Australia: Reasons for Federation in 1901 - Coursework Example

Running Head: Reasons for federation in 1901 despite opposition Your name Course name Professors’ name Date Introduction In 1901, six independent colonies of the then British empire joined together to form one nation. Since then, Australia came to be referred as the commonwealth of Australia in formal circles. A federation is the unification of several states, counties or colonies into one central government. The Australian government refers to federation as 'the birth of a nation' ostensibly because a federal system of governance was created within which power is divided between the central government and member states. The 1901 Australian federation thus refers to the moment in history of the Australasian nation when the six independent colonies of Queensland, Victoria and others united into one country under one federal government1. Under the new unification plan, the agreement that was reached was that each colony would adhere to its earlier established systems of government. There was however to be a federal government responsible for matters that affected the whole nation. Before the federation was a success, however, there were difficulties since unification was opposed by some states and other influential individuals and organizations both within and outside government. In this paper I have attempted to analyze the factors that made it possible for the Australian colonies to federate in 1901 despite strong forces of opposition. Historical background Upon the endorsement of the Australian constitution in 1901, the six colonies came to be referred as the Commonwealth of Australia. Initially, the colonies were independent of each other but by 1872, the idea of unification began being advocated for by the media through songs and poems such that by 1890 federation had become popular idea2. Consequently majority population realized that unification of colonies would lead to greater benefit in terms of economy and defence. A series of conventions were then organized throughout the colonies. The first such convention was the Australasian federation convention of 1890 during which the then premier of New South Wales, Henry Parkes, persuaded his colleagues to discuss issue of federation. In 1891 another convention, National Australasian Convention was held in Sydney with each colony sending a team of representatives to discuss the draft constitution under which the new federation would be governed. Following the unification, individual state governments were still left with the powers to determine their own laws over issues that were not affecting the unitary government. This authority of self governance was derived from section 51 of the constitution3. Factors that led Australian colonies to federate despite opposition There was a strong opposition when the idea of federation of all Australian colonies was first mooted in the early 1890s. This led to subsequent conventions and eventual referendums in 1898 and 1899. Opposition towards unification came from various quarters and mostly from political representatives. George Reid, the New South Wales Premier, was among the most vocal critics of the unification because he wanted the best deal for his colony. Most scholars however agree that Reid's real motives for opposing unification were 'complex'. When the Australian economy encountered a severe depression in the 1890s, many Australians started to see the importance of unification. The argument presented was that business interests were of paramount importance. When a referendum was consequently held, it was voters from Victoria - which had been severely affected by economic crisis - who voted overwhelmingly for the federation. The struggling Victoria voted for unification in massive numbers in the hope of being salvaged economically. The more prosperous areas of Queensway and New South Wales were however not convinced by the unification bid. Consequently, it was after a series of conventions and persuasion that Queensway supported the drive for federation. Even so, Queensway passed the referendum vote with a slimmest majority of 55 percent.4 The press also played a crucial role towards showing its support to the referendum bill that had been brought forward for citizens to either show their support or reject the unification attempts. Most newspapers, except the Daily Telegraph, gave a warm welcome to the Unification Bill. Another newspaper that rejected the idea of unification was the Age, which disliked the financial arrangements of the new commonwealth5. The Daily Telegraph strongly campaigned against federation in 1898 and 1899. Daily newspaper editorials also gave prominence towards the issue of unification and these stimulated healthy discussions on federation by community members. Newspapers were important media through which opinions were reflected. Majority of the newspapers were owned by parliamentarians and could therefore influence content. Most of them were in support of the unification and this gave them insurmountable influence in terms of the ability to influence public opinion6. Role of the press was crucial as it served to inform and enlighten entire population on importance of unification. The media was able to persuade society members who were earlier opposed to federation. Another way in which the media served to help in the unification bid was through highlighting the causes for dissatisfaction. Such issues were then dealt with through attempts to gain consensus. The newspapers also published various articles by prominent authors and scholars in support of the federation. All these served to crystallize public opinion in support of the unification of Australian colonies. Another factor that emboldened strive towards unification was the support gained from employer groups. Employer groups had a general desire for national unity. Major employer groups in Australia supported the bid for unification although certain groups such as the Queensland Sugar Industry opposed moves towards federation. Such opposition was based on sectional interests that did not seem to bother majority of the employer groups. The open support that was displayed by employer bodies in favour of the federation was a major boost to the pro-federation camp. Furthermore, several other large scale and influential farmers, like John Ewen Davidson-an aristocrat, were not opposed to the unification of the Australian colonies. The federation was also successful because of support from key figures of authority such as politicians and members of cabinet. Support of the bill from the cabinet and declarations by politicians also helped to shape public opinion. Politicians serve an influential role in society and more so in persuading the public towards a particular cause. Opinion studies have shown that politicians have the ability to sway public opinion towards a given side. The impact of political leaders was widely felt at the early stages of the drive towards federation because there was a limited source of information to the masses and politicians served to bridge the gap as 'providers of knowledge' the assumption being that they were the most enlightened members of society and had to be emulated. In a Statement by Cardinal Moran, federation was a critical factor that could be achieved by political leaders or revolution7. According to him, revolution simply meant determination of the people to emphasize or rather declare their rights. The cardinal compared colonies with de facto republics who practised high level of civic liability. While responding to fears of separation, the cardinal made it clear that cooperation with the Royal Navy for defence of Australia was essential especially with an increasing danger in an international environment. Another specific feature of federation as highlighted by Moran was economic development issues e. g “grand trunk railways that would open interior part of the nation”8. In February 1899, Moran told the “Catholic press” that federation was not far from achievement. The argument here was on defence that a United Australia could deal with German expansion in the pacific region. Even though the Catholic newspaper was against the revised Federal Bill, Moran went ahead to assure two separate parish of his commitment to federalism. It was during this month of February 1899 that Irish-born Slattery expressed his opinion that federation was more likely to break “silken bonds” of union with Britain thus become a major disaster. Heydon - a colonial-born, further stated a fact that people who supported Home Rule for Ireland were not likely to vote for Federal Bill. Just before a referendum, Moran clarified that blessings would follow if federation was accepted. Even thou Sydney and Suburbs voted narrowly against the bill, the overall country votes provided majority for the bill despite low turnover as compared to that of 1897. Federated Australia was supposed to sanitize the past by reshaping social, political, and cultural aspect of Australian sectarianism. As analysed earlier, Moran’s hundred recommendations for federation was driven by external need for defence. He advocated for an independent Australian navy since Australia was at the mercy of foreign invader. Moran was more concerned with European imperial powers and Japanese imperial expansion thus advocated for war preparedness. To most people, Moran was classified as a dreamer and a pragmatist. Morgan’s dreams and pragmatism gave a positive result of bringing together Australian colonies in 1897-1900. His contribution to this process captured regular comments made during Church functions held in 1880’s and frequent formal lectures and press interviews in addition to direct public interventions at Bathurst in 1896 and 1897 convention elections. Contrary to ‘ardent’ federalist, Cardinal Moran registered substantial success9. In a study by Meany Neville, Australian History is presented as a story of frustrated nationalism10. This frustrated state resulted from the need for British protection and manipulations that was abetted by local Anglo-Australians. Historical description gives a vivid account of Australia as nation relying on British. Despite numerous provocations, Australia was still reluctant to cut the British ties, and achieve an independent state. This confirms difficulties facing federation. Nonetheless, Australians are recognised as having a distinct national myth which has subsequently separated them from other people and driven them to achieving national sovereignty. These distinct features are evidenced by leaders of representative institutions, content of the history and literature curriculum, oaths of loyalty and public rituals and the need for symbols, anthems and ceremonial days11. The media intensively shaped the process of federation through its strong tools. At one point, Premier had declared that Victoria would benefit from federation and the Age accepted the matter. A few days later, the paper endorsed the Bill and subsequently urged for a Yes vote. In Victoria, federal sentiments had been strong such that those who opposed were scared off by a simple show of enthusiasm for the bill. In terms of beneficiaries, there was a clear signal that Victoria’s stock tax would be eliminated consequently allowing fast access to domestic animals from New South Wales and Queensland. On the contrary, catastrophe that would be caused by abandonment of stock tax acted as a campaign against the Bill. Allan McLean who was then a minister in Turner’s government went ahead to resign and campaign for the federation bill accepting that it would reduce value of rural property. Higgins, who led the No case in Melbourne revealed that the Federation Bill was undemocratic due to equal representation in the Senate, hard to amend and enshrined provincialism instead of providing for a United Nation. From this view, Higgins gained support from Labour Party and its weekly paper, the Tocsin. In a speech by one of the successful premier, Reid, federation Bill contained more shortfalls as compared with the positive features. The intention of Reid was to expose the common man to different aspects of the bill. Statistically, persons who supported No were Sydney business, the Labour Party and the New South Wales patriots. The proponents for the federal bill were young professionals and constituents in the countryside particularly the boarder territory. The Womanhood Suffrage League was also divided on federation Bill. Maybenke Wolstenholme was moved by the possibility of the union bringing a higher life thus women were in a better position to get votes in the Commonwealth. According to Rose Scott, New South Wales would suffer under the new Bill since men were creating for them a new realm that would enable them take full control of marriage and divorce12. The mining, shipping, pastoral and commercial sectors were represented by employers’ federation and Chambers of Commerce. The bodies considered the possibility of inter-colonial labour market and the prospect of a national government13. Majority of the trade unions up held proposals in the federation Bill and expressed this concern to the public and political players. Nonetheless, there was a shift from general support for federation to a proactive and hostile relationship with Commonwealth by the end of the first ten years after enactment of the new constitution. British money and markets were critical especially to traders who exported wool and coal as well as the shipping companies. Several employers in Australian colonies were wholly owned by British companies and operated centrally from Britain. The depression of 1890s specifically created a reason for the need of political unification. Depressed colonies of Australia projected benefits from economic windfalls resulting from federation. For this reason, struggling states of Victoria voted for the federation whilst prosperous colonies of Queensland and New South Wales were not propelled by the bid to federate. Decisions made by employer peak groups were strictly influenced by sense of national identity and an estimation of potential financial gains from federal structure of politics14. An example to demonstrate this argument is the opening up of markets after federation. Expansive commercial markets of Melbourne and Adelaide were eyeing business opportunities in other colonies. Particularly Melbourne Chamber of Commerce supported federation since such a move had the capability of restoring prosperity to Australia. Adelaide Chamber of Commerce, which pursued shipping interest, strongly advocated for federation. Part of colonial Chambers like Adelaide had expressed the need for uniform tariffs. Another factor that proved the need for federation was trade, supply, and administration of river Murray. Insurance and banking sectors remained motivated by federation simply because it catered for standardisation of acts governing banking institution15. Governing these banks uniformly had the effect of relieving banking executives and this was only possible under Federal parliament. Pastoralist Union of Victoria, based in Victoria, showed little concern for federation issues. In recognition of the fact that most employer groups favoured federation, specific economic interests were highlighted more. Coal factory located in Newcastle expressed both sides of the federal sentiments. One of the best examples to demonstrate opposition to federate is Queensland sugar industry. With a united Australia, Pacific Islanders were to be deported thus deny the industry valuable labour force. This therefore sparked rebellion from Queensland sugar industry. After inauguration of the Commonwealth Government on 1st January 1901 employers paid more attention to the political process as most new laws were still to be debated and ratified by the federal government. From 1901 to 1904, relationship between employer groups and the Commonwealth government was calm since substantial activity was taking place in organizational front. Between the year 1905 and 1908, employer groups were surprised at the rate at which Commonwealth governments played their role. This opened way for a counterattack such that from 1908 to 1912, the government and employer groups were engaged in a legal and political battle. Conclusion This literature gave a vivid description of various issues that validated the need to federate. The needs of each colony actually were a determining factor whether federation was to succeed or not. An example is illustrated by the struggling states of Victoria which voted for the federation whilst prosperous colonies of Queensland and New South Wales were against the move to federate. The paper further highlighted role played by interest groups in the campaign process that would lead to federation. Among others, politically influential persons like Reid participated actively in the search for emancipation from British ties. The depression of 1890s affected many colonies especially Victoria thus Federation was supposed to offer solution to this economic crisis. Read More