100 YEARS OLD AND STILL GOING STRONG

 

It’s time for celebration! Did you know that two buildings in the township of Ingham are 100 years old this year: The Farmers’ League Building (now Ingham Travel) and the Station Hotel?

The Herbert River Farmers’ League (HRFL) is now no longer a farmers’ representative body but provides a scholarship fund for tertiary students. The HRFL had its Lannercost Street building constructed in heady times when its activities mirrored both the prosperous times the sugar industry was enjoying and the growing dynamism of the sugar towns.

Facade of Herbert River Farmers League Limited building (Source: http://www.rgsq.org.au/19-146c Royal Geographical Society of Queensland)

Developments beyond Ingham set in motion the idea of the HRFL having a building of its own. In 1922 The Primary Producers’ Organization Act provided for any association or body of not fewer than 15 primary producers residing in a district to register as a Local Producers’ Association.  While there is no explicit evidence that the HRFL planned to register as the representative Primary Producers’ Association, nevertheless, on August 21, 1923, it became incorporated as the Herbert River Farmers’ League Ltd. in order to give it “wider scope.”  

Following incorporation in 1923, the HRFL began trading as a cooperative.  It also acted as a fertilizer agency. In 1925 the league tendered for a builder to construct a building on Lannercost Street, in Ingham’s central business district. The building was to include two brick shops and offices. After a civic reception in the Shire Hall on Friday 9 October 1925, the Governor of Queensland, Sir Matthew Nathan, laid the foundation stone. He was presented with a miniature silver cane knife as a gift by the farmers.

The construction cost of the two-storey reinforced concrete building was around £3,000. When the building was completed, it was described as adding “considerably to the attractiveness of the main street”. Soon after farmer bodies, for example, the Queensland Producers’ Association (Q.P.A.) Mill Suppliers’ Committee and Executives, were holding their meetings in the building and negotiating to rent space.

Herbert River Farmers' League Building, Lannercost Street (Source: Hinchinbrook Shire Library Photograph Collection)

Even before it was officially opened the building narrowly avoided disaster when the galvanized iron and wooden building next door, the London Café, went up in flames at 2am on Christmas Eve 1925. Considerable difficulty was experienced in saving the HRFL building, “the fascla window sashes being burnt out, but with a dousing of water assisted by the wind blowlng against the fire, eventually the League office was saved.”

Officiating at the opening ceremony on Tuesday 24 August 1926 was Dr Lewis Nott, federal member for Herbert and the Post-Master General, William Gibson. Clearly Dr Nott did not have a premonition of what the imminent creation of a district executive—Herbert River Cane Growers Association (HCGA)—of the Queensland Cane Growers Association (QCGA) would mean for the HRFL when he expressed the hope that “their membership would extend to every farmer in the district.”  A reception followed the official opening.

The steps that brought the district executive (later HRCGA) into existence are unknown. In February 1932, following negotiations, a merger was achieved with the HRFL which created the HRCGA. There were no records kept until 1933 and after the district executive became the Herbert River Cane Growers (HRCGA).  When the local district executive came into existence it not only began to hold meetings in the HRFL building but negotiated to rent office space in which to carry out the extensive administrative tasks required of it as a statutory body. The first President, George Geeson, and Secretary, Alfred Louden Musgrave, were both HRFL members.

The roles of the district executive not only duplicated those of the HRFL but transcended them with the inclusion of all matters pertaining to production and marketing.  The district executive was authorized by legislation to assume the roles that had being carried out by the league to that date.

From that point on the HRFL was no longer directly responsible for carrying out farmers’ business, though it continued to provide office space and meeting rooms for the “combined” body and shared a secretary. While at the time the HRCGA’s formation was described as “tantamount to an amalgamation with the Herbert River Farmers’ League Ltd.”, it was really its death knell as a growers’ representative body.    

The transition was not easy. From thereon in the HRFL assumed a watchdog role, “carefully observing the actions and operations of the other organization with a view where necessary, to counteract any actions that we consider were detrimental to the Industry as a whole.”

The HRFL continued to be invited by the mills, Chamber of Commerce, HRCGA and other community groups to be included in both political discussions and social events and there were many roles the HRFL did not immediately relinquish. Though the HRCGA deferred to the HRFL in some matters, the HRFL executive continued to be unhappy with the arrangement, feeling that its role as an industrial organization had been restricted, while the HRCGA had not adhered to the principles of the amalgamation.

The final break with a pretense of unity came about when the HRCGA decided that it was no longer appropriate to use another organization’s premises, and that its “status and dignity” warranted its own building.  The HRCGA obtained a perpetual lease of an allotment on the opposite side of Lannercost Street, defiantly facing the HRFL building. It was constructed in conjunction with the Capitol Building to a common design by Mr. V. A. Pidgeon under the supervision of Messrs W. and M. Hunt, architects. The new farmers' building was officially opened on Saturday 29 September 1934. The opening ceremony was performed by Mr. G. Johnson (President of the Q.C.G. A.). Mr. G. Cantamessa (President of the Herbert River Cane Growers' Association) presided. The original HRCG’s building no longer stands but the Capitol Building does.

Herbert River Canegrowers’ Association' FArmers Building, opened in 1934. Site of present

CANEGROWERS building (Source: State Library of Queensland. Image number: 96364)

From that point on, the HRFL building served as the distict office of the Australian Sugar Producers Association (ASPA). A room was reserved to be used as a boardroom for meetings of the HRFL, while the rest of the building was rented out to various tenants. With the reduction of its responsibilities and income, the HRFL became preoccupied with the maintenance and improvement of the building while keeping full rental occupancy.

In 2010, a far from unanimous decision was reached to sell the building. With the building sold, the money was invested and the scholarship scheme secured for the future.  With the identity of the building covered over by an Ingham Travel sign, nobody today would know that the building was once a proud and vital farmer organization’s headquarters.

Herbert River Farmers League building 2025 (Source: Felix Reitano Real Estate)

OFF TO THE SEASIDE EVERYBODY! DANCE FROLIC AND SPORTS

London’s underground and crossrail developments unearthed significant archeological finds dating back to prehistoric times. As they dug, layer after layer of London’s intriguing past was revealed. Have you ever looked at a landscape or a building and wondered what was there before? 

Did you know that where the Forrest Beach Surf Life Saving Club House now stands, was also the site of the Dance Hall or Dance Pavilion? The site is a gathering place as it must have been for thousands of years, for Forrest Beach is located in the traditional lands of the Nywaigi people. 

Barbara Horsely wrote in Sea, Sand and Swamp. A history of the township of Allingham and Forrest Beach, of the Dance Hall or Dance Pavilion. When she wrote the book she provided a sketch of the Hall, as, as far as she knew, there was no existing photograph. However, in the way things go, of course somebody must have had a photograph in their family photograph collections. And they did! 

People had been finding their way to the beach and enjoying the sea and sand since the early 1900s, but it was not until 1925 that the area was surveyed and gazette as a township: Allingham with the beach area still called Forrest Beach. It was originally written Forrest’s Beach for G.B. Forrest, manager of Victoria Mill, who cut a track through to the beach to encourage his mill workers to visit the beach for recreation. 

Vince Corbett, builder and entrepreneur, saw the potential of Forrest Beach and applied for the lease of an acre of Council Reserve in 1925. By April 1925 he had built and opened a refreshment room. By May 1926 he had constructed two dressing sheds, two toilets and a dance hall/pavilion. The first dance held there was a fundraiser for the Valley’s Football Club on 9 April 1926. Over 20 couples attended. The Hall/Pavilion became known as the Forrest Beach Dance Hall. It was extensively renovated in 1938. 

Dane Pavilion (Source: Leila Muller)

The photograph shows the Hall before or during its renovation. Barbara’s sketch shows the renovated building with its baton walls. You can see in the photograph that the dance floor was one metre above the ground and was reputedly a very good dance floor. Once renovated there was a two foot (61 centimetres) gap between the floor and the baton walls. That gap is clear in the photograph (the baton walls were yet to come). Because of this construction the hall stayed quite cool even in summer. The hall and its extensions became part of the Surf Life Savers complex. Electric light was provided by a 5.6 Ruston Hornsby engine dynamo that required refueling several times during the evening.

Barbara Horsley's sketch of renovated Dance Pavilion (Source Sea, Sand and Swamp, p.48)

 

The dances held there were very informal because those attending had usually been at the beach for the day. But not only dances, but engagement and birthday parties were held there and the hall was used by the Surf Life Savers Club for socials and as a dining hall when visiting clubs came for carnivals. Other clubs that used the hall included the Cardinal Basketball Club, Pony and Tennis Clubs, Ranges Soccer Club and Nurses Welfare Committee.

By the late 1960s the hall was becoming worse for wear, with the floor being very uneven. Parts of the floor even gave away once during a very vigorous and enthusiastic crowd danced ‘the stomp’, a dance that was popular at the time. In 1973 the hall was destroyed by fire. The remnants were bulldozed into a large hole. 

Barbara Horsley lists some of the musicians who played at the dances. I am sure some of these names will bring back great memories: Bands: The Varsity Boys Orchestra The Chook King Orchestra The New Breed The Thunderbirds The Psychedelics The Silhouettes The Melody Makers The Evans Orchestra 

The Evans Orchestra (Source: D. Harvey in Sea, Sand and Swamp, p.50)

Musicians: Eileen Bird (nee Corbett) – piano George Stagg-piano Lou Castorina Syd Stannard Romano Olivero ‘Snooky’ Angus-trumpet/saxophone Lurlie Wickens-piano, Arthur Wickens-drums Jim Smithwick-drums Gordon Peebles-saxophone Lance Andrews-trumpet/saxophone Thelma Woodman-violin Marion Evans-piano Robert Evans-drums Daphne Evans (Harvey) piano and violin Syd Stannard.

I have quoted from Sea, Sand and Swamp pages 12-15 and 48-51 for this blog and I recommend you read the book for a detailed history of Forrest Beach and the Dance Pavilion. It’s a great read.

What? No Caterina Cordelia? Folklore debunked

 

As I research and write history, I always feel that I should add a disclaimer: this is the story, until further research proves otherwise!

THE FOLKLORE

I have oft repeated the story of the enigmatic Caterina Cordelia as given us by history buff and newspaper editor Robert Shepherd who may have got it from Alec S Kemp, The Kemp Report. According to local lore an Italian woman, Caterina Cordelia, arrived on the Herbert as the housekeeper for licenced surveyor Maurice Geoffrey O’Connell who along with his brother John Geoffrey O’Connell and William McDowall (McDowell) are attributed with the first planting of sugar cane in the Herbert River Valley.

 It has always been thought that a number of landscape features eg: creek and hill, were named for her. What happened to the O’Connells and McDowall can be tracked through newspaper reports and documents, but the fate of Caterina Cordelia has remained a mystery.

Until now…………….

FOLKLORE DEBUNKED

Bill Kitson, Retired Senior Curator, Museum of Lands Mapping and Surveying and coauthor of works such as Surveying Queensland 1839-1945, A Pictorial History and With Great Zeal. Charting of the Queensland Coast by the Royal Navy 1861-1913 appears to have solved the mystery and in so doing debunked the folklore.

This is what Bill writes and I quote:

In 1866 Maurice, who was at that time the Commissioner of Crown Lands for the North Kennedy Pastoral District, carried out a feature survey between Saltwater Creek just to the north of Townsville, up to and along the south bank of the Herbert River from Long Pocket to Halifax. On his plan of survey he names several features including a Mt Catherina where Mt Cordelia is today. At the base of it there was a small creek flowing into the Herbert River, which he leaves unnamed. Surveyor George Phillips would in May 1872 call this Katharina Creek. In September that year he also gives O’Connell’s Mt Catherina the name Mt Katharina.

It appears that Maurice was unaware that in 1866 George Strong Nares RN had given the feature the name of Cordelia hill. Nares had carried out a hydrographic survey between Gould   and Rattlesnake Islands (Ref D9482/1 G S Nares, Salamander1866), during which he named several features in the Palm Island group after Royal Naval vessels, that had served on the Australia Station, eg, Pioneer Bay, Pelorus Island, Orpheus Island, Hazard Bay, Harrier Point and on the mainland opposite the islands, Cordelia hill.

 SO!

(1)          Mt Cordelia was named after a vessel of the Royal Navy, not a person.

(2)          Yes, a feature was called Mt Catherina by O’Connell on his 1866 survey.

(3)          The creek at the base was not named Katharina creek by O’Connell on his 1866 survey.  

NOW!

In relation to a mysterious “Italian Lady” named K/Catherina, I offer the following information.

After Maurice’s death in December 1868, his younger brother John Geoffrey O’Connell, who had been his assistant since 1865, got married in April 1869 at Cardwell. On the Marriage certificate it showed that John was a farmer at Katherina Plains Herbert River (O’Connell Bros sugar selection). John would not become an Authorised surveyor until June 1869. His bride was listed as Maria Katherina Louise Cesar (Caesar) age 20 years. She was in fact christened at St Andrew’s Church Sydney in October 1848 as Catharine Lewis (Louis?) Caesar.  Her father was Alfred Louis Cesar (Caesar) and mother Marion Lockhart. Alfred was a linguist working with the New south Wales Police Department. It appears that he may have been born in Mauritius, as his father was Julius Cesar (Caesar), assistant port master at Port Louis for thirty five years. Her mother Marion (Mary) died in 1850, her father remarried in 1853 but died a few years later in 1857.

It is possible that a young woman losing both parents at such an early age might be capable of heading to the wilds of north Queensland while still a teenager?

If the O’Connell brothers named their sugar selection [first taken up in 1868] after her when she was 19 years of age, then there is a chance that she may have been with them in 1866 at age 17 years, when O’Connell carried out his original survey??????.

So, there you have it.  There was no Caterina Cordelia but there may have been a Maria Katherina Louise Cesar (Caesar).  What is so gratifying about the solving of this mystery is that Bill has made an invisible woman visible, and corrected some inaccuracies in the historical record of our district.

Source:

Kemp, Alec S. The Kemp Report, unpublished text, n.d.

Kitson, Bill. The Mysterious “Catherina Cordelia”.

Vidonja Balanzategui, The mysterious Caterina Cordelia. Interpreting Ingham History Blog, 24 July 2022.

StateLibQld 2 239314 Herbert River with Mount Cordelia in the background

                            StateLibQld 1 235334 Lagoon with lilies at Mount Cordelia, near Ingham, ca. 1881

StateLibQld 1 235358 Looking through the garden towards Mount Cordelia, near Ingham, ca. 1881.

 

 

 

History of Ripple Creek Mill and Plantation

When Robert Mitchell Boyd and John and Joseph Wood from NSW acquired Arnot’s 600 acre selection on Ripple Creek in 1882, their venture became the Ripple Creek Plantation and Mill. Installing machinery obtained from Mirrlees, Watson and Co., Glasgow, it first crushed in 1883. Despite its late start it operated the longest of the now defunct mills. Its strengths were that its owners were experienced sugar growers, it was a private concern, it was not overcapitalised, and it used a good proportion of the available plantation lands for growing sugar cane. It also took cane from independent and tenant growers. It had a large annual production of refined white sugar achieved by a sulphitation process, which gave it independence of those few companies that monopolised refining, the largest of which was CSR. By 1906 it had grown to 3 580 acres.

A ‘classic plantation’ and longest operating of the now defunct mills. Ripple Creek Mill, 1884. (Source: Hinchinbrook Shire Council Library Photographic Collection)

In every respect it was the epitome of the classic plantation, essentially a self-sufficient community. The substantial plantation house was surrounded by a luxurious tropical garden and featured a tennis court. Besides the sugar mill, there was also a saw mill and a manure ‘mill’. There were stores, a post and telephone office, a school, hospital, a blacksmith’s shop, implement shed, stock yard, slaughter yard and stables for over 100 horses. 

The 100 horse mill stables, Ripple Creek, n.d.  (Source: Hinchinbrook Shire Council Library Photographic Collection)

As well there were officers’ houses and workers’ cottages and barracks. It had its own tramway system and a wharf on the Seymour River. When Gairloch Plantation and Mill closed and went up for sale in 1887 Wood Bros. and Boyd of Ripple Creek acquired 500 acres of that plantation. Robert M. Boyd, of Ripple Creek Plantation, leased to tenants, and both he and the Neames would have liked to have purchased cane from more contractors but needed the divisional board to put in the infrastructure on the northern side of the river, as they could not afford to do it themselves. Unfortunately, it was not until the passing of the Railways Guarantee Act in 1895 that the divisional board could secure loans to lay a tramline on the northern side of the river. After that Boyd of Ripple Creek followed CSR, taking supplies from both tenant and independent farmers. By 1904 CSR records showed that land-owning farmers outnumbered tenant farmers. 

When Robert M. Boyd put his Ripple Creek Planation up for sale, CSR began construction on a bridge across the Anabranch to facilitate access to Ripple Creek land before the Ripple Creek management had managed to sell their property. This quick action is indicative of why CSR was a survivor and able to withstand the constraints others buckled under to. CSR had a broad business base, astute management, was opportunistic, protective of its own interests, and prioritised agricultural research and innovation. It, of all the planters on the Herbert, was in the position to put in the required infrastructure: bridges, rail, and rolling stock to source small growers’ cane as they became increasingly more numerous. R.M. Boyd felt unable to offer prospective suppliers the same price that CSR offered, nor was he willing to enter into long-term contracts. He argued that there was no way he could increase his mill’s output of raw sugar since it lacked the requisite amount of cane to run the mill in “double shifts”. Moreover, Boyd was only permitted to refine so much white sugar because CSR (as dominant refiner) controlled how much refined sugar produced by other millers could be put on the market. The only course left was to close down. Even CSR had clear reservations about the viability of taking the crop let alone purchasing the mill. In 1906 Wood Bros. and Boyd listed Ripple Creek Planation Mill plantation for sale, though with clear regret. They blamed the farmers for the position they were in, saying that the farmers were holding back on planting cane, trying to force the Ripple Creek management’s hand to pay the same prices as CSR offered its farmers. They hoped that the mill would continue as a cooperative mill. There had been some hope in the Valley that the government would step in to ensure the survival of the mill and the farmers had petitioned the government accordingly. CSR ended up purchasing the sugar mill machinery, tramlines and rolling stock. 

1893. Ripple Creek Estate Mill Docket, small farmer Daniel Pearson. Source: Pearson family, Brooklands.

In 1908 the Ripple Creek Mill conducted its last crush and the plantation was again offered for sale, this time with the land offered as discrete blocks. It had been arranged that CSR’s Macknade Mill would take the purchasers’ cane. With the Ripple Creek Plantation and Mill closed down, CSR became the sole miller in the district, and its monopoly of the sugar industry there and dominance of the wider Australian sugar industry was commented on with censure, even at the time. Boyd did not sever all contact with the district even after selling out to CSR. His son Archie, with his wife and their children, continued to reside at ‘The Palms’ Ripple Creek; Boyd Snr. would visit and maintained his connections in the Valley. Archie and his family moved to Sydney in October 1913 following his father’s death there on December 4, 1912. With the sale of Macknade to CSR and the closure of Ripple Creek mill, CSR became the dominant miller on the Herbert, operating both of its mills as central mills.

SOURCES:“The Ripple Creek Mill,” Townsville Daily Bulletin, August 28, 1907, 4.“Ripple Creek Plantation,” Queenslander, June 8, 1901, 1110.“Ripple Creek Sugar Plantation, Herbert River, Ingham,” Queenslander, May 12, 1906, 24; “Advertising,” Macleay Chronicle, July 23, 1908, 8.Queensland Government, “Railways Guarantee Act 1895.”Census of White Persons directly connected with C.S.R. Coy’s Mills in Queensland, November 15, 1904, Deposit N305-D.1.0 6 2, CSR Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra.“The Northern Miner,” Northern Miner, April 24, 1908, 4;“Ingham News,” Northern Miner, May 7 1908, 9. JAB Diary,“Robert Mitchell Boyd (1849-1912),” quoting “Ripple Creek Plantation,” Brisbane Courier, May 11, 1901, 15.Correspondence from R. Boyd to E.W. Knox, November 22, 1905, Deposit 142/1560, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra; and handwritten notes, October 24, 1903, Deposit 142/1559, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra.Correspondence from R. Boyd to E.W. Knox, November 22, 1905, Deposit 142/1560, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra; and handwritten notes, October 24, 1903, Deposit 142/1559, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra; correspondence from R. Boyd, to E.W. Knox, January 9, 1906, Deposit N305-D 3.0 F4 1, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra; and “Ripple Creek,” handwritten notes, October 24, 1905, N305-D 3.0 F4 1, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra.  “Display Advertising. Ripple Creek Plantation, Herbert River, N.Q.,” Queenslander, September 8, 1906, 12.  “The Ripple Creek Mill: Premier’s Reply to Petition,” Townsville Daily Bulletin, August 28, 1907, 4 as quoted in JAB Diary, “Robert Mitchell Boyd (1849-1912).”Memorandum of agreement between CSR and Wood Bros. and Boyd, April 14, 1908, N305-D 3.0 4 1, CSR, Noel Butlin Archives, Australian National University, Canberra.“The Queenslander: Ripple Creek Sugar Plantation,” Brisbane Courier, May 10, 1906, 4; “Farms, Land etc.: Ripple Creek Plantation, Herbert River, N.Q.,” Queenslander, June 16, 1906, 16; “Local and General,” Johnstone River Advocate, June 27 1907, 2; “Telegrams,” Evening Telegraph, June 20, 1907, 3; “World of Labour,” Worker, May 30, 1908, 7; “Notes and Comments,” Queenslander, May 2 1908, 36; “Advertising,” Macleay Chronicle, July 23 1908, 8.“Northern Sugar Industry,” Queenslander, August 11, 1906, 40; “MALEFICENT MONOPOLY The Colonial Sugar Refining Co.,” Sunday Times, December 1, 1907, 1; “Colonial Sugar Refining Company,” Daily Mercury, August 9. 1910, 7; Commonwealth Parliament, “House of Representatives,” [Hansard], Sugar Bounty Bill (No.2) Second Reading, September 21, 1910 and Constitution Alteration (Legislative Powers) Bill Second Reading, October 20, 1910; and Griggs, “The Decline of Competition,” for his discussion of CSR’s monopoly of the factors of the Australian sugar industry.“Herbert River Notes,” Townsville Daily Bulletin, October 11, 1913, 11; “Personal,” Townsville Daily Bulletin, December 12, 1912, 4; JAB Diary, “Robert Mitchell Boyd (1849-1912),” December 2-4, 1912.  

Founding of the RSSILA sub branch Ingham 1933 and saga of the Memorial Hall 1938

 FORMATION OF RETURNED SOLDIERS LEAGUES

Already by 1915 invalid returning soldiers from World War 1 were forming associations and gathering in clubhouses to discuss their health problems and concerns about the lack of coordinated repatriation facilities and tailored medical services.

In May 1916 representatives of those associations met in Sydney and then Melbourne to address the need for a unified approach to these concerns. A constitution was formulated and the provisional name the Returned Soldiers and Sailors Imperial League of Australia (RSSILA) was decided upon.

At the first Federal Congress held in Brisbane in September 1916 the RSSILA was formally constituted and name adopted.

 In November 1940 the name was changed to include airmen: Returned Sailors, Soldiers and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia (RSSAILA).

In October 1965 the name was condensed to Returned Services League of Australia.

Then in September 1990 another name change was made to cater for a wider membership as, with the passing of time, an exclusive membership of returned servicemen and women could no longer be sustained. Today the organization is known as the Returned & Services League of Australia.

FIRST MOVES TO BUILD A MEMORIAL HALL - 1920

Already, in Ingham, returned soldiers had formed themselves into what may have been an unofficial branch of the RSSILA as it wasn’t until 1924 that the North Queensland District of the RSSILA was established. In January 1920 the group held a dance to raise money for a soldiers’ ‘rest room’ in Ingham. The first ANZAC DAY dinner was held at the Masonic Hall on Palm Terrance in Ingham in 1920.  After the opening of the Shire Hall on 18 March 1921 the Honour Roll was housed in the Shire Hall and ANZAC Day ceremonies were conducted outside that building.

A committee was formed of three returned soldiers (Messrs G. Groundwater, E. Billam and C. Renouf) and three civilians (Messrs F. Cassady, G. Cantamessa and G.G. Venables) for the aim of raising funds for a Memorial Hall. A two storied brick and concrete building was envisaged whose entrance would house the honour board. The building would include a meeting room, shops and offices for rent in order to provide revenue to assist paying off the building and for running expenses.

The committee investigated the possibility of obtaining a vacant allotment (originally where the postmaster’s residence had stood) in Lannercost Street between the Post Office and the Police Sergeant’s residence. It was anticipated that between £2000 and £3000 would be required to build the Memorial Hall. Already on the occasion of the visit of the Italian Consul, Count di San Marzano to Ingham in 1929 when the Italian Returned Soldiers’ Association contributed £35 to the construction of a Memorial Hall, £1000 had been raised.

FORMATION OF THE INGHAM SUB BRANCH OF THE TOWNSVILLE RSSILA - 1933

Perhaps spurred on by Halifax which had unveiled a concrete obelisk as a war memorial on ANZAC DAY 1933 and the remark on that occasion that Ingham “was still without anything of the sort” a large number of returned soldiers met in Ingham in June 1933 to discuss the formation of a branch of the RSSILA and the building of a Memorial Hall to commemorate the fallen of World War 1and to provide a meeting place for returned service men of which there were at least 120 returned soldiers living in the district.

The President and Secretary of the Townsville branch of the RSSILA addressed the meeting and suggested that a sub branch of the Townsville branch be formed. As a result of this meeting a Herbert River sub branch committee (herewith referred to as the Sub Branch) was constituted.

LITTLE PROGRESS ON MEMORIAL HALL IN THE 1930s

However, the acquisition of a block of land for a Memorial Hall did not go smoothly. The Lannercost Street site was vetoed in September 1933 by the Lands Department because a piece of land on Townsville Road had already been allotted for that purpose. When the returned soldiers had applied for the Townsville Road land in the early 1920s the Lannercost Street block was not up for application. The 1927 flood saw the Townsville Road allotment go many feet under water which proved its unsuitability for the location of the Memorial Hall, hence the Sub Branch preferring a main street location.

After another unsuccessful bid to secure any of the town allotments that went up for lease in early 1934, the Lands Department agreed that the Council could excise a portion of the Shire Hall land  for the use of the Sub Branch on the proviso that it agreed that the land would revert back to the Council when and if the returned soldiers no longer had any use for the land.

In 1935, tenders were called for the building of the hall with shops on the land adjacent to the Shire Hall but not before another block of land that came up for lease opposite the Court House on Palm Terrace was considered but rejected. But by 1936 even the idea of building near the Shire Hall had faltered.

Though fund raising by the Memorial Hall committee continued the momentum faltered.

VINCENT EDWARD HAY SWAYNE, SOLICITOR OFFERS 4 HAWKINS STREET

A new two-storied brick and concrete building never eventuated. Just before the outbreak of World War 2, which ironically would see a member of the founding Memorial Hall Committee Giuseppe Cantamessa interned as an enemy alien. Vincent E. Swayne, solicitor, and his wife Helen (nee Fraser) offered their home to the Memorial Hall committee. The house was a typical Queenslander style and incorporated a tennis court as many houses then did. Because Swayne had named his property Kentucky, the court was called the Kentucky Court. Swayne and his family were avid tennis players and visiting teams from north and south of Ingham would travel to compete on this court. On one occasion there were 150 spectators watching the hotly contested matches.

The building was acquired for £1750 payable on terms. However, Swayne suggested that he donate £250 towards the furnishing fund if the Sub Branch would pay £1500 outright in cash. The Sub Branch secured a £500 overdraft, and the deal was completed. The Diggers’ Hack Club transferred £117 to the Sub Branch to help pay off the bank overdraft. The furnishing of the ‘Diggers’ Club Rooms’ and alterations required to convert the former home to a club house would be achieved with the donations already received which amounted to £370 and a piano donated by Swayne in addition to the agreed upon £250.

The Sub Branch took possession of the house a few days before it held its first annual general meeting in its new clubhouse at 4 Hawkins Street on Sunday 6 February 1938.

The original Swayne house continued to be renovated for the growing and changing needs of the RSL. Renovations to the club house occurred in the early 1970s, 1999 and 2010. The clubhouse hosted North Queensland District Congresses in 1948, 1957, 1983,1995 and 2011.

Kentucky Tennis Court (Source: Hinchinbrook Shire Library Photograph Collection)

SOURCES:

A Short History of the beginnings of the RSL, http://www.rslangeles.com/history-of-the-rsl/

Herbert River Sub Branch Inc. https://www.rslqld.org/about-us/herbert-river-sub-branch-inc

TROVE – newspapers 1929-1959

Vidonja Balanzategui, The Herbert River Story, Ingham: Hinchinbrook Shire Council, 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“We remember you, the fallen ones who gave your lives for our freedom” - WILLIAM MARKEY – An Irish born soldier of the AIF

 

Who would have thought that in researching the origins of the naming of MARKEY STREET Ingham I would discover a regretful oversight in local RSL records.

In World War 1 in 1915, Irish born William John Markey was a labourer in Ingham when he enlisted. He was killed in 1916. William John Markey is recorded as one of the ones the All Souls Church, Victoria Estate is dedicated to. He is honoured at the Villers-Bretonneux Memorial and in the Commemorative Area Australian War Memorial - Panel 20. On his record held at the Australian War Memorial it says that the cenotaph on which his name should appear is Herbert River as that is where he enlisted. William John Markey is not recorded on the cenotaph, nor on the RSL honour board.

In World War 2 in 1943 Ingham born Thomas Markey enlisted in Townsville at the R.A.A.F Recruiting Unit, and formerly joined up in Brisbane. He did not die overseas while in action but in Greenslopes Hospital, Brisbane from an unspecified illness less than three weeks after enlistment. He is buried in Lutwyche Cemetery, Lutwyche, Brisbane, Queensland. His name is located at panel 115 in the Commemorative Area at the Australian War Memorial. On both the cenotaph and the honour board in the Ingham RSL Thomas Markey is recorded as a casualty of World War 2.

So who were Thomas and William Markey?

Private William John MARKEY. No. 373. William John Markey was born in Belfast, Antrim, Ireland. He was the son of William & Ellen Markey, of 51 Annadale St., Belfast, Ireland. He came to Australia as a 19-year-old. He enlisted on 13 April 1915 in Ingham, Queensland. His occupation prior to enlistment was labourer. His mother was recorded as his next of kin. He embarked on 25 May 1915, in Brisbane, Queensland  on the Ascanius. He was a member of the Battalion: 2^nd Australian Division Light Trench Mortar Battery, Australian Infantry. He was killed in action on 5 August 1916 aged 23 years. His personal effects: a bible, wallet and photos were returned to his mother on his death.

William John Markey (Source: Irish Born Soldiers of the AIF)

Aircraftsman Class 1 Thomas Markey 152019. Thomas was the son of Patrick Markey and wife Jane (nee Dunlop) who were early residents of the district. Thomas was born on 26 April 1925. Patrick made application for a perpetual lease selection in the Parish of Lannercost in 1927. The Markey family had a sawmill at Log Creek in 1924. Thomas enlisted on 17 July 1943 at 18 years of age. His occupation was mail contractor, but he also worked in his father’s sawmill. He had hoped to take on a technical traineeship but failed the aptitude test so was given the duties of aircraft hand. His father was listed as his next of kin. Tragically Thomas died less than three weeks after enlistment in Greenslopes Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland on 4 August 1943 of an unspecified illness. According to a Hinchinbrook Shire Council document, Future Road Names - Hinchinbrook Shire Council, dated 2011 the street is named for Thomas Markey.

Thomas Markey (Source: AWM)

Rectifying the omission

Nobody would argue that Thomas Markey’s name should not be on a cenotaph, after all he volunteered and died while on duty even if it was in the comfort of a hospital bed back in Australia, rather than on the field in course of raging battle. However, it does bring into question what is the local RSL’s criteria for both cenotaph and honour board. As cenotaphs began to be erected across Australia after World War 1 they had different criteria for who should be recorded on the cenotaph. Usually though, the cenotaphs record those war casualties who died in the field and who were residing in the place of enlistment at the time of enlistment. If Thomas Markey who lived in Ingham but enlisted in Townsville and died on home ground is recorded why then is William Markey who lived in Ingham, enlisted in Ingham and died in France in action not?

How different the criteria can be is illustrated by the centotaphs that record the REJECTS! Yes, that is the word used on the cenotaphs! Rejects were those local men who enlisted but were rejected because of flat feet, myopia, sunken chest or other physical conditions that were thought would hinder their ability to perform their duties in a war zone. What is demonstrated in including a REJECTS column is that those men had exhibited their bravery in volunteering and so were worthy of recognition.

The Commonwealth War Graves Commission and the Australian War Memorial are discerning about who is considered a war casualty. For instance, local Victor John Cowen was only relatively recently added to the Ingham cenotaph and RSL honour board at the intervention of Lloyd Greentree on behalf of the Herbert River RSL sub-branch. Cowen was not initially recorded as ‘war dead’ because he died as the result of a motor bike accident in an area not publicly classified as a war zone at the time of the Indonesia-Malaysia conflict in which Cowen had seen action in flying missions. Only in 1996 did the Australian Government release classified information about the exact nature of Australia’s involvement in the Indonesia-Malaysia conflict and its secret cross-border missions, so allowing commemorations of those Australians, like Cowen who had lost their lives.

William John Markey is another clear omission from both the Ingham’s cenotaph and the RSL honour board and hopefully that omission will be rectified before the next ANZAC Day.

Sources:

Irish born soldiers of the AIF. https://irishsoldiersaifww1.weebly.com/

W. Markey. https://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/Interface/ViewImage.aspx?B=8214871

T. Markey. https://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/Interface/ViewImage.aspx?B=5364915

 

 

ABERGOWRIE AND THE SOLDIER SETTLEMENT SCHEME

With ANZAC Day nearly here and my work on identifying the origins of Hinchinbrook Shire road and street names of the district I have been thinking about a historical photograph which is a favourite of mine. It was published in the book South Pacific Enterprise, The Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited. The photographer was the inimitable Max Dupain and the photograph is of soldier settlers in Abergowrie. He has captured them looking into the distance as if contemplating a happier, more prosperous and peaceful future than the horror of the past they had just endured. One of the soldiers is William (Bill) Richmond Rae.

Source: South Pacific Enterprise

As far as I can make our at least 14 roads in the district, particularly the Abergowrie area, are named for returned solders-or soldier settlers as they were known in the 1950s. In all, however, 42 returned soldiers were allocated land in the Herbert River district. 

From road names I have identified these soldier settlers and I am open to correction: Henry and George Copley; David Craig; Reay Craven; Roy Dowling; Thomas Finlayson; Donald and Murray Groundwater; Charles Irlam; Arthur Lee; Stanley McCarthy; William Rae; Herman Strid; Douglas Venables; Herbert Wallis; Joseph Wilkinson. Noel Trost was another, though no road is named after him. But that is only 17 names of the 42. 

 How and why did soldier settlement come about in the Herbert River district? Compared to the south of the continent, the north was and continues to be sparsely settled. The close proximity of the battle front to Australia in World War 2 only heightened “the virtual obsession of land settlement authorities” (Tanzer). A solution was closer settlement with agricultural development. So, a Royal Commission on Soldier Settlement on Sugar Lands in 1946 looked into settlement of returned soldiers on farms north of Proserpine, but especially in the far northern sugar growing districts. The Herbert River district was viewed as particularly vulnerable and could be bolstered by new settlement of both returned solder and others. 

Meanwhile the demand for increased milling capacity to handle the Herbert River district’s crop was once more on the agenda. West of Ingham township had long been identified as a possible location with farmers petitioning the government in 1916 for a central sugar mill at Long Pocket. However now post World War 2 CSR and local farmers came up with the ‘Abergowrie Scheme’ which would achieve the duplication of Victoria Mill and the extension of cane growing into the Abergowrie district. 58 square kilometres of countryside along the Herbert River were identified as suitable for sugar cane cultivation.

The Abergowrie Scheme was ambitious, and it was planned that 200 new farms would be established by the end of 1954. The 'War Service (Sugar Industry) Settlement Act of 1946' was consequently passed and ballots were conducted of returned soldier applicants. Those selected for the Herbert River district were allotted 24.3 hectares (60 acres). By 1954 120 farms had been taken up by prospective growers, 78 of which had received assignments under the Sugar Industry Act, while 42 were ex-servicemen or soldier settlers who had secured their blocks by ballot. The first to take up their assignments were the soldier settlers during 1952 and 1953. 

 As John Tanzer, who had interviewed settlers from the period who were still on their farms in 1978 wrote: “During this early period of settlement the area was very isolated and living conditions were harsh. Ingham is some 50 kms. away and then was only accessible by a single dirt road. During the wet season this road was impossible for weeks at a time. There were no telephones except for one at a local agricultural college. Thus isolation was a major problem facing the new settlers and their families. In addition to the loneliness and isolation, living conditions were poor. There was no electricity in the area until 1957. Before this the new settlers had to rely on wood or coke stoves and kerosene or petrol lights. The only water available came from sinking bores. To begin with, many settlers lived in tents while their land was being cleared. Then they moved into farm sheds which were built first to store machinery. Half the shed would be used as living space and the other half set aside for the invaluable.” Moreover, “Despite the Central Sugar Cane Prices Board being assured by a spokesman for the proposal that, ‘the bulk of the land is lightly timbered, some of its river flats naturally clear and there is some scrub’ (Australian Sugar Journal, 1950), most of the land was covered by dense rainforest. This made the clearing of the land both time consuming and expensive” [requiring bulldozers]. “This high initial outlay naturally involved new settlers in substantial loan operations.” 

As soon as they were able both soldier settlers and others started abandoning their blocks. Up until 1958 they were prohibited (except in severe extenuating circumstances) by the Central Sugar Cane Prices Board from selling up. 45% of the solder settlers had sold up after 13 years and by 1978 when Tanzer conducted his research 27 solder settlers had left. While comparatively more soldier settlers exited than others in the five-year period between 1958 to 1962, once the five year sale prohibition had been lifted a half of all the new settlers who were to leave their farms did so. (Tanzer). Bill Rae was not one of those. Arthur Lee died tragically in 1953, but several others like Bill Rae weathered the adversities and held onto their farms. 

Source: South Pacific Enterprise

The reasons why those soldier settlers exited who did can be guessed at: • The benevolent motivation of authorities regarding returned soldiers-their eligibility was decided with less caution than in the cases of the other settlers • most of them were from the south and had never before grown sugar cane but rather had worked on dairy or sheep properties • were new to the Herbert River district so did not have family support or relatives on adjacent farms with whom they could have shared machinery, labour and expertise • they received smaller farms, in some cases less than the minimum area deemed necessary to provide an 'average living'. Of those new settlers, soldier settlers or others, who received less than 28.2 hectares (70 acres), Tanzer calculated that fewer than 50% survived • High establishment costs • Inability to access to adequate finance • Mechanization, increased costs, imperative to increase assignment • Constraint of size of initial land grant made purchasing additional assignments from those who exited prohibitive • Isolation and harsh living conditions 

For those who had to walk away from their farms on the Herbert it must have bitter sweet. They came here with so much hope. Most would be dead now, but for some their names live on not only when their families speak their names but in the collective memory of a community as residents traverse the roads named for them. 

Source: South Pacific Enterprise. The Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited. Sydney: Angus and Robertson,1956.

Tanzer John M. AN INVESTIGATION OF NEW SETTLEMENT IN THE SUGAR INDUSTRY AS A RESULT OF POST-WAR EXPANSIONS. A CASE STUDY IN THE HERBERT RIVER DISTRICT, NORTH QUEENSLAND (Bachelor of Economics, Hons, 1979.) Vidonja Balanzategui, Bianka. RADF Street naming project.