[Editor: This article, reporting on a speech in federal parliament by Alfred Deakin, regarding the Immigration Restriction Bill, was published in The Toowoomba Chronicle and Darling Downs General Advertiser (Toowoomba, Qld.), 14 September 1901. When it became law, the Immigration Restriction Act formed the foundation of the White Australia Policy.]
Immigration Restriction Bill.
Brilliant speech by the Hon. A. Deakin.
The education test.
“Desirable Europeans not to be excluded.
“Bill introduced to exclude coloured aliens.
“To keep Australia for the white man.”
(By Telegraph.)
Melbourne, September 12.
On the second reading of the Immigration Restriction Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, the Hon. A. Deakin said no subject that had as yet been discussed was surrounded by such grave issues as the one now before the House.
We were not wasting time by dealing with this measure in its larger aspect. There was no stain on our lips when we spoke with inflexible firmness on a subject upon which the people of Australia had declared themselves. The note that had been struck by the Australian ban was that they should remain one people, without any admixture of races, on whom there was no necessity to reflect even by implication.
Our Constitution marked a distinct advance on that of the United States, as it provided for dealing with the difficulty in the amplest shape. We had power here to deal expressly with all people within our borders. We had power over immigration and emigration. We had these undefined powers with regard to external affairs which might slumber for some time, so that Australia entered into this matter fully equipped to deal with it.
There was about 80,000 declared aliens in Australia, of whom about one-half were Chinese, and 9000 came from the Polynesian Islands, the remainder being made up in various ways. We had to fear, not an Australia protected by State powers, but an Australia protected so little in this way that it was not protected at all. It was for this reason that so much stress had been laid by the Government on the issue of a white Australia.
In a few days a measure would be introduced to deal with Polynesian labour, and in due course a measure would be necessary to bring the regulations with regard to Chinese into line. The cause of our action was looked upon with old-world eyes, and we could understand the amazement with which our intended legislation was received. However limited the future of Australia might be, the sacrifices we were making were nothing in comparison with the salvation from the great evils that were affecting the United States. This note of nationality gave dignity and importance to this debate.
A united race meant one inspired by the same ideas, and before our temporary barriers were set aside it was this unity that had saved us from the unhappy quarrels which had set the Republics of South America against each other. We stood shoulder to shoulder at the outset of our career for a white Australia. (Cheers.)
It was the “Monroe doctrine” of the Commonwealth of Australia. It was no mere election manifesto, but one of the principles by which the Commonwealth was to be guided. (Hear, hear.)
Victoria had in 1855 legislated against Chinese, and he was a member of the Government which in 1883 declared that not a man connected with the Phoenix Park tragedy should be allowed to land in Victoria. (Cheers.)
He had afterwards assisted at the conference held in Sydney in 1896 to deal with the invasion of Chinese, and this conference secured a series of Acts which were accepted by the mother-country, and resulted in the influx of Chinese being put a stop to.
In 1897 the Premiers met and decided on similar legislation regarding other undesirable aliens, when the Premiers visited England and had a conference with Mr. Chamberlain. Members had asked why the Government had not put on the face of the bill the description of aliens whom it was desired to exclude. What Mr. Chamberlain said in 1897 referred to an exactly similar measure to that which it was now sought to substitute for the Government proposal. Mr. Chamberlain then said that to exclude all Asiatics would be so painful to her Majesty that such an unnecessary slight should be avoided. What Australia had to consider was, said Mr. Chamberlain, the character of such immigration, and it was matter, he contended, for friendly consultation. Mr. Chamberlain further urged the advantages of the Natal system.
This was plain and frank, and in every way a friendly request to the Australian Governments to adopt a certain course. This he thought was a reasonable request as long as the desired end was secured. It had been held that while an educational standard would exclude a great many, it would not exclude all those we wanted to keep out. All Syrians and Chinese, for instance, would fail to undergo the tests, and so would most of the Japanese, as it was only the lowest class of Japanese who came over here. He held, therefore, that the educational clause would be operative.
New South Wales had adopted a similar measure, while Queensland had not. In New South Wales in the last six years the total arrivals were 839, and the departures 2296. The test in New South Wales was in any European language. In Queensland, for a similar period, the arrivals of Polynesians were 6700, and 4700 left, while of other races 8000 had entered, against an outflow of 6000. This showed the effectiveness of the education test. Queensland without such an Act had attracted 8000 aliens, against 739 who came to New South Wales; and taking the Chinese away from the Queensland figures there were still about 4000 other undesirable aliens.
The most recent despatch defining the attitude of the British Government had reference to a Queensland bill to which the Royal assent was withheld. The grounds were the same as were indicated by Mr. Chamberlain in his interview with the Premiers, and they were, moreover, emphasised with regard to Japan. Nothing could be plainer than this despatch. If members thought the proposed educational test was not sufficient it was for the House to fix upon a more rigid one. We had this power in our hands, and Mr. Chamberlain had drawn particular attention to there being no objection to an educational test in the despatch.
This was answer to those who asked why the Government had adopted the particular attitude they had done. They had felt it their duty to comply with a request couched in most respectful language. It was possible to overlook that a nation which had taken such a high position as Japan should resent being placed on a level with untutored savages from Asia. Mere consideration of common courtesy should induce us to differentiate between our treatment of such people as the Japanese and uneducated Asiatics. Yet he held that Australia had more to fear from the Japanese than from any other Asiatics, and their exclusion must be insisted upon.
The Government of Queensland had already entered into an amicable treaty with Japan, which was working very well. What we had to provide for was the exclusion of such people in a manner which would be least offensive. The Government of Japan was not desirous of losing its better class of citizens. She wanted these men at home, where they were of more advantage than in Australia; and there was reason to believe that the Government of Japan would meet the Commonwealth even more freely than it had Queensland.
At the same time, the Government thoroughly endorsed the policy of prohibition of immigration under contract. (Hear, hear.)
He had shown why the Government had proposed an educational test, and it was the intention of the Government to advocate it strongly, but this should not say that there would not be further legislation. It had been suggested that the action of the Government had been dictated by some secret coercion on the part of the British Government. Such a conception was absolutely without foundation. (Cheers.) It carried its own refutation on it face. The whole theory of interference of this kind was false and pernicious. (Sir William McMillan: “No one said so.”) Mr. Deakin rejoined that the hon. member should not interrupt. He had not called attention to certain passages in his (Sir William McMillan’s) speech.
A declaration for a White Australia on the one hand did not interfere with our loyalty to the Empire on the other. (Cheers.) The Government was under no obligation to the Empire that every Australian was not under. Until we were challenged, it was in the highest degree mischievous to set up a false bogey, and obscure the issues.
THERE WAS NO INTENTION TO KEEP OUT EITHER GERMANS, SCANDINAVIANS, OR MEMBERS OF LIKE RACES. THESE PEOPLE HAD HELPED TO BUILD UP AUSTRALIA. CONSIDERABLE POWER WAS ASKED FOR ON BEHALF OF THE EXECUTIVE, NOT THAT THE EXECUTIVE WANTED THIS POWER, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS NECESSARY.
THIS BILL WAS INTENDED TO EXCLUDE COLOURED ALIENS AND UNDESIRABLE WHITES, BUT NOT THE CLASS OF WHITES TO WHICH THE COMMONWEALTH OWED SO MUCH. IT DID NOT MATTER WHETHER GERMANS, SCANDINAVIANS, ETC., COULD FULFIL THE EDUCATIONAL TEST OR NOT. WE HAD HERE THE OPPORTUNITY OF SECURING THE CONTINENT FROM AN INFLUX OF COLOURED ALIENS. (Cheers.)
Source:
The Toowoomba Chronicle and Darling Downs General Advertiser (Toowoomba, Qld.), 14 September 1901, p. 3
Editor’s notes:
The use of upper case text in the last two paragraphs is as per the usage of upper case text in the original article.
Deakin’s reference to the Phoenix Park tragedy was in relation to the blocking of undesirable migrants coming into Australia; in the original Hansard report of Deakin’s speech, he refers to Victoria (previously known as the Port Phillip district) blocking the immigration of convicts in 1849, the Chinese in 1855, and anyone connected with the Phoenix Park murders (the latter being radical Irish nationalists or Irish republicans) in 1883.
See: 1) House of Representatives, “Immigration Restriction Bill: Second Reading: Speech: Thursday, 12 September 1901”, Commonwealth of Australia Parliamentary Debates
Act = an Act of parliament, a law (in its written form, a law is called a “statute”)
See: 1) “Act of parliament”, Wikipedia
2) “Statute”, Wikipedia
A. Deakin = Alfred Deakin (1856-1919) Victorian parliamentarian 1879-1900, federal parliamentarian 1901-1913, and second Prime Minister of Australia (he served for three separate terms as Prime Minister: 1903-1904, 1905-1908, and 1909-1910); he was born in Collingwood (Melbourne, Vic.) in 1856, and died in South Yarra (Melbourne, Vic.) in 1919
See: 1) R. Norris, “Alfred Deakin (1856–1919)”, Australian Dictionary of Biography
2) “Death of Mr. Deakin: Brilliant career ends: Thrice Prime Minister”, The Herald (Melbourne, Vic.), 7 October 1919, p. 1
3) “Alfred Deakin”, Wikipedia
alien = a foreigner (someone who was not born in the country, i.e. a person from a foreign land); someone who is not a citizen of a country; (in a racial context) a non-white foreigner (can also refer to someone born in the country, but who is of foreign ethnic origin); someone who belongs to a different race or ethnicity; in an early Australian context, someone of non-British or non-white origin
bill = a proposed law, or an amendment to an existing law
See: “Bill (law)”, Wikipedia
bogey = an imagined cause for fear or alarm (may also refer to: someone or something which causes fear or alarm; a frightening or haunting specter, especially a “bogeyman”); an evil or mischievous spirit; a demon, ghost, goblin, or another hostile supernatural creature; the Devil (also spelt: bogie)
Chamberlain = Joseph Chamberlain (1836-1914), British politician; he was born in Camberwell (Surrey, England) in 1836, served as the United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for the Colonies (1895-1903), and died in Birmingham (England) in 1914
See: “Joseph Chamberlain”, Wikipedia
Commonwealth = the Commonwealth of Australia; the Australian nation, federated on 1 January 1901
despatch = (an alternative spelling of “dispatch”) a communication, memo, message, or report (especially an official report sent as a matter of urgency, or a military communication sent to a headquarters or to a commanding officer)
Empire = in the context of early Australia, the British Empire
Executive = the political executive of a state or nation; the body of administrators and/or politicians which has administrative, decision-making, and supervisory powers over a state or nation
held = maintained or expressed an opinion
Hon. = an abbreviation of “honorary” (in a parliamentary or political context, it is used as an abbreviation of the term “honourable” which is used as a style to refer to government ministers, or as a courtesy to members of parliament)
House = (in the context of the Australian federal politics) the House of Representatives; can also refer to Parliament House, or to the federal Upper House (the Senate)
member = (in the context of parliament or parliamentarians) Member of Parliament
mother-country = (in the context of early Australia) Great Britain; can also refer to England specifically (can also be spelt without a hyphen, i.e. mother country)
Phoenix Park tragedy = the murder of Lord Frederick Cavendish (Chief Secretary of Ireland) and Thomas Henry Burke (Under-Secretary of Ireland) in Phoenix Park (Dublin, Ireland) on 6 May 1882; Burke was the target of a planned assassination by members of the Invincibles (a radical Irish nationalist organisation), whilst Cavendish (who had only just arrived in Ireland to fill the role of Chief Secretary, and was not recognised by the attackers) was murdered for being a witness to the killing of Burke
See: 1) “Phoenix Park murders: assassination, Dublin, Ireland [1882]”, Encyclopaedia Britannica
2) “Phoenix Park Murders”, Wikipedia
3) “Irish National Invincibles”, Wikipedia
4) “The Phœnix Park tragedy”, The Gippsland Farmers’ Journal and Traralgon, Heyfield, and Rosedale News (Traralgon, Vic.), 28 April 1887, p. 4
Premier = the person who ranks first in importance, position, or rank; the leader of a country, state, or province; the leading politician (the premier politician) of a country; (in the context of the Commonwealth of Australia) the Prime Minister; in modern Australia, the term “Premier” is normally used to refer to the head of a State government, whilst the term “Prime Minister” is normally used to refer to the head of the Federal government; prior to Federation, the head of an Australian colony could be referred to as “Premier” or “Prime Minister” (the leading Minister), although the terms “Colonial Secretary” and “Chief Secretary” were also used (depending on the arrangement or structure of the colonial government)
William McMillan = Sir William McMillan (1850-1926), businessman and politician; he was born in Londonderry (Ireland) in 1850; came to Australian in 1869, served (as a free-trader) as a Member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly (1887-1898) and as a Member of the House of Representatives (1901-1903), and died in Woollahra (Sydney, NSW) in 1926
See: 1) A. W. Martin, “Sir William McMillan (1850–1926)”, Australian Dictionary of Biography
2) “William McMillan (Australian politician)”, Wikipedia
[Editor: Changed “carried its its own” to “carried its own”.]
[Editor: The original text has been separated into paragraphs.]
Leave a Reply