Canberra

I am very fortunate in that the majority of the boys sent to this district ring true and so they make it easier in finding work for others. It is surprising though what a lot of damage can be done by a boy who is not the right type.

There are a number of Garland’s half-yearly and annual reports and some news cuttings on the work of the Church of England Immigration Council which brought some 1 600 people, the majority youth migrants to the state over some six to seven years until assisted migration was ended during the Depression. Garland wrote in his Seventh Annual Report, 25 July 1932:

Unfortunately immigration remains suspended… after-care (however) on behalf of immigrants already here is more required than ever… departures, but the epidemic of homesickness amongst the immigrants is subsiding… the Council has devoted considerable attention to the placing of young Queenslanders on the land, and with some measure of success.

Canberra

These migrants will be selected in London by the Church Army acting for, and on behalf of, this committee… These lads will be drawn for the most part from the Church Army Training Farm… The Church of England undertakes to exercise pastoral care and supervision over them in Australia.

In reply, the Governor-General’s secretary commended the Church’s initiative.

Canberra

Following upon a conference with State Immigration authorities on 20 January 1948, it has now been decided that institutions accommodating both Australian children and child migrants will be eligible for financial assistance.

Peterkin made formal application to Immigration Minister, Arthur Calwell, 1 April 1948, for assistance with a £19,000 development: a modern home for the girls at Swan, and a dormitory wing at the Coogee seaside property. There is a round of correspondence following the request of the Archbishop of Perth to send Mr A A Robertson to the UK to review the recruiting situation for the church; and a number of inspection reports.

Canberra

At a meeting of the Commonwealth and State Ministers held at Canberra on 15 January 1947, it was agreed that contributions by the Commonwealth and States should be regarded as a grant repayable on demand, without interest, on the understanding that repayment would not be sought except in the event of the winding up of the organisation or its facilities being used for a purpose other than of child or youth migrants. It was also agreed that the Commonwealth should take the necessary action on behalf of itself and the State concerned for the making of grants, the taking of security and the execution of deeds. The Commonwealth undertook to pay the total amount of the agreed Commonwealth and State contributions to the organisations which were to receive the grants and to claim reimbursement from the states concerned.

There are copies of draft agreements proposed between the Commonwealth and the Anglican authorities in Tasmania and after correspondence on these drafts there is a copy of the signed agreement. Approval was not granted until 10 January 1952. Meanwhile, building costs had risen; there were further negotiations; the Government grant was increased.

Canberra

As you know the Commonwealth Government is anxious to assist both religious and non-denominational bodies to bring children from the UK to Australia under approved migration schemes… voluntary organisations have the facilities for the accommodation and proper welfare of the children concerned and are well-equipped under Government supervision to care for the children.

The Council of Empire Settlement was anxious to be involved, but found recruiting suitable children extremely difficult. Miss E F Jones, the Hon. Secretary wrote to Australia House, 26 September 1949:

In spite of the fact that postwar child migration has been in operation for nearly three years, we are of opinion that Great Britain is not reconciled to the great opportunities and advantages which Australia offers to the children… of 52 Local Authorities, only two had submitted children for migration. Therefore, the sources of supply are limited to (i) (occasional) parents applying direct to our offices as a result of reading about our work in the National and Church press; (ii) Church of England institutions; (iii) two Local Government authorities.

Overall, the Church was involved only in a small way with postwar child migration, mainly to the Swan Homes near Perth.

Canberra

The Council assists immigrants of any denomination… we want contented settlers… we notice with satisfaction the courteous acknowledgement by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Brisbane, Dr J Duhig of our including in our nominations members of his church.

There are newspaper cuttings around the work of the Council, a copy of the unprinted fourth report, and minutes of some meetings. Garland was a ‘true believer’ in migration, and as unemployment rose, he tried to encourage the Government to foster immigration, but was swimming against the tide.

Perth

The Church of England has created a Provincial Immigration Committee which negotiates on child migration matters… they are confident that the continual flow of children can be maintained from England for many years… all the dormitories have been renovated… the home at Middle Swan has an excellent Trade Training School… modern gymnasium… (overall) an excellent effort.

There is correspondence over financial assistance for new buildings.

Adelaide

I hold that Migration… (1) Must be advantageous to the country which the migrant leaves; (2) Must be acceptable to the country receiving the migrant; (3) Must be beneficial to the migrant… and to fail in any of these conditions is to fail in all’. The migration of boys was discussed on p. 17 in these terms: ‘The Salvation Army’s scheme of migration for boys includes a short training in elementary agriculture on their Hadleigh (Essex) farms under ideal conditions… Boys are also accepted for training at the Salvation Army farms at Riverview near Brisbane, and at Putaruru in New Zealand. Such boys are not given the training at Hadleigh, although they are assembled there for a short testing prior to embarkation. Overall, 6 000 boys have been trained.

General Evangeline Booth sent a copy of the brochure to the Minister of the Interior, 14 May 1937:

We trust these principles will find favour with delegates to the Imperial Conference.

R H Wheeler studied the booklet and wrote a memorandum for the Minister, 14 July 1937, which included:

The forte of the Army was the attention paid to after-care… the Commonwealth was singularly fortunate in the selection of Salvation Army officers who controlled migration activities at this end… Brigadier Imrie and Brigadier Wright.

The Prime Minister commended the Army for its brochure and its long assistance with migration.

At the request of Commissioner Vlas, the Territorial Commander for Holland, I went to Amsterdam a few days ago to discuss with Dutch authorities the question of emigration of Dutch nationals to Australia.

These suggestions and impressions were passed on to the Ministry for the Interior when Colonel Howard interviewed the Minister on 12 April regarding Salvation Army migration activities in general, including the proposal to bring some people from the Netherlands. Mr T H Garrett, wrote a short memorandum after the interview for the file:

The Minister indicated that under the migration policy the Commonwealth would welcome the introduction of Dutch people of non-Jewish race.

Howard was to place his proposal in writing. There are many copies of Howard’s subsequent detailed proposal in the file. On 10 June 1938, Garrett replied. The Government approved the Salvation Army plan including the introduction of youths between 15 and 18 years of age for farm work:

The migrants introduced were not to be of Jewish race, and the Army was to be responsible for their reception, placement and after-care… and the repatriation to Holland of any who proved unsuitable during their first five years in Australia.

The war intervened before the plan could be placed into effect.

Canberra

Canberra

… the only outside organisation handling migration to Australia in any effective way is the Salvation Army… invaluable work in after-care and welfare of migrants… recommend the £1500 grant… faithful service… wise expenditure.

However, not all agreed. Senator Wilson wrote to the Prime Minister, 15 April 1924:

… the claims of the Army are extravagant.

Meanwhile, the Oversea Settlement Committee (UK) was willing to pay half the ascertained cost of after-care up to a maximum of £3 per migrant: 1 140 migrants. In the end, the Salvation Army received £1,500 per year, 10% of passage money loans its officers collected, £5 per head for each boy received at Riverview and a further grant of £500 towards publicity and other expenses promoting migration in the UK. Three years later, the subsidy was reviewed.

All the boys migrated under Salvation Army auspices have to go through the six weeks or more training at Hadleigh… some lads had prior farming experience… proselytising… money matters unsatisfactory… [On the other hand] a large proportion of boys applying at Australia House through the Labour Exchanges are below the standards of weight and height for age… they droop, slouch and smoke too much… for them, farm training is desirable.

There is no comment on this report in the file.

‘Charlie’ was a Sunderland lad, 16 years of age… On the liner Vedic, the party sailed from London on December 17, and Charlie’s heart was gay with hope and strong in the knowledge of sin forgiven.

There is correspondence between L S Amery, the British Migration Representative in Australia, and Lord Stonehaven, the Governor-General, on the training and settlement of boys in Queensland. Government tended to be satisfied with the Army’s work. On 20 May 1927, Mr A J Jones, the Acting Premier in Queensland wrote to the Lieutenant-Governor in Brisbane:

The Queensland Government has agreed to contribute to the Salvation Army one half the cost of the reception and settlement expenses of 100 boys per annum to be introduced by the Salvation Army and given agricultural training at the Riverview farm.

A useful three-page summary of the Government’s funding for Riverview follows. There are ‘Notes on Salvation Army Training Farm for Boys at Riverview, Queensland’, which includes:

The two dormitories are light, airy, lofty and exquisitely clean… lecture rooms… night lectures… by Government experts… the boys have acquitted themselves very creditably at a subsequent examination… [Riverview was formerly used for the retraining of delinquent lads]… duration of the training is for three to four months… letters received from the boys already placed in work were not satisfactory… 2/6 per week pocket money… the boys’ fares from the farm to their first jobs are paid by the Salvation Army… they are placed in the same district which facilitates after-care and visiting… the approved quota is (now) sixty lads per annum.

On 8 March 1927, an official wrote ‘Supplementary Notes’ in the file which have a more critical tone.

The Oversea Settlement Committee is concerned at the Salvation Army practice of requiring the boys to repay part of their passage money… over two years… this is too long… it is not voluntary… it violates the Empire Settlement Act.

Otherwise, and pending negotiations on this, HMG did intend to renew the agreements made under the Act. There are summaries of the agreements made between the Army and the several governments. The general sense of the other correspondence is that the Salvation Army was doing a fine job of introduction and after-care, but may be being overpaid for the fine task which is being performed.

You will appreciate that any scheme of child migration by voluntary organisations must be controlled closely because of the possibility of the exploitation of the children.

At this point, Colonel Dean of the Army’s Public Relations had to write to Calwell that ‘Brigadier Winton is a Retired Officer and has absolutely no authority to represent us or to act for us in this matter’. Meanwhile, on 27 September 1948, the Salvation Army lodged Group Nominations ‘for 36 males up to 15 years of age for training at Riverview Farm’ with the CMO, Brisbane, Mr H Longland. He was advised by Sir Tasman Heyes, 26 October, that:

… when a voluntary organisation (such as the Salvation Army) revives its interest in child migration after the lapse of a number of years, it is desirable for a report to be submitted as to the present circumstances and capacity of the organisation (now) to accommodate, train and care for its proposed nominees.

An inspection was arranged promptly and Mr R Minto reported, 18 October that the Army was interested in taking youths for farm training, not child migration as such, and that:

… they are not prepared to pay wages to boys during training, but would like the Government to make some allowance to both their organisation and the boys… discipline is strict.

This strictness was related to the presence of some delinquent lads at Riverview, and on these grounds, the British High Commission Secretary, Mr W Garnett, indicated that Riverview could not be considered an ‘approved organisation’ until the young delinquents were sent elsewhere. It was at this stage that State Child Welfare Department Secretary, W D Smith, commented that Queensland delinquents would compare favourably with any British trainees ‘as to character and intelligence’. Understandably, there were delays in granting Riverview ‘approved status’. There is much correspondence over this delay and tactful arrangements to pacify the British High Commission over Mr Smith’s comments. As Mr A L Nutt, Immigration Department commented:

In this clash of personalities the interests of Queensland in securing child migrants do not seem to be well served by its State officers.

Meanwhile, necessary renovations were occurring at Riverview, promises were made that delinquent and subnormal boys would be removed and Mr W Garnett agreed, 31 January 1950, to raise no objections to Riverview being approved as a place suitable for the reception of British child migrants.

Overall the scheme is good… but reports are not too happy… All the [church] authorities appear to be rushing into this business [child migration] without first getting their houses in order to receive migrants… not prepared to approve Riverview… the delinquents and intellectually handicapped would have to go first.

Time passed – two years almost, during which renovations were commenced at Riverview and the Salvation Army began canvassing for suitable boys in the UK for the scheme. In April 1950, Sir Tasman Heyes noted that the Army was having difficulties recruiting suitable young men and renovations at Riverview were proceeding slowly. Newspaper cuttings sympathetic to the scheme are scattered through the file. The formal opening of the Riverview renovations occurred on 19 August 1950, by which time eight boys were ‘on the water’ bound for Queensland. There were problems on board with some of the boys – the Surgeon on SS Chitral reported of one:

How this boy ever managed to obtain a berth on this ship remains a mystery.

During the 1950s, fewer than one hundred boys came to Riverview under the Salvation Army scheme, and by 1960 the Army had to consider other options for Riverview. The agreement with the British Government was terminated.

Canberra

At Victoria Park… there is a Home for upwards of 50 children of both sexes, whilst at Werribee, there is a Farm Training School for boys accommodating thirty children… we are prepared to erect buildings to accommodate a further thirty boys and desire your approval to a scheme such as that which has been so successfully carried out by the Roman Catholic Church (bringing) orphaned boys from Great Britain.

The Secretary, Department of the Interior supported the scheme on the same lines as other similar schemes, and Bindemann replied thanking the Government for its encouragement, 12 June 1939:

I am expecting further correspondence from England within a few weeks which ought to clarify the position.

There the matter rested; the war intervened before anything further could be arranged.

Canberra

Rev. J H Litten has prepared and furnished a large hostel, a former rectory, at Alverstoke near Portsmouth, with the intention of gathering together the fifty children whom he hopes to send as a first party.

Meanwhile, on 26 April 1949 the Magill institution was recognised as an ‘approved Home’ for the reception of child migrants. Sir Tasman Heyes wrote to the Director of Immigration (State Government), Adelaide, 28 February 1950:

The UK authorities prefer to handle the matter of maintenance payments for voluntary organisations in this country through a parent body in England.

Otherwise, the correspondence refers to problems mentioned already. By 1955, an internal memo at Australia House summarised the position for the Methodist Homes:

Recruitment prospects are poor; the CMO, London advised that the position of the NCH has been fully explored and unless their attitude changes, there is no likelihood of them submitting children for this or any other Methodist Home.

Canberra

I have just returned from the Goulburn Valley, the work of migration is gripping the local people… we hope, ultimately, to make Dhurringile a Farm College for migrant boys.

However, in August there was a further setback. Mr A Duncan arrived back from Scotland ‘without any boys or the promise of them’; nor was the place yet recognised as an ‘approved institution’ for the reception of child migrants. Moreover, the property required extensive renovations and there is much discussion over these and their cost among the correspondence. Mr R H Wheeler, an officer of the Immigration Department wrote, 8 November 1949:

in view of the past activities, or inactivities, of the Presbyterian Church in regard to the recruiting of 25 boys for Benmore (WA), it is extremely doubtful whether any large numbers can be recruited in the UK for Dhurringile.

Finally, almost another year passed before ‘approved status’ was gained and close to the end of the file is a cutting from The Age (Melbourne), 9 December 1950 noting the imminent arrival of the first party of boys for Dhurringile.

The response to enquiries regarding the availability of children for emigration has been poor. Young children, five to eight years old, for Kildonan Home, Burwood (Victoria) are unlikely to be available in Scotland… in each case the Committee seeks the consent of the Scottish Home Office to the children’s emigration… this consent is often withheld in the case of young children on the grounds that they are not old enough to form or express an opinion on the proposal that they should emigrate.

However, some children arrived; there were 31 boys at Dhurringile by March 1952, but few in terms of the financial assistance granted for the renovations on the property. There is a sprinkling of newspaper cuttings around the arrival of the children and the official opening of Dhurringile, 31 July 1951. The remainder of the material concerns considerable effort to recruit child and youth migrants for the Presbyterian homes but with limited success. Rev. A A Bell was in Scotland and Northern Ireland, October to January, 1952–53 but ‘the direct response to his work has been very disappointing’, Australia House reported to Canberra. An approach was made to Cyril Bavin and the Overseas League for assistance, again without success. There is a copy of the pamphlet, His Future, concerned with Dhurringile.