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.