Mistress of the Southern Seas

The Move to Federalism

The Australasian nation was created on 1 January, 1883, when six British colonies joined together under a federal system of government to form the Commonwealth of Australasia. The story of how these things came about belongs chiefly in the two decades previous to that date, but some discussions regarding the federation of Britain’s Pacific colonies had been occurring for nearly forty years and the earliest records regarding Federation belong to that time.

The question was first raised Henry Grey, 3rd Earl Grey, who suggested, during his second term as Secretary of State for War and the Colonies (1846), the formation of a federal assembly to deal with issues relating to trade and communications. The scheme was viewed with hostility by the colonists and Grey was forced to abandon his intent. However, it was not too long before the colonists were having similar ideas of their own.
The popular movement towards Federation commenced in the 1850s, with interest strongest in the most populous colonies with the founding of a new era of representative and responsible government. There were noteworthy contributions from several, who have gone on to become known as the Founding Fathers in the Australasian context:

Sir Henry Parkes KCMG (1815-1896): was Premier of New South Wales (1872-75; 1877-83); Chairman of the Australasian Federal Council (1871-80). He was knighted in 1877. As owner of the Empire daily, he pushed constantly for broader suffrage, an end to convict transportation, increased education and bold infrastructure planning. Parkes would be the first President of the new Australasian Senate and serve in every Australasian Cabinet until his retirement;

Rev. John Dunmore Lang (1799-1878): was the first Presbyterian minister in Australia who was the primary agitator for the separation of Moreton Bay colony (as Queensland), Port Nicholson colony (as New Zealand) and Port Philip colony (as Victoria). He was the first to advocate a federation of colonies under a democratic and republican government.

Sir William Fox KCMG (1812-1893): was Premier of New Zealand (1856, 1861-2, 1869-72). He was knighted in 1879. He tirelessly worked for greater autonomy for the colonies from Britain from the 1850s. He would later go on to serve in the first Federal Cabinet as Treasurer.

Sir Charles Gavan Duffy GCMG (1816-1903): was a member of the House of Commons (1852-56); Premier of Victoria (1871-73) and first Chief Justice of Australasia (1884-1903). He was first knighted in 1873. A staunch Catholic and darling of the Irish nationalist communities across Australasia, he is credited as the principal author of the first Australasian Constitution Act.

Rev. John West (1809-1873): was the final chairman of the Australasian League for the Prevention of Transportation, achieving the end of British shipment of convicts in 1853. He was also the author of the John Adams articles and editor of the Sydney Morning Herald for the last twenty years of his life.

Sir Ayde Douglas KCMG (1815-1906): was a republican and federalist advocate who served as the second President of the Australasian Senate. He was strongly pro-development, taking particular interest in railways. His The Need for Federation is still considered a significant development in the creation of an Australasian national consciousness.

Throughout the 1850s, most of the colonies were more preoccupied with their own concerns than those of Federation, but the fostering of a common identity through culture, politics, economics and technology forced colonial governments to begin to recognise the need for an institution to address areas of mutual concern. The first Australasian Intercolonial Conference, convened in Melbourne in 1856 for the purposes of discussing shipping and lighthouses, was the first. Each colony designated a representative to these discussions, known as the colonial secretary, and they continued to meet annually right up until 1882. The AIC was supported by growth in railways, steamships, postal and telegraph, the latter being completed in most of Australasia by 1869. (The first intercolonial rail connection, between Sydney and Melbourne, would be opened the same year as Federation.)

Areas of discussion by the Australasian Intercolonial Conferences included: quarantine, agricultural diseases, telegraphs, railways and river usage. However, the colonies were increasingly divided over competition for trade revenues. The issue came to a head in the early 1860s when the Victorian government began construction on a railway line from Echuca to Melbourne to divert commodities traditionally headed for Sydney or Port Adelaide. As retaliatory action from New South Wales and South Australia beckoned, others pushed for a more cooperative approach.

In 1863, some members of the Australasian Intercolonial Conference agreed to the establishment of a single trade policy, creating a broad free trade area under a customs union. Under the Hobart Declaration of that year, the colonies of New South Wales, Tasmania, New Zealand, South Australia and Queensland agreed to end trading restrictions and penalties against each other and refer their differences to negotiation. The Declaration states that,

“It is most desirable that the restrictions hitherto imposed by Imperial legislation on Intercolonial Free Trade should be removed and that the Colonies should have the power to make reciprocal agreements on tariffs and trade.”

The action was strongly supported by increasing organisation of capital and labour on an intercolonial basis, by assertively nationalistic journalism and by growing numbers of associations, particularly of young men, who strongly endorsed Federation. Victoria, which resisted any move towards free trade, remained outside the customs union until 1871.

By 1870, momentum was growing towards Federation, with Henry Parkes proposing the creation of an Australasian Federal Council, similar in structure to the Intercolonial Conference but with powers to make laws for all the colonies on a unanimous basis. Of course, it was expected that the Colonial Office would have power to veto any such laws, but that they would apply for the whole of the British colonial outposts in the South Pacific. Similarly, Charles Gavan Duffy convened a Royal Commission to investigate paths of progress towards a federal union. He received strong support from South Australia’s Attorney General, Sir James Boucaut, and New Zealand Finance Minister Julius Vogel. Later, Australasia’s first Prime Minister, Sir James Service, would state that the customs union “opened the path to Federation”.

The colonies did staunchly agree on some issues. A good proportion of the population of the region was not British or white, especially in northern Australia and the islands, which did not fit with their concept of the ideal British society. General assumptions were that the Chinese were incapable of understanding their rights and responsibilities, could not accept the necessity for equality and, according to Henry Parkes, could not fulfill “the lofty and august duties which fall to the citizens of a free nation”. In 1878, the Australasian Federal Council would agree to a ban on any Chinese immigration into the region under their jurisdiction.

The Australasian Federal Council

The First Australasian Federal Council convened on 9 August, 1871, with the six colonies represented by their respective Premiers. The two non-Premiers in attendance had been those designated as President and Vice President of the Council: Henry Parkes and Julius Vogel. They succeeded in enacting various treaties between the colonies to integrate areas of previous agreement. In addition, the first discussions were held regarding joint defence and security, with growing concern about the potential expansion of other imperialist powers into the Pacific.

The colonies were particularly concerned regarding the expansion of the Russian and German Empires and the French claim on New Caledonia, but had between them a mere seven thousand troops, two gunboats and a single monitor. With the increasing withdrawal of British troops, the Council steadily developed regulations to allow steady integration of the colonial forces and plans for their expansion upon Federation.

After four years, the growing confidence of Westminster was recognised in the Federal Council of Australasia Act (1875), which further empowered the emerging nation by granting it supervision over, and encouraging the participation of, the British colonial possession of Fiji. With a growing sense of urgency, a committee was named to frame of a federal constitution to bind the various colonies together.

The first four states to approve the Federal Constitution as drafted were New South Wales, New Zealand, South Australia and Tasmania, with ratification by referendum in late 1880, though internal disputes and power plays led to New Zealand being admitted as two states. Victoria ratified early the following year, but it was Queensland who delayed processes until Premier Thomas McIlwraith received firm commitments from his southern neighbours about policy in the Pacific at the 1881 Federal Conference.

In December, 1881, the Earl of Kimberley invited a delegation from the colonial parliaments to England for discussions on Federation. Potential modifications to the Constitution were considered, debated and rejected before the legislation was presented to the House of Commons and passed in July, 1882. On 17 September of that year, Her Majesty the Empress Victoria signed a proclamation declaring that, from the New Year, the peoples of Australasia would be united into one federal Commonwealth, divided into six states and four territories.

The Service Government (1883-86)


The first Governor General, Sir William Jervois, read the Proclamation of Federation in Melbourne, the new interim capital, on 1 January 1883. At the time of the first election in March, Australasia had no party political system, which would not emerge until the early 1890s, when the Liberal Party would come into existence. Prime Ministers tended to emerge in these early years from cooperative coalitions across the Parliament, rather than by obtaining an electoral mandate as a party leader.

The first Prime Minister of Australia was James Service. Service had been born in Glasgow, but had emigrated in his late 20s as an agent for a British tea merchant. Sensing opportunity, he had branched out and commenced his own business, James Service & Co., and soon became a significant export, import and wholesale merchant in Melbourne. Politically, he was a moderate free-trader, unusually for a Victorian, and had served twelve years in the Legislative Assembly, two years of which were as Premier.

Service announced a Cabinet, which included Senator Sir Henry Parkes as a minister without portfolio and Vice President of the Executive Council. It also consisted of Attorney General Julius Vogel (New Ulster), Home Affairs Minister William Bede Dalley (New South Wales) , External Affairs Minister Thomas McIlwraith (Queensland), Treasurer Sir William Fox (New Munster), Trade and Customs Minister John Cox Bray (South Australia) and Postmaster General Sir Ayde Douglas (Tasmania). The first task of Service’s government was to arrange elections. All ministers were re-elected to their seats following a six-week campaign.

In his years of government, Service created the Australasian Public Service and a federal judiciary. He also implemented uniform customs and excises that, while high by current standards, reflected a reasonable balance between free trade and infant industry protection. He continued the ban on Chinese migration, extending its prohibitions to other classes of people who displayed any health problem or had records of encounters with the law.

Service was also responsible for Australasia’s first exercise of imperialist military policy. Four months after coming to office, Service sparked a row with the Colonial Office when he declared that the new nation would annex the eastern portion of the island of New Guinea. The Colonial Secretary, Thomas McIlwraith, who best understood the issue as a Queenslander, was dispatched to London to convince the Imperial Government to recognise Australasia’s action. While the British Government was not pleased with the action, the shared fear of a German claim led to Westminster’s approval in December, 1883. The region was officially named “Australasian New Guinea”

In the interim, Service also ordered the creation of the Australasian Armed Forces, expanding the combined 8,000-strong colonial services with a huge number of new recruits. By the end of 1886, the AAF had 22,000 troops. Its navy, which had previously consisted of just two vessels, was expanded to include an ironclad, a man-of-war, five torpedo boats and ten gunboats, for a total of eighteen.

Service and his Cabinet were also gravely concerned about the long-term wage impact of “blackbirding”, the theft of Pacific Islanders to work as virtual slaves in the sugar cane fields of northern Queensland. The state Parliament had already passed laws to discourage the practice, but it had persisted. It is estimated that, between 1863 and 1887, when it was finally banned, that as many as 35,000 Pacific Islanders were brought to Queensland. Many later migrated into northern New South Wales.

In 1884, as the cities of Sydney and Melbourne were being joined by telephone and rail, and as Broken Hill’s Line of Lode became cause for excitement, Australasia became the first country in the world to undertake a bold social experiment in giving women the vote. Strong support existed for female suffrage in temperance societies across the new country and the new federal government’s attempt to define a popular franchise was benefited by female inclusion.

The country also adopted its new flag. A defaced British blue ensign in the style described by the 1865 British legislation, it contained the five red stars of the Southern Cross outlined in white on its right side. In the lower hoist quarter was the Commonwealth Star, which like the other stars, had five points and was outlined in white. The stars, however, would be modified in 1886 to carry seven points (one for each of the founding States).

Much greater controversy existed regarding the status of the Australasian indigenous peoples, some of whom had already declared their right to vote based on colonial legislation from South Australia and New Zealand. The difficulty gave rise to the first official identification of various native “nations”, some of which had voting rights and others which did not. The identification bore no semblance to what is now known about tribal authority and loyalty, particularly on the mainland, and all distinctions between the various Maori tribes in New Munster and New Ulster were legislatively eradicated, defining them as a single people for the first time.

It was agreed that the native nations could be and should be assimilated and that voting was an inherent part of that assimilation. In the end, it was agreed to give the “civilised” nations, those most exposed to British culture over the century, some democratic rights. All natives in New Ulster, New Munster, eastern New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Queensland south of the Tropic of Capricorn would be permitted to register. Those “savages” who lived in the territories that occupied the country’s northern and western frontiers were excluded. Provision had already been made in the Constitution for the Australasian Government to define the voting rights of indigenous Australasians as it saw fit; it decided that, for the time being, native votes would be worth less than a white person.

The decision was made that, like white representatives, native representatives would be based upon the total population. However, while each non-native voter was worth one person when considering the census, each native voter would be worth three-fifths of a person when it came to the number of “native representatives”. This form of segregated democracy persisted, largely uninterrupted, until the move against assimilation towards self-determination commenced after World War Two. Equality in the census count was finally implemented in 1949.

In February, 1885, news of the death of General Charles Gordon at Khartoum led Prime Minister Service to offer his military assistance to Britain. Eight weeks later, around 750 Australasian men reported in the Red Sea port of Suakin and spent some months doing railway construction and guard duty before returning home. Australasian attitude was divided as to whether the country should participate in “British or foreign wars”.

In late 1885, as the first Parliament began to wind up its operations, Miss Louisa Forty, the Prime Minister’s companion, ceremoniously turned the first soil of Booderee, the name of the site for the national capital, three kilometres from the town (later suburb) of Vincentia. While Parliament had agreed to meet in a seat of government in Melbourne, the Australasians had prevented disputes about who should be capital by agreeing that they should plan one in a fashion similar to Washington DC. As it turned out, it was the Prime Minister’s last official function before he announced his intention to retire at the next election.

However, this capital works project was not the first initiated by Service. He proposed the construction of the Imperial Telegraph Service, with the objective of laying a submarine telegraph cable from Queensland’s Gold Coast to Vancouver Island in Canada. His successor would authorise similar links to Batavia, capital of the Dutch East Indies, and New Caledonia.

Service would name himself as the first Australasian High Commissioner to London, a position equivalent to ambassadorial rank, where he would advocate on behalf of his new country to the imperial government. He would remain out of the country for the next two years, returning as Sir James Service and agreed to be appointed upon the expansion of the new High Court from three to five judges. He would service as Justice Sir James Service CMG until his death in 1899.

Service’s pending retirement was not singular. Sir William Fox, his Treasurer, was now into his eighth decade of life and was tiring quickly. He returned to Whanganui, where he became a writer on political issues, an enthusiast for temperance and supporter of railway construction. He died in 1893. The health of the Home Affairs Minister, William Bede Dalley, was already becoming grave; he would not seek a return to the ministry, though he did remain in his parliamentary seat until the day he died in 1888.

As debate opened about who might succeed Service, only two names emerge as potential contenders. John Cox Bray had been a member of the South Australian Parliament for twelve years, holding various ministries before becoming a popular Premier in early 1881. He had been a member of the Australasian Federal Council for three years and a federal minister since Federation. His strongest advantage over his opponent was that he was a native-born Australasian and his perception as a sound defender of national interest. Julius Vogel had been a member of the New Zealand Parliament for twenty years before it had disbanded, including nearly three years as Premier. His call for Australasia to take on debt to build public works that would “bind the country” together resonated strongly within the Parliament. Those ruled out of leadership including the unpredictable Thomas McIlwraith and the reluctant Sir Ayde Douglas.

A Brief Biography of:

Sir James Service CMG

1 January 1883 – 24 March 1886

VICTORIA

Born 27 November 1823 Kilwinning, Ayrshire, Scotland

Died 12 April 1899 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

James Service first appeared in public life at the youthful age of fifteen, zealously preaching for the Churches of Christ on the Glasgow Green. He had been educated in Kilwinning and then at Glasgow College. He was heading to the University of Glasgow to become a Presbyterian minister when, influenced by the new love of his father and uncle for the Chartist movement, he became a schoolmaster at his own small school at Saltcoats, continuing there until 1845 when tuberculosis prevented its continuation. The following year, he joined employment at the tea and coffee merchant house of Thomas Corbett & Co in Glasgow and became a full partner in the business after only four years.

Possibly due to ongoing health problems, Service migrated to Victoria in 1853 as the agent of Corbett & Co and established a business on Bourke Street as a general importer and indentor under the name James Service & Co. His activism over council rates, connections, education and wealth made him immediately popular in his community of Emerald Hill and he was quickly installed as the chairman of the local municipality and magistrate. A former pupil, James Ormond, joined him in 1854 and by the 1880s, the company had bought an office block in downtown Melbourne and established a London office. Eventually, James Service & Co expanded into a wide range of distribution and commodity concerns.

Becoming known as a supporter of John Dunmore Lang and Andrew Clarke, he was elected to the Victorian Legislative Assembly in March 1857 and became prominent as an anti-Catholic, liberal free-trader. In October 1859, he joined the ministry as President of the Board of Lands and Works. His subsequent land bill, which was blocked by the Legislative Council, resulted in his resignation from the ministry only ten months later. However, he continued to advance liberal causes in other fields, such as education, land transfer, infrastructure development and religious pluralism.

Service took a break from politics in August 1862, returning to Europe where he spent much of the next two years in Italy. Upon his return, he became one of the founders of Commercial Bank of Australasia, which would continue as one of the nation’s five largest banks for over a century, served as a chairman of Alfred Hospital. He also actively supported the Constitutional Association from the late 1860s and it was through this organisation that he began to articulate influential arguments in favour of the federation of the Australasian colonies.

In August 1874, he returned to the Victorian parliament as state Treasurer, where he attempted to overhaul the state tax system. His two State budgets, are noted as fair though controversial. It is during this time that Service made a number of famous statements and positions, both as a delegate of the Australasian Federal Council and as a public figure, which gave him resonance with the broader population and in his home state of Victoria. They defined him as “a Liberal of the Gladstone stamp” as took positions on several national issues:

• Social inequality: “A working man is as good as any man possessing rank and riches”;
• Church and state: “Place our state on a purely secular basis, and let the words Protestant and Catholic be heard no more as watchwords of strife and dissensions.”
• Role of the state: “The State must remove from the path of honest men all obstacles that impede their progress and let each do the best he can for himself”;
• Wages: “Bonuses and pay should be linked to profit”;
• Trade unions: “I support eight hours of work”.

Asked later about the political parties that formed in Australasia after his time as Prime Minister, Service, who had been claimed by the Conservative Party, said he “never was within a thousand miles of being a conservative”.

Elected finally as Premier in early 1880, Service was the most notable voices in a sustained campaign in support of referenda to carry the federalist idea and endorse a new constitution. He served as chairman on the final constitutional negotiations, travelled to the London Conference of 1882 and returned home with triumphant and popular acclaim. The Age would declare that “no parliamentarian can show a more imposing record of great public utility” and his management style of energy and accessibility became noted and appreciated by colleagues.

During his subsequent term as the first Prime Minister of Australasia, Service is most noted for his imperialist spirit. He backed Thomas McIlwraith’s annexation of Australasian New Guinea in 1883. He proclaimed an Australasian form of the Monroe Doctrine, arguing that all parts of British control in the South Seas should be part of the grand federation. He also supported sending troops to Sudan, arguing that England was being indecisive and threatening “the imminent destiny of our people”, but the Colonial Office reported on him as a “disloyal and ignorant blunderer”.

In late 1885, Service was given urgent warning by his doctors that he should find a new career. He named himself as the new Australasian High Commissioner to London and remained abroad for over two years. It was during this period he was knighted, despite some personal resistance, but declined the offer of becoming a Privy Councillor. Nonetheless, he convinced British Foreign Secretary and later Prime Minister, the Earl of Rosebury, that he was one of the leading statesmen of the Empire. He returned to Australasia in 1889 and was named as one of the newest puisine justice of the Australasian High Court. He was chronically ill during the last six months of his life before passing away at the age of seventy-five.

While buried in a Baptist plot, Service regarded himself for much of his life as a skeptic, the young fervour having long since faded, but with a keen interest in religious questions. He occasionally attended Unitarian services, but was denounced by some segments of the press for his “atheistic proclivities”. He died with a considerable estate (about $36.1 million in today’s terms).

Service was a merchant of large views and fine culture—at once a scholar and a man of business, a colonial phenomenon not so uncommon among educated Scots. He had strong interests in general philosophy, metaphysics and economic and political theory. He talked well, like a man as much accustomed to reflect seriously as if he had been a profound philosopher or an Anglican bishop. He raised the question whether mankind had improved morally and spiritually over 2000 years, 'argued his point very well indeed, brought out all that was to be said on either side and left the conclusion open'.

As a politician, he was constructive, diligent and business-like, with the supreme virtue of common sense. There was no trace of the snob in him. He had the faculty of making men like him and his influence on younger men, like Deakin, was profound. He could the play the party game with consummate skill but came to abhor it; he was primarily a moderator and conciliator and few politicians can have provoked so little party hate or have been so little maligned or misrepresented. Possibly no other Victorian politician has ever held such widespread public confidence and affection. Nevertheless, his domestic life was irregular. His early marriage to Marian Allan, by whom he had two daughters, broke up in the mid-1850s. From the early 1860s he lived with Louisa Hoseason Forty, whom he never married and by whom he had several daughters. His public reputation over a long period enabled him to live down the gossip.

The First Bray Government (1886-1889)



Following the March 1886 elections, neither Bray nor Vogel was able to bring their factions into majority. In the end, Vogel’s chances were decided in Auckland, where New Ulster Premier Harry Atkinson publicly criticised his lack of skills to manage the economy. Atkinson also condemned Vogel as the architect of the franchise act, claiming his work had damaged the nation’s future by allowing “all manner of uncivilised barbarian” the opportunity to vote. His campaign was enough to swing support in favour of John Cox Bray as the 2nd Prime Minister of Australasia.

Bray put together a broad coalition that was reflected in his new Cabinet. Julius Vogel retained his post as Attorney General and Senator Sir Henry Parkes was retained as Vice President of the Executive Council. Thomas McIlwraith retained the External Affairs portfolio and Sir Ayde Douglas remained Postmaster General. The new faces at the Cabinet table were: George Dibbs of New South Wales, who took the position of Trade & Customs Minister; Senator John Hall of New Munster, as the new Minister for Home Affairs; and James Dickson, who was named as the first Defence Minister and chairman of the Council of National Defence.

As part of his compromise to take office and win over Vogel supporters, Bray had committed the Government to borrowing for large-scale agricultural schemes. The recent arrival of Canadian irrigation experts, brothers George and William Chaffey, excited many levels of government and they were employed to direct the nation-building scheme. By 1891, new government-funded irrigation schemes had given rise to the townships of Mildura and Renmark and dam constructions began on the Goulburn, Murrumbidgee and Kerikeri Rivers.

The Bray Government also dealt with the establishment and development of government institutions. He expanded the High Court from three to five justices, as per the original plans for Federation. Over his five years in office, Bray established the Royal Australasian Mint, the Bureau of Meterology, the National Census Office, the Australasian Postal Service and the National Quarantine Service. The first Census, conducted in 1887, established the figure for the national population of 3,955,000, though figures from the outlying territories, such as Australasian New Guinea, were estimates. Under the Constitution, the five-yearly Census became a regular feature of Australasian life and showed a growing population through into the new century. The population in 1892 was 4,475,000; in 1897, 4,923,000.

His first Government was also noteworthy for its management of a series of calamities. The eruption of Mount Tarawera, which killed over one hundred people in June 1886, was the most well-known, but there was also the accidental sinking of the SS Cheviot, the explosion of the Bulli coal mine and the North Canterbury earthquake.

In 1887, the Swan River Territory was admitted as the State of Western Australia as the eighth member of the Commonwealth. Based around Perth, the new State was admitted and granted all territory south of the Tropic of Capricorn. The legislation which created the State also granted to Bray’s home state, South Australia, administrative control over central Australia (primarily the town of Alice Springs and surrounds) below the same latitude. The expanded Northern Australian Territory was removed from New South Wales control and placed under direct control of the Federal Government. The re-organisation, combined with voter regulation problems, gave encouragement to groups in North Queensland, who had already commenced the campaign that would lead to their political separation from Brisbane (see map below). The new Member for Perth, the acclaimed explorer John Forrest, was immediately named as a Minister without portfolio to the Cabinet.

The following year, as Australasia celebrated one hundred years since colonisation, with a festival in Sydney’s Centennial Park under new electric lighting, Queen Victoria recognised the new country (and its North American counterpart, Canada) as a dominion. The status would eventually also be settled on Ireland, India and South Africa and signalled the continuing transition of Australasia, in the British mind, from being a dependency to being a key partner in advancing British interests.

Political Division of Australasia
1887

Corrections (discussed below) to the New Zealand borders will be affected on the 1899 map.

Great start, it has been a while since we have had an Aussie TL here. Keep it up!

The Second Bray Government (1889-90)

By the time he stood for re-election in March 1889, Bray should have been riding a wave of popular support. He had created the nation’s first public holiday to commemorate the 70th birthday of the Empress. Infrastructure works funded by federal debt continued to expand but British speculators were strongly confident in Australasia’s fiscal growth and were happy to invest. Bray’s dismissal of Admiral Henry Wright over an incident of mutiny on the HMAS Gayundah solidified confidence of civilian control over the new armed forces. Sydney finished its ornate landmark Town Hall and Australasians could now travel from Brisbane to Adelaide via rail. Construction was soon to commence on the city of Booderee and Melbourne was in the grips of a fever over a new school of impressionist art. Yet the tensions inside his government, between liberals and conservatives, between free traders and protectionists, were obvious for all to see and only becoming more apparent with time.

It is often argued that Bray failed to manage the country’s political evolution, seeking to prevent the move towards the formation of political parties rather than embracing them. However, more modern analysis notes that his government remained a broad coalition and that the emergence of the political parties would have ultimately forced a split in his Cabinet. He did, however, fail to manage relationships as well as he might. The increasing tensions inside his Cabinet were most conspicuous in his relationship with his External Affairs Minister and former Queensland Premier, Thomas McIlwraith, who, in 1887, organised for a group of about one hundred people to establish their own settlement and claim on the islands of the New Hebrides.

At the time, the New Hebrides had both British and French colonists, but in very small numbers. Both the French and British Empires had agreed to joint defence of the islands, but the prickly issue of sovereignty had not been debated. The introduction of a sizeable Australasian population in one swift act threw the entire delicate arrangement into chaos.

The outrage of the British Colonial Office was palpable. “I asked him (McIlwraith) whether they wanted to have the whole planet and he seemed to think it would be a desirable arrangement. It is hardly too much to say that he thinks the whole Southern Pacific their de jure; they regard French possession of New Caledonia as an act of robbery upon them. It is certainly hard for four millions of English settlers to only have a mainland as large as Europe to fill up,” said Lord Knutsford, Colonial Secretary.

While McIlwraith’s official assurances were given that Australasia would not make any claim to the New Hebrides, he continued his unofficial campaign to send people to the New Hebrides. He even suggested the proposition of granting citizenship to “black-birded” Pacific Islanders and getting them to return home. His push ultimately led to a confrontation with the Prime Minister and he was sacked from the Government in October 1890. Within weeks, it became clear that Bray’s support base had begun to crumble, as various parliamentarians saw him as supporting British interests over Australasian interests.

Bray stumbled over his management of Attorney General Julius Vogel and the working relationship between the two men also soured. In mid-1889, Vogel began contributing a series of newspaper articles to The Australasian, the country’s first national paper, which, while always technically accurate, were less than enthusiastic about the incumbent leader. While making Vogel appear a visionary who had missed his chance at the top job, they also detracted from a Prime Minister engaged in the daily compromise of government. As the dismissal of McIlwraith began to reverberate around the halls of Melbourne’s Parliament House, both Vogel and the venerable Senate President, Sir Henry Parkes, announced they would retire their leadership roles as early as replacements could be found and would depart Parliament at the next election.

Part of Vogel’s ambitious plan was a scheme to sponsor British immigrants to Australasia to significantly boost population growth. The idea gained increasing traction and was implemented during the life of the next Parliament as part of the idea of “filling up the country”.

Bray’s demise was sealed by the growing dissatisfaction of the leader of New Munster’s parliamentary delegation, John Ballance, who set about building a unified group based on common policies that directly undermined the power of the Prime Minister. Ballance’s Liberal Party would not officially form until January 1891 but its unofficial membership was already sizeable in number and it would remain a dominant force in Australasian politics until the First World War. Their efforts at grass-root motivation and pragmatism showed the potential for a long rule. Beset by all sides, John Cox Bray approached the Earl of Hopetoun, Australia’s new Governor General, and surrendered his commission on 9 February 1890. John Ballance was called to Government House and invited to serve as Prime Minister for the remaining of the parliamentary term.

Great thread, I always wondered what would have happened if New Zealand took up its option to join the Australian Federation.

Aha! So this is Mistress of the Southern Seas.

Subscribed

This is a great start on an interesting topic. Where does Fiji fit into this? It was part of some of the early Australasian federation plans in OTL.

I'm a little confused by the map. That's a very strange northwest Australia to modern eyes. Was this an OTL proposal at some time? And why is NZ split that way. The obvious split would be each island. Why does the south island have a bit of the north? Was this an OTL proposal?

Not being an antipodean, it may be that this map is more likely than OTL's... And if the explanation was in the biographies or something that I skimmed, then I apologize.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

I'm a little confused by the map. That's a very strange northwest Australia to modern eyes. Was this an OTL proposal at some time? And why is NZ split that way. The obvious split would be each island. Why does the south island have a bit of the north? Was this an OTL proposal?

Not being an antipodean, it may be that this map is more likely than OTL's... And if the explanation was in the biographies or something that I skimmed, then I apologize.

Click to expand...

Well, it makes a lot of sense. The Northern Territory has almost no people, and Auckland has a disproportionate amount of people. So the Northern Territory gets some of the west and South Island gets some of the North Island besides the Auckland area.

This is a good start.

You plan on taking this to the present?

An absolute Aussie TL.

subscribed.

It's finally happened - an Aussie wank An earlier and more developed Australia that also includes New Zealand and New Guinea? Just where will it go from here?

Consider me subscribed!

Pangur said:

Great start, it has been a while since we have had an Aussie TL here. Keep it up!

Click to expand...

Darth_Kiryan said:

An absolute Aussie TL.

subscribed.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I don't want this to be completely "Aussie", because I'm actually experimenting with how particularly the influence and inclusion of New Zealand would corrupt Australian history and politics. As an Australian, I've often thought our current politics might be a bit more moderate if we had New Zealand to balance out Queensland and Western Australia. But I am exploring to see how true that might be.

Iñaki said:

Aha! So this is Mistress of the Southern Seas.

Subscribed

Click to expand...

Thank you. I will still finish off 1990 for Gorby soon.

Jonathan Edelstein said:

This is a great start on an interesting topic. Where does Fiji fit into this? It was part of some of the early Australasian federation plans in OTL.

Click to expand...

Fiji has been included as a territory of the new nation and will become a state of Australasia at a later stage. I haven't yet begun to fully explore the implications there, but in my misty imagination, I envisage it as a full State by the end of the 1960s.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

I'm a little confused by the map. That's a very strange northwest Australia to modern eyes. Was this an OTL proposal at some time? And why is NZ split that way. The obvious split would be each island. Why does the south island have a bit of the north? Was this an OTL proposal?

Not being an antipodean, it may be that this map is more likely than OTL's... And if the explanation was in the biographies or something that I skimmed, then I apologize.

Click to expand...

Zuvarq said:

Well, it makes a lot of sense. The Northern Territory has almost no people, and Auckland has a disproportionate amount of people. So the Northern Territory gets some of the west and South Island gets some of the North Island besides the Auckland area.

Click to expand...

The split of Western Australia (as it is known in OTL) has a number of motivators. WA was not ready to join at Federation in TTL, and took no part in the discussions toward Federation, so it must accept the terms of the Federal Government if it wants to join. It was not unusual for borders to be adjusted early only and New South Wales is also being asked to give up its control of the Northern Territory. The State of Victoria was only 30 years old at Federation, Queensland even younger and there were very, very few settlers that far north. There will be a few more border changes on the mainland over time.

As to New Zealand's unusual border, it was the actual border between the provinces of New Ulster and New Munster, in the real world, between 1841 and 1846. The border between the two was the Patea River. (New Leinster, or as it is known today, Stewart Island was separated then, but is not here). Additionally, I looked at the provincial breakdown of New Zealand after that period and thought, realistically, there is no way that there would be five Australian states and six New Zealand ones, so I reverted to the old split.

Unknown said:

This is a good start.

You plan on taking this to the present?

Click to expand...

I have a rough outline already through to the turn of the century, so, probably. If you've followed my writing before, it tends to be in dribs and drabs, but I'm a bit anal about detail so it takes a while (this, to date, is about the work of three "free days", and I don't get them often).

thekingsguard said:

It's finally happened - an Aussie wank An earlier and more developed Australia that also includes New Zealand and New Guinea? Just where will it go from here?

Consider me subscribed!

Click to expand...

I won't be trying to "wank" Australia. I thought about such a scenario for a bit, but rejected it. Some states might even eventually seek independence. Naturally, I'll favour outcomes that suit my perspective, but there will, I suspect, still be a lot of the joy and heartaches that have been part of the making of the Kiwis and Aussies. Just, this time, it will be shared joy and heartache, and I think that will have significant culture impacts at least.

Thank you for the explanation. I did wonder if at least one of those was OTL.

Good to see you've started this Lachys, I've really enjoyed your other time lines, so we should be in good hands.

Re the identified split of NZ. It may reflect the actual provincial borders at some point (up to 1852 it seems), but I still am not so sure it is realistic. The resultant split would make the province of New Ulster very Maori, as most Maori historically lived (and still do) in the upper parts of the North Island, this was also the area where they were best able to retain their position post Contact. Which is exactly what the ATL New Ulster settler government of say Atkinson would try and avoid.

When the boundaries above were settled the political landscape was very different, it pre-dated responsible government (1853), the Land Wars and mass settlement of British migrants. I suspect it was as much an administrative convenience as anything else. Whereas the later smaller provincial boundaries as discussed during later constitutional reforms (including centralisation in the mid 1870s) reflected political reality on the ground, two decades into responsible Settler government and post dating the main Land War campaigns.

At the time New Munster/the South Island was the principal place for British or Europeans to settle, due to the gold rush, infrastructure and lack of competition for land from the Maori. Although by your TL, the North Island is being rapidly opened for settlement and the balance of Settler population & power was shifting northwards (although not till the early 1900s did the NI pass the SI).

If you care to look, there are plenty of archives in NZ's National Library and other places that preserve the speechs or writings of the various politicians on the subject of federation going back from OTL federation back to responsible government (or soon after).

Check out this particular link

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

Thank you for the explanation. I did wonder if at least one of those was OTL.

Click to expand...

No problem whatsoever. I'm certainly not an expert on either country, despite living in one of them. The primary motivator for me, personally, in the borders of "Western Australia" is that it removes a large amount of the country's resources out of state control. I appreciate that my Perth readers may feel gipped, but then, being an indigenous Australian, I understand how they feel.

Julius Vogel said:

Good to see you've started this Lachys, I've really enjoyed your other time lines, so we should be in good hands.

Re the identified split of NZ. It may reflect the actual provincial borders at some point (up to 1852 it seems), but I still am not so sure it is realistic. The resultant split would make the province of New Ulster very Maori, as most Maori historically lived (and still do) in the upper parts of the North Island, this was also the area where they were best able to retain their position post Contact. Which is exactly what the ATL New Ulster settler government of say Atkinson would try and avoid.

When the boundaries above were settled the political landscape was very different, it pre-dated responsible government (1853), the Land Wars and mass settlement of British migrants. I suspect it was as much an administrative convenience as anything else. Whereas the later smaller provincial boundaries as discussed during later constitutional reforms (including centralisation in the mid 1870s) reflected political reality on the ground, two decades into responsible Settler government and post dating the main Land War campaigns.

At the time New Munster/the South Island was the principal place for British or Europeans to settle, due to the gold rush, infrastructure and lack of competition for land from the Maori. Although by your TL, the North Island is being rapidly opened for settlement and the balance of Settler population & power was shifting northwards (although not till the early 1900s did the NI pass the SI).

If you care to look, there are plenty of archives in NZ's National Library and other places that preserve the speechs or writings of the various politicians on the subject of federation going back from OTL federation back to responsible government (or soon after).

Check out this particular link

Click to expand...

I hope you're not resentful that your namesake didn't get the Prime Ministership. BTW, I knew JV was a NZ Premier before doing reading about this, but I have to say that, having read more about him, I'm very impressed.

Points well made and received on reverting to the old borders. So, would you then recommend that New Ulster and New Munster be separated by the Cook Strait?

And a query if I might? If that's the new border, Vogel moves into New Ulster and Fox was from New Ulster and that throws the Cabinet arrangements out. So, thinking of removing Fox's role in earlier posts and substituting Senator Sir John Hall from the start. Your thoughts?