to make laws for Indigenous people.

A poster for the 1967 referendum.(Supplied: State Library of New South Wales )

Up until that point, Indigenous people were the responsibility of the states.

At the time of the referendum, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people could vote in every part of Australia, with the Queensland laws being the last to change in 1965.

Myth: The 1967 referendum changed the lives of Indigenous people

Constitutional change, like the one achieved in 1967, does not mean transformations occur overnight.

Many Indigenous people say they had heightened expectations about what would be achieved by the referendum, and then woke up to find that nothing had changed.

This lack of transformation was one of the factors that drove the rights movement that emerged in the 1970s.

The Tent Embassy, established in 1972 on the lawns of Parliament House in Canberra is a good example of this energised political movement.

The focus shifted from a campaign for inclusion to one that asserted particular Indigenous rights, such as land rights.

Before 1967, section 51(26) of the constitution, the "races power", gave the Federal Government the power to make laws in relation to, "the people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws."

The referendum removed the words "other than the aboriginal people in any State" - giving the Federal Government the power to make laws in relation to Indigenous people.

Over time, the races power has been used to pass legislation that has been considered beneficial for Indigenous people, most notably the Native Title Act, 1993.

But the idea that the 1967 referendum dramatically improved life for Aboriginal Australians at the time is a falsehood.

Myth: TheFederal Government would use the races power benevolently

A large part of the campaign for constitutional changes in 1967 that related to the "races power" was underpinned by the assumption that if the Federal Government was given the power to make laws for Indigenous people, it would do a better job of it than the states had. (It's worth noting here, that the Federal Parliament already had powers to make laws for Indigenous people living in Australian territories.)

Underpinning this assumption was the belief by campaigners that the Federal Government would only use theraces power for the benefit of Aboriginal people.

However, nothing in the wording of that section of the constitution makes any mention of the need for the power to be exercised for the benefit of Aboriginal people.

This has been confirmed by the High Court, which has ruled that if the Federal Government has the power to grant a benefit it has the power to repeal that benefit.

In the case of Kartinyeri v Commonwealth (1998), traditional owners had been relying on the rights under the federal Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act (1984) to stop the building of a bridge they believed would affect one of their sacred sites.

But the Federal Government repealed the legislation to the extent that it would not apply over this particular area.

The traditional owners challenged that decision. One of their arguments was that when the Australian people voted to change the constitution it was clearly with the understanding that the exercise of the power to make laws for Indigenous people would be used beneficially.

However, the High Court said that when the Federal Government was granted the protections, it also retained the power to take those protections away.

Only Justice Michael Kirby dissented.

After considering the history of the changes made in 1967, he concluded that the exercise of the power should be non-discriminatory.

Fact: More than 90 per cent of Australians voted for change

Above are some of the myths that surround the 1967 referendum.

But one thing that remains true is that never has a referendum had such an overwhelming "yes" vote.

The fact that 90.77 per cent of Australians voted for a change they believed would improve the lives of Indigenous people is something we should celebrate.
Larissa Behrendt is a professor of law and the director of research at Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning at UTS. Larissa is a Eualeyai-Kamilaroi woman, a NSW Land Commissioner, barrister and the presenter of Speaking Out on ABC Radio.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The three biggest myths of the 1967 referendum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1967, 90.77 per cent of Australians voted yes for a change that they believed would improve the lives of Indigenous peoples. But as with any historic moment, there are myths and mysteries about the referendum - and about what people hoped it would accomplish and what it actually achieved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At a demonstration, Faith Bandler (right) and her daughter Lilon (2R) appeal to national unity as grounds for constitutional amendment. Aboriginal Studies Press

On May 27, 1967, campaigners for Aboriginal rights and status won the most-decisive referendum victory in Australian history.

The referendum attracted more than 90% of voters in favour of deleting the two references to Aborigines in Australia's Constitution. Campaigners for a "Yes" vote successfully argued those references were discriminatory and debarred Aboriginal people from citizenship.

Ever since, and as we approach the 1967 referendum's 50th anniversary, it has been popularly remembered as the moment when Aboriginal people won equal rights - even the right to vote. In fact, the referendum did not secure those outcomes.

By 1967, all Aboriginal adults already held the right to vote in federal, state and territory elections. Racial discriminations had been removed from the statute books at the federal level and in all states and territories except Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. And even those three laggards were moving toward legal equality.

So what was achieved?

Constitutionally, the 1967 referendum secured the amendment of Section 51 (xxvi) and the deletion of Section 127.

The former section specified the federal parliament could make laws with respect to the:

... people of any race, other than the Aboriginal race in any state, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws.

The words "other than the Aboriginal race in any state" were deleted.

The latter section stipulated that in:

... reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a state or other part of the Commonwealth, Aboriginal natives shall not be counted.

Neither section prevented Aboriginal people from exercising the same legal rights as other Australians. The rights of Aborigines were abridged not by the Constitution, but by laws enacted by federal and state parliaments.

How was the campaign run?

Campaigners for a "Yes" vote, however, told a different story. They insisted constitutional change was a necessary precondition for Aboriginal equality.

Yet the campaigners' ambitions went beyond legal equality. They sought the inclusion of Aboriginal people as respected members of the national community. This had been a principal goal of Aboriginal and pro-Aboriginal activists since the early 20th century.

The 1967 referendum was the culmination of a long struggle for rights and respect, for social esteem as well as equality before the law.

Accordingly, publicity material for the "Yes" campaign did not focus narrowly on the legal implications of constitutional change. More often, it exhorted Australians to welcome Aboriginal people into the fellowship of the nation. As the opening line of a popular campaign song ran:

Vote "Yes" for Aborigines, they want to be Australians too.

Effectively, the proponents of a Yes vote transformed what could have been a dry, legalistic tinkering with the Constitution into a plebiscite on Australian nationhood.

In achieving this transformation, the campaigners held an unusual advantage. Uniquely among Australian referendums, for the 1967 question on Aborigines there was no campaign for a "No" vote. And even the government broke with convention by providing, in the official advice to voters, only the case for "Yes". Consequently, campaigners could talk up the importance of the changes they advocated virtually unrestrained.

New South Wales campaign director Faith Bandler told voters:

When you write Yes in the lower square of your ballot paper you are holding out the hand of friendship and wiping out nearly 200 years of injustice and inhumanity.

Hyperbole of this kind is not unusual in political campaigns. What was unusual is that there was no organised opposition to contest the claims of the Yes campaigners, or to counter them with equally extravagant rhetoric for the negative.

The lack of a "No" campaign undoubtedly boosted the "Yes" vote. It was equally important in shaping remembrance of the referendum.

Lacking an opposition, the "Yes" campaigners had a virtual monopoly on the narratives about what the referendum meant. Their expansive conception of the referendum as a plebiscite on nationhood prevailed.

A symbolic win

The triumph of the "Yes" vote was primarily a symbolic victory. It did not win rights for Aborigines, and the government of the day did not utilise the extension of Commonwealth powers secured by amendment of Section 51 (xxvi). Nor did Gough Whitlam's government after it came to power in 1972.

Whitlam did, however, invoke the resounding "Yes" vote of 1967 as a moral mandate for change in Aboriginal affairs.

Symbolic victories are important. Shortly after hearing of the massive "Yes" majority, veteran Aboriginal activist Pastor Doug Nicholls proclaimed it was:

... evidence that Australians recognise Aborigines are part of the nation.

As Nicholls knew from three decades of involvement in Aboriginal politics, recognition of his people as part of the nation was a hard-fought achievement.

Regardless of its slight legal consequences, the 1967 referendum was an important event in Australian history. It was a symbolic affirmation of Aboriginal people's acceptance into the community of the nation.

Yet the referendum affirmed only the broad principle of national inclusion. On how that principle should be translated into practice - on the terms of inclusion - the referendum was silent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Right wrongs, write Yes': what was the 1967 referendum all about?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On May 27, 1967, campaigners for Aboriginal rights and status won the most-decisive referendum victory in Australian history. The referendum attracted more than 90% of voters in favour of deleting the two references to Aborigines in Australia's Constitution. Campaigners for a "Yes" vote successfully argued those references were discriminatory and debarred Aboriginal people from citizenship.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Archives holds records relating to the 1967 Referendum. It saw the highest YES vote ever recorded, in favour of removing content from the Australian Constitution that discriminated against Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander peoples.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Saturday 27th of May marks the 50th anniversary of the 1967 Referendum in which Australians voted overwhelmingly to amend the Constitution to allow the Commonwealth to make laws for Aboriginal people and include them in the Census of Population and Housing conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, commencing with the 1971 Census.

The referendum put the following question to the Australian people:
Do you approve the proposed law for the alteration of the Constitution entitled 'An Act to alter the Constitution so as to omit certain words relating to the people of the Aboriginal race in any state and so that Aboriginals are to be counted in reckoning the population'?
The proposed law (Constitution Alteration (Aboriginals) 1967) sought to give the Commonwealth Parliament power to make laws with respect to Aboriginal people wherever they lived in Australia. It also sought to make it possible to fully include Aboriginal people in the national five-yearly census. The amendment deleted part of section 51 (xxvi) of the Constitution and repealed section 127.

Turnout for the referendum was almost 94 per cent, and the result was a strong 'Yes' vote, with a significant majority in all six states and an overall majority of almost 91 per cent. The results of the referendum vote are set out below:

The referendum also put a separate question on a proposed law seeking to remove the connection in the Constitution between the number of members of the House of Representatives and the number of senators; this question was not carried. The estimated cost of the referendum was $1,041,000 (approx. $12.9m in 2016 prices).
Background
The reasons for the previous and explicit exclusion of Aboriginal people by sections 51 (xxvi) and 127 of the Constitution are not entirely clear. However, the effect of this exclusion was the implementation by the states of policies that could broadly be termed 'assimilationist', and laws that resulted in Aboriginal peoples' dispossession, oppression and alienation.

Following longstanding calls for greater Commonwealth involvement in Indigenous affairs, in the 1960s the pressure for change built rapidly. In the face of evidence that assimilationist policies had failed, and with Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal activists drawing attention to the denial of civil rights and discrimination that these policies entailed, the plight of Aboriginal people became a significant political issue. Activists ran petition campaigns to amend the Constitution in support of Indigenous civil rights, and bills seeking to amend the Constitution in favour of Aboriginal people were debated in the Federal Parliament.

In 1967, in response to a Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI) petition calling for a referendum on sections 51 and 127 of the Constitution, the Holt Coalition Government introduced the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginals) Bill 1967 to the Parliament. The legislation was passed unanimously.

Because no parliamentarian had voted against the proposals relating to Aborigines, the Government only prepared a 'Yes' case for the referendum. The campaign for a 'Yes' vote gained widespread support among the Australian public and this was reflected in the final vote.
Impact
The significance of the 1967 Referendum has been somewhat obscured by a number of myths. These include the misconceptions that the Referendum granted Aboriginal people citizenship, the right to vote, wage equality and access to social security, among other things.

In terms of its practical significance, perhaps the main achievement of the Referendum was to raise the expectations of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people regarding Aboriginal rights and welfare.

The Referendum also had a great deal of symbolic significance. As John Gardiner-Garden has observed, the event 'has come to act as a form of historical shorthand for a decade of change which began in the early 1960s and ended in the early 1970s'. The Referendum signalled a general shift in the way that Australian governments approached Indigenous issues, away from assimilationist policies towards policies based around self-determination, reconciliation and, more recently, 'closing the gap'.
Further reading
J Gardiner-Garden, The origin of Commonwealth involvement in Indigenous Affairs and the 1967 Referendum, Background paper, 11, 1996-97, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 1997.

J Gardiner-Garden, The 1967 Referendum-history and myths, Research brief, 11, 2006-07, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2007.

Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS), ' The referendum Australia had to have ', AIATSIS website.

National Museum Australia, ' The Referendum, 1957-67 ', Collaborating for Indigenous Rights 1957-1973 website.

Parliamentary Library, Parliamentary Handbook of the Commonwealth of Australia, 44th Parliament, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2014.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Saturday 27th of May marks the 50th anniversary of the 1967 Referendum in which Australians voted overwhelmingly to amend the Constitution to allow the Commonwealth to make laws for Aboriginal people and include them in the Census of Population and Housing conducted by the Austra