Title: Thomas Mitchell: Surveyor General and Explorer
Author: J H L Cumpston
* A Project Gutenberg of Australia eBook *
eBook No.: 0700531h.html
Language:  English
Date first posted: April 2007
Date most recently updated: April 2007

Production notes: References for the notes contained within []
are located at the end of the ebook.

Project Gutenberg of Australia eBooks are created from printed editions
which are in the public domain in Australia, unless a copyright notice
is included. We do NOT keep any eBooks in compliance with a particular
paper edition.

Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the
copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing this
file.

This eBook is made available at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg of Australia License which may be viewed online at
http://gutenberg.net.au/licence.html

GO TO Project Gutenberg of Australia HOME PAGE

Thomas Mitchell

Surveyor General and Explorer

by

J H L Cumpston

(1954)

This volume is dedicated to the memory of
RICHARD CUNNINGHAM
JOHN BAXTER
JAMES POOLE
JOHN GILBERT
and the many unknown or forgotten humble
builders of our nation, who, after tragic
deaths, lie in lonely graves in the still silent
places of our land.

CONTENTS

Introduction
I     PROLOGUE
II    MILITARY CAREER
III   COLONIAL POLICY AND PERSONALITIES
IV    CONDITIONS IN THE EARLIER YEARS
V     GOVERNOR DARLING
VI    THE FIRST EXPEDITION
VII   THE COLONIAL OFFICE IS CRITICAL
VIII  THE SECOND EXPEDITION
IX    THE THIRD EXPEDITION
X    FOUR YEARS' LEAVE OF ABSENCE
XI   IN POLITICS AND OUT AGAIN
XII  THE FOURTH EXPEDITION
XIII SECOND VISIT TO ENGLAND
XIV  THE LAST YEARS
XV   EPILOGUE
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
References
Bibliography


LIST OF PLATES

Front Thomas Mitchell, about 1839
I     Sir George Murray
      From a painting by Pieter Christoph Wonder in the National Portrait Gallery
II    Salamanca, 1812
      From a drawing by Thomas Mitchell, reproduced from Wyld's Atlas
      by courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum
III   Governor Sir Ralph Darling
      From a painting in the possession of Mrs Anderson of Port Sorell, Tasmania
IV    "Craigend", Mitchell's first residence at Darlinghurst
      Lennox Bridge
V     The Pass at Mt. Victoria when it was opened
      The Pass at Mt. Victoria as it is now
VI    Monument marking the point of departure of the second, third and fourth
      expeditions
      Richard Cunningham's grave
VII   One of the trees blazed by Lieutenant Zouch
      The Darling River at Menindee
VIII  Mt. Arapiles
      Mitchell's sketch of Mt. Arapiles
      Reproduced from 'Three Expeditions into the Interior of Eastern Australia'
      by Thomas Mitchell
IX    Some Mitchell monuments:
      Middle Creek, Newstead, Expedition Pass
X     "Parkhall" as Mitchell built it
      "Parkhall" as it is to-day ("St. Mary's Towers")
XI    Thomas Mitchell, about 1847
      Reproduced by permission of the Royal Geographical Society of Queensland
XII   Monument to Mitchell at St. George
      Monument to Mitchell at Blackall
XIII  Yuranigh's grave
XIV   Mitchell's paint-box, camera lucida, and pistol
      Reproduced by permission of the Royal Geographical Society of Queensland
XV    "Carthona", Darling Point: Mitchell's last home
XVI   Mitchell in his later years


LIST OF MAPS

I    Map of Spain showing the main Peninsular War battles
II   Plan of Mitchell's country property "Parkhall" in the County of Camden
III  Map showing the route followed by Mitchell on the first part of his
     expedition to the Barwon River
IV   Map showing the second part of Mitchell's journey to the Barwon
     and his return to Tamworth
V    Map showing the route followed by Mitchell from Boree and along
     the Bogan on his second expedition. Cunningham's probable track,
     and his grave, are also shown
VI   Map showing the whole of Mitchell's second expedition. Part of
     Mitchell's route (from Forbes to Wentworth, thence to Swan Hill)
     on his third expedition in the following year is shown also
VII  Map showing part of Mitchell's journey into "Australia Felix":
     from Swan Hill to Mt. Arapiles
VIII Map showing Mitchell's entry into the Glenelg River region
     and the beginning of his return journey on the third expedition
IX   Map showing the last stage of the third expedition: Mitchell's route
     from Castlemaine to the Murrumbidgee
X    Map showing the first part of Mitchell's fourth expedition:
     the route from Boree to Narran Lake
XI   Map showing the journey from Narran Lake to Mt. Bindango,
     and part of the return journey, on Mitchell's fourth expedition
XII  Map showing Mitchell's journey north to Alpha, his route to the
     west from Pyramid Depot to Isisford, and part of his return journey

INTRODUCTION

For the purposes of a story of this kind frequent quotations from letters are necessary. This applies particularly to letters between, the Governor in Sydney and the Minister controlling the Colonial Office in London. The identity of each Minister and each Governor is indicated from time to time in the text, but for reference a full list is set out in Appendix A.

For the benefit of the reader modern place names have been used where necessary: it will be readily understood that some of these names did not exist at the relative period, although, as Mitchell was generous in the distribution of place names, these instances are not numerous.

The fullest acknowledgment must be made by the author for the generous help given by: Miss Mander Jones, Mitchell Librarian, and the staff of the Mitchell Library; the staff of the National Library at Canberra; the Chief Librarian, Public Library of Victoria; the Under-Secretary, Lands Department of New South Wales; the Secretary, Western Lands Commission, New South Wales; the Clerk of Parliament, Victorian Legislative Assembly; the Secretary of the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, Mr A. T. Latham, and Mr A. J. Hopton, Treasurer of that Society; Mrs W. Bassett of Armadale, Victoria, for information concerning the Henty brothers; Mr D. F. Elder for much helpful advice and especially for information concerning Mitchell's military career; and my daughter, Miss I. M. Cumpston, D.Phil., who has searched the Colonial Office records in the Public Record Office in London for the correspondence which passed direct between Sir Thomas Mitchell and the Colonial Office.

For the illustrations in this volume the author is indebted to, and acknowledges the courtesy of: the Royal Australian Historical Society for the frontispiece; the Trustees of the National British Museum for Plate I; the Trustees of the Portrait Gallery, London, for Plate II; Mrs Anderson of Port Sorell, Tasmania, for Plate III; the Trustees of the Mitchell Library for Plate IV (above) and Plate X (above); Mr W. L. Havard of Liverpool, New South Wales, for Plate IV (below) and Plate V; Mr W. R. Glasson of Molong, New South Wales, for Plate VI (below) and Plate XIII; the Australian Geographical Society for Plate VII (below); the Victorian Railways Commissioners for Plate VIII (above); the Royal Geographical Society of Queensland for Plates Plate XI, Plate XIV and Plate XVI; and Mr P. H. Bushell for Plate XV.

Men in great places are thrice servants:
servants of the Sovereign or State: servants
of fame: and servants of business.

Bacon: 'Of Great Place'

CHAPTER I - Prologue

Thomas Livingstone* Mitchell was born at Craigend, Stirlingshire, Scotland, on 15 June 1792, and was baptized three days later.[1] There is some evidence that his parents were neither prosperous nor socially influential; but he was able to obtain, from some source, money for the purchase of a commission and later for his marriage.[2]

[* This name has been variously spelt, but on the certificate of baptism it is shown as above, as it was in his own signature sixty-two years later.]

There is clear evidence in later life that he had received a good education, also some evidence that he had, while quite young, some skill as an artist. On the other hand, there is no evidence that he had, in his early life, experience in surveying which was to be his occupation in the army and his profession in civil life.

His father died when he was still young; just when is not known, but it was before he was nineteen years old. At the age of seventeen he "managed" Rumford Colliery for his uncle Alexander Livingston of Parkhall and rendered a claim for payment for this service.[3] As an early indication of his meticulous care in appraising the value of his services, the claim was for three months and nineteen days at £120 per annum--the amount being £36 9s. 10d.: in making this claim he indicated in plain terms that he had no hope of help or consideration from the person concerned. His father's name was John Mitchell and his mother had been Janet Wilson; he had at least two brothers, Houston and John. Houston will appear later in this story. John became a merchant in Leith and published various works, including Illustrations of the Runic Literature of Scandinavia (1863).[4]

Mitchell's military career will be described in the next chapter. While still a lieutenant, and while engaged in the survey of battle sites in Portugal and Spain, he married, on 10 June 1818, Mary Blunt, the daughter of General Blunt, an English general serving with the Portuguese army.

In connexion with this marriage some items of intrinsic interest deserve to be recorded. Just before the marriage Mitchell serenaded his lady under her window at Lisbon. As an example of the romantic standards of the time, the text was as follows:

A SERENADE[5]

Sung to the tune "Tweedside" and accompanied on the guitar by
Senor Vigo Rabaglio under Miss Blunt's window
at Lisbon, at 2 a.m., May 1818.

1

Can music awake you fair maid
Oh! are those bright eyes hid in sleep
Ah! hear how in night's sable shade
I come to your windows to weep
Not the stars now above me displayed
Nor Cynthia shining so fair
Nor the dew on the orange-flow'r blade
Can with thee in brightness compare.

2

Ah! could I but tell you my pain
'Twould ease the sore wound in my breast
But to Mary the tale would be vain
She sleeps for her heart is at rest
Cupid! bear to her pillow my strain
A balm to the wound you impart
Say a captive is galled with his chain
And your arrow strike deep in her heart.

A marriage settlement was drawn up in June 1818.[6] General Blunt was to find £3,000, and Lieutenant Thomas Mitchell £2,000, both amounts to be paid into a trust fund, the interest--but not the capital--o be paid regularly by the trustees to Mitchell and his wife. The deed of settlement contains this paragraph:

In witness thereof the undersigned have drawn up the present writing in good faith, no lawyers being resident to execute the same--the undersigned solemnly pledging themselves to sign any other paper to this effect (the same being necessary) drawn up in regular form, and hereby declaring that they wish this to be read and acted upon as understood by common comprehension and not subject to the equivocations which those versed in law may detect.

Mitchell wrote to tell his mother of this marriage, telling her that Mary Blunt had been born in the West Indies, had gone to England when three years old, was not quite eighteen when she married

and is not much acquainted with the care of a house, but considering her age she does very well. She left boarding school in London about a year ago. The rank of her father and a small settlement, which will however prove sufficient with economy, and my pay, will enable us to live in these trying times.[7]

From time to time in this story there will be glimpses of their private life; but, having regard to the main purpose of this narrative, it will be sufficient to record evidence of the success of this marriage. They had twelve children--six sons, Livingstone, Roderick, Murray, Campbell, Thomas, Richard; and six daughters, Georgina, Maria, Emily, Camilla, Alicia, Blanche.

Mitchell, writing from London during his second visit to England in 1847 to his son Livingstone, said:

Give my affectionate love to Mamma and say I am most anxiously awaiting the "arrivals at Deal" in the papers in hopes of hearing how she is and how all are--I am very lonely here without one of the family with me. God bless you all Livy, Roddy, Emily, Cammy, Milly, Tommy, Alice, Dicky, and Blanche.[8]

Georgina and Maria had died young, Murray was dead at the time this letter was written.

Mitchell's wife, by this time Lady Mitchell, wrote to her husband a letter without address or date, but probably written some time during the 'forties. She began:

My dearest Mitchell: I was made very happy by your affectionate letter, and shall endeavour by every means I can to mitigate the annoyances you meet with in the world.[9]

At one time Lady Mitchell must have suffered a serious illness for Dr (later Sir) Charles Nicholson wrote to her congratulations on her recovery and advised her

to take more care than you are usually wont to do of your health, not to sacrifice your health and strength unnecessarily in domestic concerns.[10]

During the last years of Mitchell's life he lost two of his elder sons, Roderick and Campbell, by tragic deaths. At the end, writing within one year after Mr. Mitchell's death, James Bonwick said of him:

As a parent, a citizen, a gentleman, a scholar, he has embalmed his memory alike in the archives of philosophy, the annals of colonial history, the hearts of his friends, and the sanctity of home.[11]

Nicholson was a medical practitioner in Sydney who was greatly respected: he was a member of the Legislative Council of New South Wales, and Speaker of that Council intermittently between 1846 and 1856; later he became the first President of the Legislative Council of Queensland. He was closely associated with the cause of higher education in New South Wales and took a prominent part in the founding of the University of Sydney. He was knighted in 1852 and made a baronet in 1859.

Bonwick was an educationist who came to Australia in 1841, and was Inspector of Denominational Schools in Victoria from 1856: his hobby was early Australian history. He wrote, and published in 1856, The Discovery and Settlement of Port Phillip. He retired and returned to England, where he spent much time in searching the records in London for despatches and documents relating to the early history of New South Wales. This was the material from which came the Historical Records of New South Wales.

That is enough to give the picture of his private life: there is no hint of scandal, no lapses such as have marked the careers of other men: there was, from all the evidence, a normal home life of affectionate relationships. There were adversities, the death of his sons, the illness of his wife, financial worries--these things come to all men. Through all the shifts and changes of public life, all the irritations and adversities, he kept the friendship of men like Nicholson, Bonwick, and many others--men highly respected in the community; and he had a wife who was a faithful comrade all through his troubled career, and who survived him.

His private life was not unusual, it is his official life which commands attention as part of our national story.

CHAPTER II - Military Career

In the preceding chapter it was stated that Mitchell was managing his uncle's colliery at the age of seventeen years. It will presently be stated that he was gazetted lieutenant in the in July 1811, when he had just passed his nineteenth, birthday There is complete uncertainty as to his activities during the intervening period: the one fact which emerges as his story proceeds is that he had great natural skill as a draughtsman, but whether he used this skill for any practical purpose at this time is not known.

The statement has been repeatedly made in recognized works of reference that he entered the army as a volunteer when sixteen years old: the most definite of these is that by Johns in the Australian Biographical Dictionary:

He entered the Army in 1808 and was A.D.C. to the Duke of Wellington: was known as "the Duke's famous draughtsman".

The Dictionary of National Biography states that he entered the army as a volunteer.[1]

It is necessary to examine these statements with some care. If, as Johns states, he entered the army in 1808 he would be only sixteen years old, but he was managing his uncle's colliery when he was seventeen, so that statement is probably incorrect: the other two may be regarded with equal reserve. As to the statement that he entered the army at some stage during this period of uncertainty, the evidence is inconclusive.

The term "volunteer" had, at that time, a more restricted and specific meaning than it has now. A volunteer was one who served as a junior officer, without pay, so that he might establish some claim to a commission without having to provide the large amount of money which was necessary to purchase even the lowest order of commission. Sir Charles Oman, the standard authority on the British army of this period has described the position:

In addition to the officers regularly commissioned, a battalion had often with it one or two "volunteers"...young men who were practically probationers; they were allowed to come out to an active service battalion on the chance of being gazetted to it without purchase on their own responsibility. They carried muskets and served in the ranks, but were allowed to wear uniforms of a better cloth than that given to the rank and file, and messed with the officers.[2]

The first clear evidence is in a draft, or copy, of an application by Mitchell to the Commander-in-Chief, Sir David Dundas:

Your memorialist, a native of Scotland, aged nineteen, is the son of respectable parentage now dead:* and has received a liberal and classical education qualifying him to fulfil the duties of a gentleman and a soldier.

Your memorialist ardently desires to enter into the services of his country in the Army, but has not the immediate means of purchasing a commission, nor other expectation of success than through the well-known liberality of Your Excellency.[3]

[* This refers to his father only: his mother was still alive.]

He stated that he was prepared to serve in any of His Majesty's regiments, and was anxious for active service where he might "have an opportunity of evincing his zeal for his country".

This memorial, in the copy which is available, carries neither date nor address; but it contains some internal evidence. He desired to enter the army, was anxious for active service, but had neither means to purchase a commission, nor the influence to secure him one. These statements are inconsistent with two, or more, years of active service as a volunteer. There is, moreover, some indirect evidence; from his many references to events in the Peninsular War the battles before 1811 are noticeably absent. His young mind could not have remained unimpressed by Rolica, Vimiero, Talavera, Bussaco, Torres Vedras, Fuentes d'Onoro, and Albuera--yet his later recorded reminiscences do not extend into this period. His service later was with the famous Light Brigade and he must have been stirred, if he had been present then, by memory of the cheers which greeted the arrival of that brigade after a forced march of forty-three miles in twenty-two hours at Talavera, nor would he forget that day at Bussaco when the Light Division under Craufurd was inflicting, heavy defeat upon Ney against superior numbers.

Mitchell never forgot his experiences in the Peninsula and the absence of any reference to this period before 1811 is significant: it seems, therefore, that the statement that he served as a volunteer before receiving a commission must be regarded as very doubtful. It could, on present evidence, be established only after patient research amongst the contemporary muster rolls, a task difficult enough under any circumstances, but especially difficult because it is not known in which battalion he is presumed to have served.

The matter is, however, placed beyond reasonable doubt by a document in the Mitchell Library,[4] bearing Mitchell's own signature, in which he states that his age on first appointment to the army was nineteen years, and the date of that appointment was 21 July 1811: this date does not agree with the official record which dates that appointment as 24 July. As the document was written when he was sixty-two years old, the difference of three days is not material. The general evidence here submitted also negatives the statement in the Australian Encyclopaedia that he entered the army under the patronage of the Duke of Wellington.

Before leaving this debatable ground it is necessary to dispose of one statement. One writer has stated that Wellington had entrusted to Mitchell the task of laying out the lines of the famous fortifications at Torres Vedras.[5] The statement is absurd. Mitchell was then only seventeen years old and, as has been suggested above, was not even in the army. The lines were constructed by Colonel Fletcher, the Chief Engineer, under Wellington's personal supervision.

Passing now from this uncertain period of two years about which so little is known, the first definitely fixed point in the story is Mitchell's gazettal, on 24 July 1811, as a second lieutenant in the First Battalion of the 95th Regiment of Foot.[6]

As already stated, Mitchell's application for a commission had been made to Dundas as Commander-in-Chief, the application stating that Mitchell was then "aged nineteen": as he was not nineteen until 15 June 1811, and Dundas had ceased to be Commander-in-Chief in May of that year, Mitchell was probably anticipating a little in stating his age as nineteen. He was, however, commissioned one month after his nineteenth birthday.

He was extremely fortunate in being posted to the 95th Regiment, one of the most deservedly famous in the Peninsular army. Captain J. Kincaid, Mitchell's "old and esteemed friend", wrote of the 95th Regiment:

We were the light regiment of the Light Division and fired the first and the last shot in almost every battle, siege and skirmish in which the army was engaged during the war.

This was the first regiment to be armed with the new rifled-bore weapon in place of the old smooth-bore musket which was still the main weapon used by the infantry.[7] The 95th, with the 43rd and the 52nd Regiments, formed the light troops which were the British answer to the French tirailleurs. These tirailleurs in battle acted as skirmishers ahead of the main attacking French column, and it was their function, acting as snipers behind any available cover, to cause disorder in the waiting British ranks by shooting as many men or officers as they could. But the activities of the British Light Division were not limited to such skirmishing functions: they were prominent in many frontal attacks and fierce close fighting. Their dark green uniform made them a distinctive group amongst the red jackets of the rest of the army. Their commander, General Robert Craufurd, unfortunately killed at Ciudad Rodrigo, was himself a distinctive personality, worthy of this famous division.

Mitchell, or indeed any other officer or private of that magnificent Light Division, could well feel, all through his life, pride in his service with it. But while their courage in battle and their military efficiency were beyond question, the personal character and behaviour of the individuals was not always on this high plane. The army, owing to the conditions of recruitment and service in those days, contained too high a proportion of loose characters and some criminals.[8] Even their courage was not always controlled, especially in the earlier stages of the war in the Peninsula: at Rolica, for example, which was one of Wellington's earliest battles in Portugal, the riflemen outposts pressed on too far and were for a while in danger.[9] The loose characters caused Wellington much worry by stealing from the local residents, and they were responsible for the disgraceful behaviour of the army after the fall of Badajoz, Ciudad Rodrigo, and San Sebastian, when drunkenness, murder, rape, and looting were practically unrestrained. It will presently be seen that even the 95th were involved in these excesses.

Wellington had arrived in Portugal in April 1809, to take command of the British army with Lisbon as his headquarters. So complete had been the Napoleonic domination of Europe that a small strip of the western coast of Portugal from Corunna to Lisbon was the only ground in all Europe left for the British army as a base for military operations (Map I). Napoleon had boastfully declared his determination to drive the British into the sea from even this tenuous hold on the Continent. The activities under Sir John Moore during 1808 had not affected the situation as just described.

An initial series of small successes by Wellington added to the difficulties experienced by the French through long-haul transport. A hostile population caused the French to retreat, and within four weeks after Wellington had landed in Lisbon no Frenchmen other than prisoners and deserters remained in Portugal. But these favourable conditions did not continue: the French returned in force and Wellington, hampered by lack of reinforcements and supplies from England as well as by an unfriendly Parliament at home, was obliged to assume a defensive strategy, holding the narrow Lisbon peninsula between the Tagus River and the sea.

This prolonged period of defence culminated in the French attack on the historic lines of Torres Vedras. When this failed the French decided to withdraw from Portugal, and by the first week in April 1811, again no French troops were left in Portugal. So clear and decisive had been the results of Wellington's clashes with the Napoleonic armies that, for the first time since Napoleon had begun his triumphal conquest of Europe, there dawned a hope that the invincible French army was not, after all, undefeatable. While this hope was slowly rising in Europe Wellington's own army had no doubts: well equipped, exuberant in victory, they had a supreme confidence in their great leader which nothing could, or did, destroy.

But, Portugal now being freed, Wellington was not content to rest there. The great frontier fortresses of Badajoz and Ciudad Rodrigo on the western Spanish border remained, and Massena was still loose in Spain with a large force. Wellington decided to move into Spain. He met and defeated Massena at Fuentes d'Onoro on 3 May 1811, while Beresford had, at the same time, met Soult at Albuera and gained a doubtful victory. The effect of these two field engagements concentrated attention on Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajoz, to which Wellington now moved.

At this point the known military career of Mitchell begins. The possibility of service as a volunteer during all this period has already been discussed and discounted. But his commission in the 95th Regiment dated from 24 July 1811, and his service began from that date.

The date on which he arrived in Portugal to begin active war service is not known: the current circumstances important to his personal career can now, at this stage, be stated. He joined, as a most junior officer, a regiment of seasoned campaigners proudly conscious of great battle honours, confident in their superiority under their trusted commander Craufurd: he became a member of an army which had been hammered into a condition of high morale and great efficiency by a military genius. As a young man at the most impressionable age he could not have escaped the influences of such an environment; the Peninsular veteran was very apt to have a firm conviction that he was one of a special order of mankind.

Mitchell's commission was almost coincident with the retirement of Sir David Dundas from the post of Commander-in-Chief and the assumption of that post by the Duke of York, whose administration became notorious for patronage, nepotism, and inefficient, if not corrupt, administration. No officer could remain unaware of, or unaffected by, these conditions.

Wellington was fortunate in having General Sir George Murray (Plate I) as his Quartermaster General. In the discharge of the responsible and varied duties of that position Murray proved himself to be extremely competent. Not only was he responsible for all supplies for the army, a service which became complicated by Wellington's rapid movements, but he was responsible for all intelligence work and especially that of the collection of information about the country over which the army was expected to move. Officers on headquarters staff, or those temporarily doing staff duties, were required to travel widely, often at a distance from the area of active military operations, mapping, sketching, reporting on roads, bridges, resources, and billeting facilities in villages and towns. This work became so extensive that it was found necessary to call on officers, not officially on the staff, to assist in this work. As it will appear later Mitchell found himself associated with, and distinguished himself in, these activities.[10]

Murray was relieved of his post as Quartermaster General soon after Mitchell's arrival in the Peninsula: he was "promoted" in 1811 to an unnecessary post in Ireland to make way for a favourite of the Duke of York, Colonel James Willoughby Gordon, who, however, proved to be incompetent and disloyal and was later removed. Murray was reappointed to his former post in September 1813.

From the time of joining his regiment in Portugal, Mitchell spent his time partly on service with his regiment and partly on staff duty engaged in topographical and survey intelligence work: it was during this work that his skill as a draughtsman and indeed as an artist began to be recognized. Wyld's Atlas of the Peninsula War contains a sketch labelled "Affair near El Bodon, 25 September 1811, from the original by Major Sir T. Mitchell".

Although this affair at El Bodon was a minor conflict it was notable in that Wellington himself, with his staff, was surrounded by the French and had literally to fight his way out of real danger.

It is known that Murray before his supersession had intermittently employed Mitchell on intelligence work so that if this sketch was made at the time this is the first record of Mitchell at work as an officer in the army.

The year 1811 closed with a suspension of hostilities for the winter, but in 1812 Wellington began that series of movements which was to take him across Spain into France and to the final triumph. He began with an attack on the fortress of Ciudad Rodrigo without waiting for the end of the winter. He invested this strong fortress on 8 January 1812, and took it by assault on 19 January--a success very important to Wellington's plans, as this stronghold was blocking his proposed north-easterly route through Spain. Here the Light Division was well in the front line of the attack and greatly distinguished itself, their commander, Craufurd, being killed. A party of one hundred volunteers from the 95th Regiment took part in the actual storming of the breach through which the fortress was finally taken.

In connexion with this siege Mitchell's father-in-law, General Blunt, writing to him from Cork (5 August 1834) and referring to William Napier's book History of the War in the Peninsula, said: "I perceive in the notes or appendix you are honourably mentioned as one of four only remaining in the breach at Rodrigo."[11] The reference is to a statement by an eye-witness contained in an appendix to vol. iv of Napier's work. But General Blunt was mistaken; the Mitchell who led this storming party was Captain (later Colonel) Mitchell of the 2nd Battalion of the 95th Regiment.[12]

What part Thomas Mitchell played during this siege is unknown, but that he was present is shown by the fact that he received the appropriate bar to his general service medal.

After the town had been taken there were scenes of disorder, violence, and brutality. On the morning following the capture, Wellington, riding into the town, saw a disorderly group of soldiers, and enquired who they were. He was disturbed to find that they were from his trusted 95th, who had fought gloriously the night before.[13]

Now Wellington turned his attention to the fortress of Badajoz, which threatened the rear of his projected northward march. On 16 March 1812, he invested this place. Here we have definite record of Mitchell; he wrote of his feelings when, on 17 March 1836, he began his third journey of exploration:

I remembered that exactly on that morning twenty-four years before, I marched down the glaciers of Elvas, to the tune of "St. Patrick's day in the morning" as the sun rose over the beleaguered towers of Badajoz.[14]

Badajoz was captured on 6 April 1812. Here again the Light Division was prominent and distinguished itself by cool bravery and fierce courage. Its losses were heavy, there were twenty-five casualties amongst the officers alone.

Napier in the work already quoted wrote:

Who shall measure out the glory of Ridge, of Macleod, of Nicholas, or of O'Hare of the 95th who perished on the breach at the head of the stormers, and with him nearly all the volunteers for that desperate service.[15]

Mitchell's personal share on this occasion is not known but he was not likely to forget the occasion and in 1836 on the Glenelg River in Victoria he named his base depot Fort O'Hare

in memory of a truly brave soldier, my commanding officer, who fell at Badajoz in leading the forlorn hope of the Light Division to the storm."[16]

He also gave the name of O'Hare Creek to a tributary of George's River near his property at Wilton. Major Peter O'Hare had achieved the distinction, very uncommon in those times, of having risen from the ranks by sheer merit.

At Badajoz, as at Rodrigo, the capture of the town was followed by three days of riotous disorder, with murder, rape, looting, and unrestrained drunkenness. The brave, disciplined, British army became an uncontrolled, savage mob. Mitchell's reactions to these two scenes of violence are not indicated by anything definite during his later life: deductions might be made, but they would be unsafe and unjustified.

Now a new phase began: Wellington was free to move northwards, Spain being unguarded by western strongposts. It is necessary here to anticipate a little and consider the direction of Wellington's future movements. His route was to be along a direct line, in a north-easterly direction from Lisbon to that angle where the eastern coast of France joins the northern coast of Spain. From Lisbon to Salamanca the route, after following the valley lands of the Tagus for about one hundred miles turns northwards for about another hundred and thirty miles along the highland broken country between two great ranges of mountains up to six thousand feet high. The first section of this route was already well known to Wellington and his staff, but the second section was more difficult, with continual crossing of rapid streams (tributaries forming the head waters of the Douro River), on one of which lies the town of Salamanca.

In this region the country presented special difficulties requiring accurate and detailed intelligence work: and it was here that Mitchell laid the foundations of his reputation, for he was seconded from May 1812 to the Quartermaster General's staff under Gordon. He was, for the next five months, busy on field work, surveying, mapping, and general topographical intelligence.

After necessary reconnaissances and assembling of supplies, Wellington moved north to Salamanca (Plate II) where, after capturing the forts on 27 June 1812, he met the main .French army on 15 July. During the next seven days both armies were manoeuvring for position. On the night of 21 July there was a heavy thunderstorm, and suddenly, at midday on 22 July, Wellington decided to attack. The French were overwhelmingly defeated. Lord Liverpool, now Prime Minister in England, stated that it was the most decisive as well as the most brilliant victory which had crowned the British army for centuries.[17] The French General Foy who commanded one of the French divisions recorded in his diary that the battle had raised Wellington almost to the level of Marlborough and that Wellington had shown himself a great and able master of manoeuvres. Although the campaign was far from over, the Salamanca battle ended the French domination in Spain.

As Mitchell was still engaged on staff work it is probable that he took no part in the actual fighting but he was almost certainly there at the time, as he received the bar for this battle, and his memories of this time remained, for on 22 July 1846--the thirty-fourth anniversary of the battle--he, being then in Queensland on his fourth expedition, entered in his journal:

The bright prospects of this morning were a pleasant contrast to the temporary difficulties of yesterday. Such is human life in travelling, and so it was in war at Salamanca this day thirty-four years back.[18]

Actually it was not as it had been at Salamanca, for whereas then a fine day had followed a thunderstorm, in 1846 when Mitchell made this entry in his diary he had just found a welcome river and open country after passing through a parched drought-stricken area. He was moved by the anniversary rather than by the contrast.

It should be noted too that, on 22 July 1836, he had named Mt. Arapiles in Victoria and recorded: "I ascended this hill on the anniversary of the battle of Salamanca, and hence the name."[19] Arapiles was the name of the mountain in Spain which overlooked the battlefield. This battle had obviously made a deep impression on his memory.

After Salamanca the French armies were reformed, and Wellington was forced to pause in his forward thrust: he was, indeed, compelled to retreat to the Portuguese frontier after failing to capture Burgos. This retreat was made under very adverse circumstances: bad weather, shocking roads, worn-out clothing; and the discomfort of the troops was intensified because, by bad staff work, the provisions were sent by the wrong route, and the army had to subsist on what could be gathered locally. The winter of 1812-13 was spent in Portugal reorganizing the army for the campaign of 1813; Mitchell had rejoined his regiment in October 1812, and nothing is known of his activities during the next few months.

Wellington was, however, far from idle and was planning his next moves: it is significant that Mitchell was back on the Quartermaster General's staff in April 1813, and there can be little doubt that he, with many others, was out surveying, mapping, and gathering all information essential before Wellington's advance which began in the following month, on 22 May 1813. There can be no doubt that Mitchell's services were valuable and appreciated for he remained on staff duties until the end of the war, and did not rejoin his regiment during that period.

Wellington's first move was back to Salamanca, then on through the very difficult mountain country north of the Douro River. Burgos was taken and the British army reached the Ebro River, the French retreating before them. At the Ebro the French had lost touch with the British army, and with Wellington's movements. He had taken the bold decision to cross the high ranges of the Sierra de Cantabria through which there were only a few, and difficult, passes.

In five days Wellington had brought his army over these mountains and came down on Vittoria: here they met and completely routed the French army. This was on 21 June 1813; in exactly thirty days Wellington had brought his army nearly two hundred miles, had passed that army through difficult mountain passes, and had defeated the French army within fifty miles of the border of France.

Wellington was not the man to undertake so difficult a feat of army movement and supply without the fullest information about the country to be crossed, so Mitchell must have been continuously busy on field survey work; he was not present at the battle at Vittoria as he did not receive the appropriate bar to his general service medal.

Now Spain had been almost cleared of the French armies, which were retreating over the border into France at the extreme southwest corner of that country. But there remained still two strong French fortresses in Spain close to the border--Pampeluna and San Sebastian. As well as these two strongposts Wellington had to face the great barrier of the Pyrenees, fifty miles of high rugged mountain ranges, up to six thousand feet high, through which there were eight practicable passes by any one of which the reorganized French army might return to attack Wellington. They did, in fact, return through the passes of Maya and Roncesvalles, the latter evoking memories of Charlemagne. It was at Roncesvalles when the armies were facing each other that Wellington's personal appearance at a most critical moment ensured victory for the British. The fighting against the French armies coming down through the Pyrenees to relieve Pampeluna and San Sebastian lasted for nine days, ending in the repulse of the French. San Sebastian fell on 8 September and Pampeluna on 31 October 1813, and on 7 October Wellington had crossed into France. Mitchell received the bars to his medal for both the Pyrenees and San Sebastian battles.

At this stage (September 1813) Murray had returned to Spain to replace Gordon in his old position as Quartermaster General.[20] It is now possible to visualize Mitchell's activities. From April 1813, until the end of the war in April 1814, he had been continuously engaged in his field survey work through some of the most difficult country in Europe, country through which even today there are few practicable routes: first in northern Spain, then in southern France as far as Toulouse. For the last seven months he had been under the direct supervision of Murray, whose complete approval, and actual friendship, he had secured. As a surveyor and draughtsman he had gained an established reputation.

He had become a full lieutenant on 16 September 1813, and in the week before Vittoria, the climax of Wellington's campaign, he had celebrated his twenty-first birthday: that he had reached maturity in more than time cannot be doubted.

Nothing is known of his personal life during these three years of active service, but there are occasional glimpses of external reactions. A brother officer in the 95th Regiment, Captain John Molloy (later to be a settler at the Swan River settlement) knew Mitchell as "a most zealous and indefatigable person and an excellent draftsman" and remembered that on the Peninsula Mitchell used often to be absent for weeks at a time with his sketch book working among the hills.[21] On the other side is Mitchell's statement in a letter to Sir Benjamin D'Urban (18 June 1815): "A junior officer on the staff, I was persecuted by the jealousy of the officers of my regiment."[22] There is no clue to this, but regimental jealousy of a junior officer selected for special staff duty would be natural enough. There is also a curious note in a letter Mitchell wrote to his mother (14 October 1820): he complained that his brother John had "touched upon that delicate point, my services abroad, in a style not reconcileable to the feelings of any officer".[23] The significance of this is obscure.

The war having ended, Murray obtained approval from the Treasury to have full plans made of all the Peninsular battlefields and selected Mitchell from amongst all who must have been available for this work:[24] this was a notable tribute to Mitchell's skill and reliability. This arrangement was made at Bordeaux in June 1814, and Mitchell at once proceeded to Portugal and Spain to begin this task. According to Napier he remained in the Peninsula for more than two years with pay as a staff officer (he still retained his commission in the 95th Regiment);[25] his extra expenses--about five thousand pounds--were also paid; and in Spain he was attended constantly by two Spanish dragoons as a protection.

This work meant that he was not with his regiment at Waterloo: writing to Sir Benjamin D'Urban (18 June 1815)* he said:

My absence from the glorious battle of Waterloo (in which my brother and others suffered so much) is a sacrifice I shall ever regret as a soldier.[26]

[* This is the date on the letter but Mitchell must have written the wrong date thoughtlessly as this was the day on which Waterloo was fought, and he was then in Spain and could not have known of the battle.]

Napier's statement that he remained in the Peninsula for "more than two years" understates the position: he was there until July 1819, when, the Treasury having refused to approve any further expenditure, he returned to England, having, as stated in the preceding chapter married Mary Blunt in June 1818.[27]

He had been placed on half-pay in December 1818, and the 'withdrawal of all approval for his special work in the Peninsula so soon after his marriage must have embarrassed him: but this difficulty may not have lasted for long, for Murray, who had been appointed in 1819 to command the Royal Military College at Sandhurst, arranged for him to be stationed at the College so that he might complete his plans, probably with special pay. Such an arrangement was a recognized practice in those times, the officer remaining on the army records as being on half-pay.[28] It is possible that he had begun duty at the College in 1819, but it is clear that he was there in 1820, for the letter to his mother dated 14 October 1820 was addressed from there.

In November 1821, he was transferred to the 54th Foot and was again on full pay.[29] This may have been the step that Murray arranged as it was only a nominal appointment, that regiment being then in South Africa, and later in India. In October 1822 he was given a brevet captaincy, and in March 1824 he transferred to the 97th Foot. All this time he remained a first lieutenant, but in January 1825 he was transferred to the 2nd Foot as a full captain.

Murray left Sandhurst in 1824, but Mitchell remained there until September 1826, and on the 29th of that month he became a major (unattached) and placed on half-pay.[30] Writing to his mother (14 September 1826) he informed her that he had been made a major on half-pay:

The Duke of York has been particularly favourable to me--this promotion has cost me £1,400, £200 of it I have borrowed. All my friend

He was now living at Thistle Grove, Chelsea. He applied to be reinstated: "I applied by letter dated 4th October 1826 to be placed on full pay, and never wished to be on half-pay."[32]

He must have had some financial resources for he had been able to produce £2,000 on his marriage, and now, eight years later, another £1,200. But his fortunes had definitely changed: he was now without prospects in the army, and the unbroken peace in Europe held no promise for junior army officers. He was receiving half-pay only, which may have varied from time to time but probably was never more than £175 per annum.

To complete here the outline of his military career, he received a brevet lieutenant-colonelcy in November 1841, and in June 1854 became a brevet colonel.[33] In Australia he was always familiarly known as "the Major". One of his last activities as a military officer on active duty was the publication of a book Outlines of a system of surveying for Geographical and Military purposes which was commended in a review in the Naval and Military Magazine.

The maps and plans he had prepared at Sandhurst, which can still be seen, are sufficient evidence that his selection for this task was fully justified. Many of them were reproduced in Wyld's Atlas of the Peninsula War. There is also contemporary testimony. Sir William Napier, in his History of the Peninsula War, wrote:

Captain Mitchell's drawings were made by him after the war, by order of the government and at the public expense...Never was money better laid out, for I believe no topographical drawings, whether they be considered for accuracy of detail, perfection of manner, or beauty of execution, ever exceeded Mitchell's.[34]

Murray's own verdict, written on 23 October 1825 from Dublin, where Murray was then Commander-in-Chief of the forces in Ireland, is given in a letter to Hay, Permanent Under-Secretary at the Colonial Office:

There is a Captain Mitchell who has been employed by me first in making surveys in the Peninsula of the several fields of Battle, and subsequently in drawing military plans from their actual surveys. He is a very intelligent and industrious man and possesses a considerable share of enterprise and adventure. He is a skilful, accurate, and practised surveyor, and a very good draftsman. His plans are indeed beautifully executed.[35]

With the end of Mitchell's work on these plans he faced a real crisis: his active temperament would not allow him to remain idle, and his young, and increasing, family involved expenses for which his half-pay was quite inadequate. His friend, Murray, remained as Commander-in-Chief in Ireland, and was always friendly (Mitchell could write, in 1834, that he had enjoyed Murray's "kind patronage for upwards of twenty years") but he could help only with letters.[36]

So Mitchell sought other opportunities for the use of his skill and experience. Learning that a vessel had been commissioned for the purpose of making a survey of the Grecian Archipelago he offered his services with the object of connecting (where it might be practicable to do so) a land survey with the marine survey.[37] He sought the support of Murray who wrote (23 October 1825) to Hay, strongly recommending Mitchell.[38] Portion of this letter has already been quoted, but he added: "I ought perhaps to mention that you must not expect to find Captain Mitchell a Greek scholar." It is clear from the relative dates that Mitchell made this application nearly a year before he was placed on half-pay: he may have realized that his future in the army was uncertain, or perhaps he hoped to be seconded for this service.

Although nothing came of this proposal, Hay did not forget Mitchell; when Governor Darling renewed his pressing requests for more skilled surveyors for New South Wales, Hay sent for Mitchell (13 January 1827) and offered him the choice of three positions in that colony:[39]

1. A principal assistant or secondary in the general survey.

2. A collector having some knowledge of surveying for allotting lands, etc.

3. A civil engineer.

As to the first, there was a reservation that Lord Bathurst, the Secretary of State, might have already offered the position to another. Mitchell therefore wrote at once (14 January 1827) to Murray telling him of the interview and asking for his support.[40] Murray wrote (17 January) to Hay, thanking him for remembering Mitchell and adding:

You are already aware of my sentiments in regard to his talents and requirements, and his active and industrious habits. I will add further that I believe him to be a strictly honest and well-principled man, and from my own experience I am inclined to think that it is very desirable to let no opportunity pass of sending out men of this latter description.

Mitchell was appointed to the first of the three positions; and Hay in a private letter to Darling (2 February 1827) said that, in consequence of Darling's very pressing demands for additional surveyors and the difficulty of finding properly qualified persons, Mitchell's offer of services had been accepted:

It was impossible to induce an officer of this superior order in his profession to accept one of the subordinate appointments in the Surveyor General's Department, and, moreover, conceiving that it would be of importance, not only to have the benefit of this officer's exertions as second to Mr Oxley, but to have a person in the colony who was competent to succeed him whenever circumstances required such an appointment, Lord Bathurst has not hesitated to allow that consideration to outweigh every other; and you will therefore have the goodness to understand that Major Mitchell is to be considered as standing next in rank to Mr Oxley, whom he will ultimately succeed.

Major Mitchell's salary has been fixed by Lord Bathurst at £500 per annum commencing from the date of his embarkation, in addition to which he will of course receive the usual allowance for a horse and for lodgings.[41]

In addition to this salary he was also receiving the half-pay from the army: this he received during the rest of his life. Before leaving England for Australia Mitchell insured his life for £1,000 to cover debts incurred in connexion with the purchase of his equipment.[42]

Immediately upon receiving notice of his appointment, and while still in London, Mitchell wrote to Hay (9 February 1827) requesting that land, in the proportion usually allotted to officers of his rank and standing, be granted to him in New South Wales.[43] This letter, however, carries an office minute that it would be much better for Mitchell to obtain land by application to the Governor after he had discharged the duties of his office for a short time.

So Mitchell came to New South Wales with the reversion of the position of Surveyor General in succession to Oxley, who was already an invalid. It is important to note, however, that in his letter to Murray of 14 January telling of the interview with Hay, Mitchell had said of the third position--that of civil engineer: "I do not feel qualified to undertake the comprehensive duties of the third." This point will be the subject of reference later in this story.

After having spent all the formative years of his life--he was now thirty-five years old--in the army under the fluctuating fortunes of the Peninsular War, at a time when influential patronage was more important than efficiency, he had now to adapt himself to the very difficult conditions of the civil service in the colonies. His career in New South Wales cannot be judged rightly unless the factors in his social and administrative environment are, at least superficially, appreciated.

As to his professional skill, he had been engaged on intelligence work requiring acute and exact observation under active, service conditions; and had then been employed on survey work and preparation of plans requiring accurate technique in the field, and skilled draughtsmanship in preparing the resultant plans, for a total period of fourteen years, at the end of which he had earned great praise. He was then, as he was always to be in Australia, tireless and unremitting in his personal traverses of country to be covered. He had become country-wise, experienced in estimating, as was essential in army intelligence work, the salient features in the topography of any region. This may have affected his later disposition towards "feature surveys" although these were forced on him by the prevailing conditions: that aspect will appear prominently later in this story.

CHAPTER III - Colonial Policy and Personalities

Mitchell was appointed to his new position in the year 1827: this was a critical period in the history of British government and of British colonial policy.* For an appreciation of the conditions and fluctuations through which the evolving political system in Australia emerged ultimately into full self-government, some description must be given of the conditions under which the government of the colonies was carried on in London, of the administrative atmosphere in New South Wales, and of. the general administrative, social, and geographical environment in which this evolution occurred.

[* In respect of the material in this chapter grateful acknowledgment is made to two articles in the journal Historical Studies--Australia and New Zealand: J. C. Beaglehole, "The Colonial Office 1782-1854", April 1941; E. T. Williams, "The Colonial Office in the Thirties", May 1943.]

Throughout this chapter it must be remembered that the Civil Service in England was not, at that period, the carefully selected, highly trained, and efficient service which it now is: it was, in fact, only in the very earliest stages of growth, and the allocation of specific departmental responsibilities to ministers of cabinet rank was indefinite and incomplete. Throughout the whole of the period now under review the administration of the colonies, although for all practical purposes a separate entity, was under the control of the Secretary of State for War. This aspect is irrelevant in the present story, except that appointments in the colonies were largely given to officers of the navy and army; to avoid confusion, the terms "Secretary of State for the Colonies", and "Colonial Office", will be used throughout.

After the Napoleonic wars had been ended at Waterloo urgent aspects of domestic policy had occupied the attention of the British Government, and the colonies were given less attention than they might otherwise have received. But they were not altogether neglected. The Colonial Office had been established as an independent administrative unit at 14 Downing Street in 1815. In 1822 a beginning was made in an attempt to place the supervision of colonial administration on a more systematic basis. By 1833 the Colonial Office staff numbered only twenty-five clerks: these had all been appointed at an early age (16-18) on nomination by influential patrons.

R. W. Hay was appointed in 1825 as the first Permanent Under-Secretary. He controlled the Colonial Office from 1825 until 1836: of him it is recorded that his letters give the impression of a kindly and sensible man with many (perhaps too many) social and extra-official interests.[1] Of the staff generally R. M. Martin, writing in 1835, said: Mr Hay, the intelligent, patriotic, and urbane Under-Secretary, has not I believe ever been in the colonies, nor am I aware of any clerk in the Colonial Office who has ever been out of Europe: nay more, the very agents appointed by the Secretary of State to represent the colonies in England have never so far as I can ascertain with very few exceptions crossed the Channel. Let any unprejudiced man ask himself how can our colonies be well managed under such a system.[2]

Hay was the official to whom, as will appear later, Mitchell wrote private letters during his disputes with Governor Darling. In a private letter to Hay (28 March 1832) acknowledging two letters from him Mitchell said:

I have to return you my most sincere thanks for the attention you have given my numerous complaints respecting the late Governor.[3]

Hay was succeeded by James Stephen whose name is indelibly associated with a very critical period of colonial administration. He had been Legal Counsellor to the Colonial Office since 1813, and had assumed the position of Permanent Under-Secretary of the Colonial Office in 1836; he remained in this position until 1847, and during those eleven years he exercised a profound influence on the attitude of the British Government towards the colonies. Verdicts on Stephen are varied. One writer who has made a critical study of this period describes him as

that aloof, austere intellectual, member by heredity and spiritual inclination of the Clapham Sect...a legal training and many years of experience as Counsel to the Colonial Department had confirmed Stephen in habits of thought and criticism precise to the point of pedantry, and confirmed also a respectful awareness of constitutional and legal precedent. His ruthless dissection of colonial acts and ordinances led to an examination of motive which, expounded in his official minutes, occasionally verges on the unduly suspicious.[4]

Another writer who has also closely studied this period has given this verdict:

With an inadequate staff, ineffective leadership combined with unconvincing representation in a bored House, and the overlapping responsibilities of the various branches of the Civil Service it was remarkable that Stephen achieved as much as he did, and that he found time to take thought for the morrow. He was too busy, too shy, and too proud to ingratiate his opponents, and he gave too little time to outside opinion. His opponents and his subordinates exaggerated his power though he had perhaps the tendency of every public man unconsciously to live up to his cartooned self...His subtlety, in so far as he led the Colonial Office, has sometimes made it difficult for the historian, without diligent application, to understand certain areas of colonial policy.[5]

The contemporary opinion of Thomas Carlyle was:

I have seen Sir James Stephen there,* but did not understand him then, or think he could be a "clever man" as reported by Henry Taylor and other good judges. "He shuts his eyes on you," said the elder Spring-Rice (Lord Monteagle), "and talks as if he were dictating a Colonial Despatch" (most true "teaching you How Not to do it" as Dickens defined afterwards): one of the pattest things I ever heard from Spring-Rice; who had rather a turn for such. Stephen, ultimately, when on half-pay and a Cambridge Professor, used to come down hither** pretty often on an evening; and we heard a great deal of talk from him, recognizably serious and able, though always in that Colonial-Office style, more or less. Colonial-Office being an Impotency (as Stephen inarticulately, though he never said or whispered it, well knew), what could an earnest and honest kind of man do, but try and teach you How Not to do it? Stephen seemed to me a master in that art.[6]

[* At Carlyle's public lectures between 1837 and 1840.]

[** To Carlyle's home.]

Stephen's own judgment of himself is on record. He wrote in 1846:

My mind is as sensitive as my eyes and as soon pained, irritated and darkened by any kind of glare. In all truth and honesty I, have but a 50-50 opinion of myself in my relations to my fellow men, and, so far as I can divine, I am unpopular, unsuccessful in the attempt to please--passing indeed for a man of more talents than I really possess, though of less amenity, cordiality, honour, and other social qualities than I should ascribe to myself.[7]

Finally, S. S. Bell and W. P. Morell in the introduction to their book Select Documents on British Colonial Policy, 1830-1860 say:

This book will fail in one of its main purposes if it does not make clear the wisdom, the knowledge, the essential righteousness of Stephen.[8]

That is the almost universal testimony of all who have dispassionately examined the work of the Colonial Office during the years in which he controlled it. This was the man who was in charge of the Colonial Office during and after Mitchell's first prolonged visit to England (see chapter X). As to the staff at the Colonial Office, Stephen himself wrote:

The majority of the members of the Colonial Department in my time possessed only in a low degree, and some of them in a degree almost incredibly low, either the talents or the habits of men of business, or the industry, the zeal, or the knowledge, required for the effective performance of their functions: they were, without exception, men who had been appointed to gratify the political, the domestic, or the personal feelings of their patrons, that is of successive Secretaries of State.[9]

And on another occasion he said that he had never yet served under any Secretary of State who did not at least appear to attach a very high interest to the power of giving such places to his dependents and friends.

As to the attitude of ministers, and his general attitude towards colonial policy, Stephen is on record as feeling that there should be studious and speculative men standing aloof from mere despatch writing, and projecting schemes of comprehensive and remote good:

I do not know my alphabet better than I know that this is not the spirit of the English Government, and that the ambition of every Secretary of State, and his operations, will be bounded by the great ultimate object of getting off the mails.[10]

He believed that England ought never to give up a colony; that the course to be pursued should be that of cheerfully relaxing, one after another, the bonds of authority as soon as the colony itself desired that relaxation, so substituting a federal for a colonial relation--no national pride wounded, no national greatness diminished, no national duty abandoned.

Herman Merivale succeeded Stephen as Permanent Under-Secretary in 1847 and was still in that position when Mitchell's career closed. He had been, before this appointment, Professor of Political Economy at Oxford, and the text of his printed lectures in that capacity indicate an academic approach to the problems of colonial government. In his public functions at the head of the Colonial Office, however, he appears to have shown appreciation of the practical aspects of problems with which he had to deal. He was the head of the Colonial Office during Mitchell's second (1847) and third (1852) visits to England (see chapters XIII and XIV). After his retirement he published a book, Lectures on Colonization and the Colonies, to which reference will presently be made.

C. Gairdner, who had been a senior officer on the Colonial Office staff since 1824, is described as a valuable civil servant, more than a mere scribe, and far from being the traditional privileged pharisee.[11]

Estimates of the characters of the ministers* who, as Secretaries of State for the Colonies, were responsible for all matters concerning Australia, are available from both contemporary observers and from modern students who have studied the period.

[* A list of ministers is given in Appendix A.]

Stephen admired Huskisson and Lord John Russell, the one for his "dominant understanding", the other for his "dominant soul", and both as being naturally fitted for statesmanship: the rest were "mere throwings up of the Tide of Life".[12]

Stephen is reported to have said of Murray that up to the end of 1828 he had done nothing, had never written a despatch: and Hay said, in 1830, that for the many years he had been in office he had never met with any public officer so totally inefficient.[13]

McCarthy says of Goderich ("Prosperity Robinson") that he was one of a class of men who are to be found at all times of parliamentary history, and who manage somehow, nobody quite knows how, to make themselves appear indispensable to their political party.[14]

It is said of Stanley that he scarcely bothered to disguise his contempt for colonial manners: but of Russell, in contrast to Stephen's opinion (quoted above) the same authority says that he never really got inside the minds of his countrymen overseas and was often more pointed than wise.[15]

Of Glenelg it was said that he had the weak man's belief that procrastination is a substitute for incorruptibility: his sluggishness was a by-word in political circles.[16]

There are available two opinions of Lord Grey. A contemporary writer said of him that the House of Commons swarmed with his bitter enemies and he had very few friends.

Notwithstanding his great and undeniable abilities he has committed blunders which proceed from his contempt for the opinions of others, and the tenacity with which he clings to his own: while those who know him are aware that a man more high-minded, more honourable and conscientious does not exist.[17]

McCarthy, writing much later, said:

Lord Grey then and since only succeeded somehow in missing the career of a leading statesman. He had great talents and some originality; he was independent and bold. But his independence degenerated too often into impracticability and even eccentricity; and he was, in fact, a politician with whom ordinary men could not work.[18]

That is a rapid review of the ministers of state who for the most part remotely, but on some occasions directly, influenced Mitchell's career. It is, perhaps, not without significance that every Secretary of State for the Colonies during Mitchell's Australian career--with the exception of Murray--were members of the titled aristocracy. Of their attitude to their responsibilities Froude could, so late as 1885, write:

Our differences with the Colonists have been aggravated by the class of persons with whom they have been brought officially into contact. The administration of the Colonial Office has been generally in the hands of men of rank, or of men who aspire to rank; and, although these high persons are fair representatives of the interests which they have been educated to understand, they are not the fittest to conduct our relations with communities of Englishmen with whom they have imperfect sympathy, in the absence of a well-informed public opinion to guide them. The colonists are socially their inferiors, out of their sphere, and without personal point of contact. Secretaries of State lie yet under the shadow of the old impression that the Colonies exist only for the benefit of the Mother-country. They distributed the colonial patronage, the lucrative places of employment, to provide for friends or political supporters. When this, too, ceased to be possible, they acquiesced easily in the theory that the Colonies were no longer of any use at all.[19]

Two contemporary expressions of opinion might be recorded of the status of the Colonial Office at the end of the period now under review, recalling at the same time Carlyle's opinion, already quoted, of his impression of Stephen's own attitude.

The Marquis of Salisbury is reported as saying, in 1852:

I am not much disposed to yield to popular clamour, but the din of indignation against Downing Street is so bad and so incessant that I cannot help thinking there must be something in it...we alienate the Colonies and harass every Ministry with the solution of a set of problems in order that we may have the exquisite privilege of supporting some thirty useless clerks.[20]

Carlyle was even more vehement:

What these strange Entities in Downing Street intrinsically are; who made them, why they were made; how they do their function--is probably known to no mortal...Every Colony, every agent for a matter Colonial, has his tragic tale to tell you of his sad experiences in the Colonial Office; what blind obstructions, fatal indolences, pedantries, stupidities, on the right and on the left, he had to do battle with...I perceive that besides choosing Parliaments never so well, the new Colonial Office will have another thing to do: contrive to send out a new kind of Governors to the Colonies.[21]

These abrupt verdicts on ministers and secretaries do not, of course, provide an accurate or adequate portrait of any of the persons concerned: other verdicts, in an infinite variety, are probably available. They have, however, been quoted as indication that there was contemporary discontent with, and some lack of harmony within, the Colonial Office. At a time when the parliament and the people of Great Britain were preoccupied with "reform", and the major anxiety of the Colonial Office was slavery and emancipation, it is not difficult to understand that the problems of the Australian colonies were not always wisely solved. It is, indeed, probable that these expressions of opinion were prompted largely by experiences connected with the West Indies, Canada, and perhaps India, and that they had little reference to the Australian colonies.

No one with experience of public administration, who has studied the despatches of the period, can accept this picture of the Colonial Office in its relations with Australia as real: these despatches provide clear evidence of honest and intelligent efforts to find the best answer to every question that was presented: but that Mitchell was unaware of the general dissatisfaction is unlikely, and that it affected his actions is probable.

Apart from these focal aspects of administration there were rapid, almost revolutionary changes in the social and political structure of society in England. The success of the revolt of 'the American colonies, the French Revolution, the writings of Paine and others, had all stirred in the minds of the English people deep questionings as to the rights of the individual man and the form of government. Discontent simmered slowly until the little revolution in France in 1829, resulting in the flight and deposition of King Charles X, crystallized definite reaction in England. The news of the events in France "provoked in England a bewildering storm of popular feeling which swept the country and was most unfavourable to the Government" at the elections in England of August in that year.[22]

Wellington, who had, since Waterloo, held in the minds of the English people a position of extraordinary prestige and authority, was definitely reactionary and unresponsive to the popular clamour for reform. He said, in 1830, that it would be utterly beyond the power of the wisest political philosopher to devise a constitution so near to absolute perfection as that under which Englishmen had been endowed by the wisdom of their ancestors, and that Englishmen already possessed all the freedom that it was good for men to have.[23]

He was, however, powerless to delay reform, and the reform of parliament, of the social structure generally, proceeded steadily during the following decades until many radical reforms, including the fundamental redistribution of electorates, liberalized qualification for voting, voting by ballot, and abolition of the system of purchase of army commissions, had become established features of the social system. These reforms had resulted, during the period now under review, in a large measure of transfer of power from the titled aristocracy to the great middle class. From this new body came a move to cut off the colonies, to give them independence and to let them survive or perish as they could. Froude has reviewed the position:

The Colonies had no longer any special value as a market for our industries; the whole world was now open to us, and so long as their inhabitants were well off and could buy our hardware and calicoes, it mattered nothing whether they were independent, or were British subjects, or what they were. The representatives of the middle classes would have shaken oft, if they had been allowed, Australia and New Zealand, and the Canadas. The politicians who succeeded to power when the aristocracy was dethroned by the Reform Bill discovered that the Colonies were of no use to us, and that we would be better off and stronger without them.[24]

Beside these specific movements, this transfer of power had involved also great reductions in the system of patronage, and of filling important positions through personal favour or family affiliations. All this social reform, until 1855, was contemporary with Mitchell's period of service in Australia. How this flooding revolution affected Mitchell's mind during his three visits to England within this period can only be a matter for speculation, but that he was uninfluenced by these changes is unlikely.

Some indication of the quality of the Governors under whom Mitchell served is necessary and verdicts upon them are available from two sources. Dr J. D. Lang, a public figure in New South Wales throughout the whole period, had many personal dealings with each of them; Dr Frederick Watson as editor of the Historical Records of Australia formed his opinions from an exhaustive study of contemporary official documents and other records. Each of these Governors was an army officer, Darling, Bourke and Gipps being veterans of the Peninsular War.

Lang[25] and Watson[26] both agree that Darling, while possessing good qualities, was not a suitable governor for a colony whose inhabitants were emerging from a period of subservience and were agitating for an extension of civil rights. Lang's opinion was that "the military man is peculiarly unfitted for dealing with opposition when he happens to be invested with civil authority".

Bourke is described by Lang as strictly just and constitutionally humane, but obstinately fixed in his own opinions and impatient of opposition.[27] Watson considers that he was a broad-minded and far-sighted statesman and recognized the advantage of granting to the people a share in their own government.[28]

Gipps is condemned by Lang in severe terms: he says that Gipps was superior both in intellect and acquirements to the generality of mankind: but with these acknowledged mental qualities he was of an essentially narrow and diminutive mind--incapable of enlarged and comprehensive views either of the nature and requirements of his own position, or of the interests of those he governed.[29] Watson does not agree with this estimate; he acknowledges that Gipps had been much criticized, but from a careful study of his despatches he concludes that Gipps was a capable administrator and brilliant statesman with great breadth of vision and almost uncanny foresight.[30]

Fitzroy is condemned by both authorities for his lax moral character.[31] Lang's condemnation is unqualified, but Watson credits him with being an industrious and impartial administrator.[32]

Lang's opinion of Denison is expressed in very unfavourable terms as an arbitrary and unreasonable governor. Watson's verdict is not available as the Historical Records ceased before this period was reached.

Although it is true that the Colonial Office, especially when controlled by Stephen and Merivale, honestly sought the right answer to each phase of a complicated problem, there was, continually, a swaying balance between the recommendations of the Governor, and the contrary representations and pressure from people in the colony to and upon their patrons and influential friends in England. Pathetic testimony is provided by the Governors themselves.

Macquarie had, in connexion with a particular complaint, protested to Bathurst against a rebuke administered by that minister, and had said that he felt assured that his Lordship would not wish him to submit tamely to the subversion of his authority as Governor. The end of it all was that Macquarie resigned:

I must confess, my Lord, I am now heartily tired of my situation here, and anxiously wish to retire from Public Life as soon as possible.[33]

Lang records that, in 1824, he heard John Macarthur say with evident self-satisfaction that he had been the means of sending home every Governor of the colony except Macquarie.[34] Darling was dismissed, as will appear later, because of continued pressure from the discontented factions and the dissatisfaction of the Colonial Office with his administration: "Your Lordship has disgraced me in the very face of people whom I have now governed for nearly six years."[35]

Bourke resigned because the Colonial Office refused to support him in an administrative action which he believed to be necessary: "I lament that Your Lordship has not appreciated my motives in offering my resignation."[36]

Gipps, after more than eight years of valuable service during which he incurred much local hostility in trying faithfully to carry out the instructions of the Colonial Office, resigned. Watson records his opinion that it is certain that his strenuous labour as Governor was the principal cause of his early death.[37]

I beg to assure Your Lordship that to be relieved from the cares and anxieties attendant on the administration of the affairs of this remote Colony will on many accounts be very gratifying to me.[38]

Fitzroy left the colony in disrepute because of disorderly conduct.

It is impossible in this review to trace the steps towards self-government in the colony from the days when Macquarie governed as absolute ruler without any Council, and hoped there never would be one, through the creation in 1824 of a Legislative Council, containing a majority of officials, to advise the Governor upon (but not to initiate) proposed legislation, then in the following year of an Executive Council to advise on administrative actions, through the gradually increasing degrees of local autonomy and elective, as opposed to nominee, representation, to full self-government in 1855-6 with a bi-cameral parliament.

The gradual progress during these thirty years was not attained without considerable and continuous agitation, nor without frequent and sustained clashing of private interests. Merivale was Permanent Under-Secretary at the Colonial Office through all the final stages in the establishment of the autonomous constitutions of New South Wales and Victoria. His verdict on this transition period was:

There was antagonism between the wealthier and the poorer classes, greatly as that antagonism was exaggerated by those who sought their own profit in maintaining hostility between them. There was probably some truth in the assertion that the large proprietors or lessees in Australia conceived themselves to have an interest in impeding the general acquisition of land and in keeping down the wages of labour.

Under these circumstances the revolution which snapped the slight tie of dependence on the mother country left the colonial aristocracy desirous but unable to make head against a numerical majority. And yet this revolution was mainly brought about by that aristocracy itself. Such is the usual course of events. The able and wealthy leaders of the old Australian legislatures wanted to transfer power from Downing Street to themselves: they succeeded in transferring it to their inferiors.

The Home Government gained a release from the unpopular and useless office of interference: relief from wearisome struggles, and kindliness instead of hatred.

Australia gained what all communities appear to gain by emancipation however unfavourable some of the features of the emancipation may have been.[39]

The period of thirty years, which has been covered in this chapter, was exactly the period of Mitchell's association with Australian affairs. This brief, and inevitably incomplete, review is, presented with the object of giving some impression of the conditions under which Mitchell had to carry out his duties and adjust himself to conditions which were rapidly changing in both England and Australia.

He began his career as a Peninsular veteran with a meritorious record and with the prestige then accorded to all such soldiers: but, as Napier said of the Napoleonic wars, the British soldier "fought beneath the cold shade of aristocracy". It was the day of the aristocrat, the day of patronage, when nepotism was the conventionally accepted practice, when a position in the civil service of England or of Australia could not be secured except through the influence of some aristocrat, and when all departmental decisions were susceptible to pressure from some influential source.

At the very commencement of his Australian career all this abruptly changed. With Wellington's fall from power and the inception of "reform": with the rise of democracy, and, especially with the firm hand of Stephen at the Colonial Office, Mitchell found that the anchors in England upon which he had relied were losing strength, and during his later visits to England he was thrown completely upon his own resources.

In Australia he came to a colony which included all the mainland of Australia as far as 129° E. longitude--i.e. the borders of Western Australia--and in which organized settlement was almost completely limited to the strip east of the Dividing Range. Towards the end of his career Victoria and South Australia were no longer under his jurisdiction and the agitation for the separation of Queensland had begun.

When Mitchell arrived in Australia in 1827 the estimated population was 56,000: when he died in 1855 it was 793,000: and the type of population had completely changed. When he arrived in 1827 the people of the colony were the official autocracy, the squatter autocracy (exclusives), convicts, emancipists, and a limited number of free immigrants. During his first years came an increasing flow of free immigrants from Great Britain, mostly young people inspired with the spirit of reform and newly-found freedom; and, in his last years, the great influx following the discovery of gold, these with still further advanced ideas of reform. From a stage at which the landed aristocracy and the governing group firmly maintained their control of wealth and power there was a steady transition to the stage at which these refused to surrender, and the newcomers sought to secure, a dominant place in this new land. And through all these changes, from beginning to end, were the steadily increasing numbers of Australian-born of whom Commissioner Bigge had written so early as 1822:

The class of inhabitants that have been born in the Colony affords a remarkable exception to the moral and physical character of their parents: they are generally tall in person and slender in their limbs, of fair complexion and small features. They are capable of undergoing more fatigue and are less exhausted by labour than native Europeans; they are active in their habits, but remarkably awkward in their movements. In their tempers they are quick and irascible but not vindictive; and I only repeat the testimony of persons who have had many opportunities of observing them, that they inherit neither the vices nor the feelings of their parents.[40]

During Mitchell's term of office the land problem was unceasingly acute. As Surveyor General he was responsible for all matters such as disposal of Crown lands, of survey of boundaries of alienated land, of titles, supervision of lease-hold tenures, and all related matters, over a territory from Bass Strait to the middle of Queensland. The old system of free grants of land had been abolished by the Home Government in 1831 and from that time followed continual changes in land policy. In these changes the influence of Wakefield's "proposal for colonizing Australia" can be recognized, although his system was not adopted as fully in New South Wales as it was in other colonies.

Mitchell would, without doubt, have known that it was Wakefield's influence which moved the Colonial Office to introduce the basic change in policy in 1831 under which sale by auction replaced the system of free land grants, and even later changes, at a time when Stephen was legal counsellor to the Colonial Office; and it is probable that he knew of Stephen's estimate of Wakefield's character:

I saw plainly that the choice before me was that of having Mr Wakefield for an official acquaintance whose want of truth and honour would render him most formidable in that capacity, or for an enemy whose hostility was to be unabated. I deliberately preferred his enmity to his acquaintanceship and I rejoice that I did so.[41]

The story which follows in this volume is an attempt to describe the course steered by Mitchell through these very troubled waters; to indicate how far he was able to adapt himself to a social environment which changed so fundamentally that the world of 1855 would look back with puzzled wonder on the world of 1827; and to record the great services he rendered to his adopted country under conditions which were always difficult.

CHAPTER IV - Conditions in the earlier Years

The first sixty-seven years of government in New South Wales provide a dramatic story of evolution in relations between the Home Government and the new colony of New South Wales.

For twenty-seven years the Home Government was preoccupied and distracted by the turmoil of the Napoleonic wars. In this period it was content to leave the control of the purely penal establishment (its status as a colony developed slowly) to a Governor vested with autocratic powers--powers which were vague, but absolute. Yet, though this was the nominal position, the Home Government encouraged patronage, and personal influence resulted often in arbitrary interference by the Colonial Office in London with the actions of the Governor in Sydney. Long delays in communications between Sydney and London, ignorance of conditions in New South Wales, and frequent inertia on the part of the Colonial Office were factors tending to increase confusion in administration.

The first Governor, Phillip, had only a guard of marines; but in the years 1790 and 1791 a military corps named the New South Wales Corps (afterwards the 102nd Regiment of the Line) was specially raised for military duties and guard service in the new colony. After the departure of Phillip an interval of almost three years elapsed before a new Governor, Hunter, was appointed and assumed office. During those three years the commanding officers of the New South Wales Corps administered government as Lieutenant Governors, first Grose and then Paterson. One of the lieutenants in the Corps was John Macarthur, whose influence in the colony became great.

The officers of the New South Wales Corps soon became interested in commercial ventures beyond the limits conventionally observed by army officers on duty. In this they were not discouraged by the Lieutenant Governors--their own commanding officers. Under the system of free grants of land with the assignment of convict servants, some of the officers acquired valuable properties; and, by the traffic in rum, they became so influential as to dominate the economic life of the colony. Their activities extended until they became a serious threat to the healthy growth of this young community, and under their influence a spirit of insurrection against constituted authority developed.

While this revolt against local authority was actively directed against the local Governor, those concerned were very careful to maintain friendly relations with influential members of the Home Government, even to the extent of securing the recall of some Governors. Bligh had arrived in Sydney, as Governor, in 1806 with explicit instructions to end the traffic in rum and to curtail the entrenched privileges of the officers of the New South Wales Corps. The result of his efforts in this field are familiar matters of history. After his illegal deposition following on the "rebellion", the Colonial Office realized that a new policy was necessary. The succession of naval officers as Governors was broken, and Macquarie, a soldier with considerable experience of active service in India, was appointed; he assumed duty in Sydney on New Year's Day, 1810.

Human communities do not stand still. Many of the transported convicts had died during those first twenty-two years: others had completed their term of transportation and chosen to remain as "emancipists" in the colony. These were free men: Macquarie took the stand that, sentence completed, they should be treated in all material respects as ordinary civilians.

Three months after Macquarie's arrival in Sydney the New South Wales Corps embarked for England; but some of the military and official autocracy had, by this time, acquired important vested interests in the colony. So early as 1802, thirty-four individuals in this group held estates to a total of eighteen thousand acres, all acquired under the system of free grants made by the Governors and Lieutenant Governors. In addition they had complete control of all official positions, and violently opposed all suggestions that the emancipists should receive any consideration. This group has become known as the "exclusives".

Macquarie, on the day of his arrival, declared his intention of treating all classes equally and appealed for harmony; although opposed by the unrelenting hostility of the exclusives he steadily advanced the interests of the emancipists and their children, receiving, for some years at least, the support of the Colonial Office in this policy. But at last, owing to prolonged intrigues against Macquarie by the exclusives, Commissioner Bigge was appointed to enquire into the actual circumstances of the colony under Macquarie's administration, and particularly to ascertain

how far in its present improved and increasing state it was susceptible of being made adequate to the object of its original institution.

The exclusives had, for the moment, been able to cast a shadow over Macquarie's humane policy.

Bigge arrived in Sydney in 1819 and his report, in some aspects critical of Macquarie's administration, was published in London in 1821: in that year Macquarie resigned as Governor, and in the following February he returned to England. Although Macquarie had made many land grants to emancipists, he had not encouraged the immigration of free settlers; nor had he favoured any move towards local self-government, even so elementary a step as the appointment of a Governor's Council. Indeed he "hoped that such a measure would never be resorted to in the colony".[1] At the end, after eleven years of successful administration, during which the population of the colony had increased from 10,096 to 29,665, wearied by the constant intrigues of his local enemies and their favourable reception by the ministers in England, he was glad to resign.

The next Governor was Sir Thomas Brisbane, whose period of administration was four years, from December 1821 to December 1825: during that period the only developments important for this present review were the first steps towards local autonomy--the decision to appoint a Legislative Council; and the beginning of immigration of free settlers with capital. These settlers arrived in considerable numbers during Brisbane's period, so that, with the continual arrival also of convicts, the population had, by 1825, increased to 38,313 persons. The immigrant settlers were given free grants of land, and convicts were assigned to them as servants. Brisbane did not continue Macquarie's policy of humane treatment of emancipists: nevertheless, as a result of the intrigues of the exclusives he was recalled.

The following extract from a farewell address presented to Brisbane illustrated the slowly changing position of the exclusives in the social balance:

Your Excellency has never, in the distribution of the patronage of the Crown, or in framing new Laws or Ordinances, allowed yourself to know the high from the low, the Emigrant from the Emancipist.[2]

Next came General Darling (Plate III) who was to serve as Governor from 1825 to 1831. He had the task of introducing reforms intended to increase the degree of local self-government.[3] The reforms had been prescribed by the Home Government, not by Darling himself. In giving effect to this policy he satisfied neither the obstinate conservative group who wished to retain their privileges, nor the aggressive radicals who desired more extensive reforms. The dissatisfaction developed into actual hostility. In the end, the intrigues of the exclusives against him were successful, and he was recalled. Later he had to face a committee of enquiry into his administration. Darling's bitter protest on the occasion of his recall is included in Appendix B.

Upon the arrival of his successor, Bourke, some citizens presented an address to the new Governor which contained this passage:

After nearly six years of public endurance arising partly from the visitations of Providence, but more from an inveterate system of misgovernment we hail Your Excellency's arrival among us as the dawn of a happier era.[4]

Darling had not deserved this. It was in Darling's period that the Legislative Council first became fully effective. At the beginning it was composed of official members, with one non-official nominee member.

Darling, like his immediate predecessors, gave many free grants of land; and, although he was severely criticized at that time, it may reasonably be said that, during his period, there was slow but steady progress towards a more stable social order. The population had increased from 38,313 to more than 48,000. This phase in our national evolution is notable for the appearance on the administrative stage of a new and vigorous group, the Australian-born. These, the children of all the different conflicting groups, were, although infected with the prejudices of their respective families, more concerned with finding a place for themselves in this new world.

It is appropriate to quote here the text of an address presented to Darling on his arrival (19 December 1825):

The growth of the Colony continues to outstrip the most sanguine expectations of the oldest inhabitants and we doubt not that Your Excellency will soon discover that the present code of Local laws is far behind the claims of a free wealthy and active community...

While we can justly boast of the loyalty and attachment to the Crown of England of all the inhabitants of the Colony who were born and educated in the United Kingdom, there exists nevertheless in the Territory a race of Men already arrived at an adult state who, scattered in the distant and silent woods of their country, unknown, unfelt, and unheard of as a political body, are yet destined to be the Fathers of the succeeding generation and the inheritors of our lands.

This class of colonists has been too much neglected, as well by His Majesty's Government as by the local administrators of the Colony, and unfortunately they deeply feel this neglect. The patronage of office they have always disregarded; but grants of land which they consider their own as it were by natural inheritance, and which they have seen of late years, through the recommendation of the late Commissioner of Enquiry lavishly bestowed upon strangers without capability of improving it...has had a baneful influence on their minds.[5]

Also to be noted are the terms in which Hamilton Hume had earlier addressed Earl Bathurst (20 April 1826) when seeking special recognition for his services in exploration:

Presuming myself (although an Australian) capable from experience of undertaking such an expedition I represented to His Excellency my willingness to explore those hitherto unexplored regions...[6]

and to note the phrasing of Brisbane's report to the Colonial Office (24 March 1825):

I have also to announce to you the discovery of a new and valuable country of great extent from Lake George to Western Port by two young men, Messrs Hovell and Hume, the latter Colonial.[7]

This cold announcement, without commendation, is in contrast with the "zeal and intelligence" displayed by Oxley on a far less arduous enterprise by sea. There is evidence that too much praise for discoveries of this value by explorers who were not on the survey staff should not be permitted as it would adversely influence Oxley's prestige.[8] Mitchell, at a later date, gave evidence of a similar attitude.

Darling was succeeded by Sir Richard Bourke, who was Governor from 1831 to 1837. Perhaps the best indication of the prosperity which marked his period is that during those six years the population increased from 48,000 to 86,842.

The system of free land grants had been discontinued about the time of Darling's recall and a new system of purchase instituted. Bourke's administration may have been wisely planned, or based on diplomatic expediency, opinions vary; but during this time progress towards social and economic stability was real and of permanent quality.

The citizens were moved to erect a statue to him. This statue now stands in front of the Mitchell Library in Sydney and carries the following inscription as a catalogue of his achievements:

This statue of Lieutenant General Sir Richard Bourke K.C.B.
is erected by the people of New South Wales to record his
able honest and benevolent administration from 1831 to 1837
Selected for the Government at a period of singular difficulty
His judgment urbanity and firmness justified the choice
Comprehending at once the vast resources
Peculiar to this Colony
He applied them for the first time
Systematically to its benefit
He voluntarily divested himself of the prodigious influence
Arising from the assignment of penal labour and enacted
Just and salutary laws, for the administration of penal discipline
He was the first Governor who published satisfactory accounts
Of public receipts and expenditure
Without oppression or detriment to any interest
He raised the revenue to a vast amount and from its surplus
Realized extensive plans of immigration
He established religious equality on a just and firm basis
And sought to provide for all without distinction of sect
A sound and adequate system of national education
He constructed various public works of permanent utility
He founded the flourishing settlement of Port Phillip
And threw open the unlimited wilds of Australia
To pastoral enterprise
He established Savings Banks and was the patron of the first Mechanics' Institute
He created an equitable tribunal for determining upon claims to grants of land
He was the warm friend of the liberty of the press
He extended trial by jury after its almost total suspension for many years
By these and numerous other measures
For the moral religious and general improvement of all classes
He raised the Colony to unexampled prosperity
And retired amid the reverent and affectionate regret of the people
   having won their confidence by his integrity
Their gratitude by his services
Their admiration by his public talents and
Their esteem by his private worth.

Bourke was followed by Gipps (1838-46), Fitzroy (1846-55), and Denison (1855-61). During the period of office of these four Governors the old exclusives-emancipists-emigrants rivalries had been largely forgotten. The population at the end of Gipps' period had grown to 196,704: and, following the discovery of gold, the population had swollen, in New South Wales and Victoria together (Victoria had become a separate colony in 1851) to 897,126 at the end of Denison's period as Governor. This dramatic increase in population involved serious problems in administration.

It has finally to be recorded that local self-government was granted slowly. A Legislative Council, as stated above, had been formed in 1824: a representative (partly elected) legislature was established in 1842: and, in 1856, full self-government under a bi-cameral legislature was instituted.

EXPANSION OF THE COLONY

The formidable wall of sandstone ranges around Sydney was, at first, a feature favourable to administration: the majority of the population were convicts whose control was greatly facilitated by this natural barrier against escape. All settlement and development were limited to the narrow coastal strip: and, although there had been some extension to the Hunter and Shoal-haven districts, traffic thereto could only be by sea. To the west there could be no traffic.

It had been somewhat vaguely assumed in the Colonial Office that this new convict settlement would become self-supporting at least in respect of food: but the country around Sydney was found to be so unsuited to agriculture that this hope was soon, perhaps too soon, abandoned. Such food as was grown was, for the most part, grown on the farms of the exclusives who kept the price unduly high. There could be no competition as all the good land in this coastal strip had already passed into private possession under the system of free grants.

Soon after his arrival Macquarie had complained to Castlereagh that persons were coming out as settlers bringing orders from cabinet ministers in England for large grants of land in specified localities: these people were naturally disappointed when they found that no land was available in the districts they had selected.[9]

Sheep provided the determinant factor. From the initial twenty-nine sheep, all that were left, on 1 May 1788, of the original importation, and from small consignments imported later, the numbers steadily grew. In 1796 there were 2,457: in 1805, 16,501: in 1813, 50,000: and by 1821 they had multiplied until it was estimated that the flocks totalled 290,000.[10] Sheep, which are never still, walking as they eat, require room. Land in ever increasing quantities became urgently necessary. But all attempts to cross the confused sandstone ranges to the west failed until 1813: in that year Lawson and his companions found a practicable route over the Blue Mountains. In the same year Evans, sent by Macquarie, followed their route and extended their discoveries to the plains around Bathurst and the Macquarie River.

Macquarie had then instructed Cox to build a road over the mountains; and when this was completed, he himself with a suitable retinue, including Surveyor General Oxley, visited the Bathurst plains, fixing the site for the future town. From here he sent Evans on westward another 115 miles; Evans returned having discovered the upper reaches of the Lachlan not far from Cowra. From these excursions it was revealed that two great rivers, the Lachlan and the Macquarie, had their source quite close to each other in the Bathurst district.

In 1814, Hamilton Hume and his brother made a journey as far as Bong Bong and Berrima, and in 1818 Hume and Meehan discovered Lake Bathurst and the country round Goulburn. Earl Bathurst in England, stimulated by these discoveries, ordered further exploration of the western rivers.[11] The revelation of these great plains, with the possibility that growing pastoral and agricultural industries might contribute towards the economic independence of the colony, excited even the Colonial Office to faint enthusiasm.[12]

Oxley offered his services for further exploration. In 1817 he followed the Lachlan down as far as Booligal, and in 1818 he traced the Macquarie as far as the marshes north of Warren. On each river his further progress--he took boats--was stopped by apparently impenetrable marshes. He retired from each journey convinced that both rivers ended in one vast inland sea, and reported adversely upon the country traversed.

Locally, the reaction to these discoveries was immediate. Macquarie gave liberal grants of free land on these great western plains: and other sheep-owners, without right or title, moved their flocks south-westward to the Goulburn plains, and westward in the Bathurst-Wellington region.

After Oxley's journey down the Macquarie in 1818 there was a period of six years without any further exploration. In 1824 Hume and Hovell reached Port Phillip.

INADEQUACY OF SURVEYS

Even from the very early stages of settlement the definition by survey of the boundaries of individual properties was an administrative problem. At the very beginning a small, very small, number of persons in a continent of almost inconceivable vastness had at their disposal land which had no owner. It is true that it was the property of the Crown; but the Crown had already approved of the principle of free grants. Successive Governors had been generous in the use of this authority. Oxley reported (26 January 1826) that, up to the year 1810, the total of alienated land was more than 1,800,000 acres spread over an area of 35,000 square miles, comprising eight counties, the boundaries of which were undefined.[13] By 1831 the total area of land alienated under the system of free grants was 3,344,030 acres.[14]

While the exclusives were in actual or virtual control of all governmental functions any difficulties about boundaries could be settled by mutual agreement; but this could not possibly continue as settlement expanded. The alienation of Crown land was ill-controlled, surveys of the location and boundaries of the several grants were rarely made; and when made were inadequate in both quality and volume. Most of the land was actually occupied. Macquarie reported that surveyors had no incentive to keep pace with occupation since their profit was hardly two shillings and sixpence for each farm. There was no enthusiasm for routine and efficient surveying.

These problems were brought into practical focus by the appointment in July 1811 of Lieutenant John Oxley as Surveyor General. Oxley reached Sydney on 1 January 1812.[15] This was not his first association with New South Wales. He had been there on naval duties from 1802 to 1807, and again from 1808 till 1810. Two years after his arrival he reported to Macquarie (1814) upon the wide dispersion of grants and farms and the inadequacy, for the task of survey, of his resources.[16] Macquarie, transmitting this report to Bathurst in the same year, recorded his conviction that the duties of a land surveyor in the extended state of the settlement was much more than Oxley, unaided, was equal to; and Macquarie asked for the appointment of a deputy surveyor.[17] This appointment was refused by the Colonial Office, and Oxley was faced with a task officially recognized as beyond his power.

The growing friction between the free settlers, the emancipists, the insurgent Macarthur coterie, and the representatives of lawful civil government has already been mentioned and is repeated here only in relation to the Surveyor General and his work. The exclusives required more and more convict labour for their ever-expanding acres, they resented the granting of civil liberties to time-expired convicts, and generally opposed most vigorously any liberal policy intended for the benefit of any section of the community other than their own privileged group.

Oxley was of this group. Bligh, Macquarie, and Darling had, each in succession, reported to the Colonial Office that Oxley's association with the Macarthur coterie was a source of official embarrassment.[18] Although Macquarie had described Oxley as "intriguing and discontented", Darling had given him credit for being a "clever man and a useful officer".[19] In addition to his official responsibilities Oxley was also the owner of an estate of a thousand acres between Camden and Narellan: an estate which he had received, while still a naval officer (1808), as a free grant by direction of Lord Castlereagh: this estate was commended by Commissioner Bigge as being especially well managed .[20]

Bigge had reported that the business of the Survey Department had fallen seriously into arrears, either on account of the disproportion of the establishment to the increase of business in it, or the frequent interruptions occasioned by the long absences of Oxley, Meehan, and Evans on tours of discovery; and by the distances at which the operations of admeasurement were to be executed.[21] He had recommended that the Surveyor General should have three assistant surveyors: and that a general division of the whole territory of New South Wales into counties, hundreds, and parishes was a measure of the highest importance and must accompany or precede every other plan of general improvements.[22] His report was not presented to the House of Commons until July 1823, and Bathurst at once transmitted to the Governor at Sydney that portion of the report which dealt with the Survey Department.[23] In doing so he covered the recommendations with official instructions:

You will understand that the recommendations in the Commissioner's Report have my approbation and sanction; and that I draw your attention to them for the purpose of their being carried into effect.[24]

Oxley had, in the meantime, been moved to action. He wrote a minute to Macquarie (27 July 1821) stating that the great and increasing pressure of public business in the Survey Department induced him to request such assistance as would enable him to bring up the great arrears and prevent in future those serious inconveniences and delays which had unavoidably been experienced in the execution of this branch of the public service [25] How far this sudden activity may have resulted from Bigge's enquiries is speculative. Bigge had left Sydney on 14 February 1821: and although the contents of Bigge's report could not have been known by Oxley when he wrote the official minute just quoted, he might well have known Bigge's views: he was of that group which throughout was intimate with Bigge.[26] He could not, in any case, have failed to realize during the course of a searching enquiry, the lack of efficiency in the field of administration for which he was responsible.

Oxley had, as stated above, asked Macquarie in July 1821 for assistance to bring up the arrears in the survey. Then, after a long delay, he submitted to Brisbane a requisition for a complete set of surveying instruments. This requisition was dated 29 January 1822 and was forwarded to London by Brisbane on 1 February 1822 asking for early supply. Two years and seven months later, on 13 August 1824, Brisbane again forwarded this requisition to London with the comment that as they were much wanted he requested that they might be forwarded by the earliest opportunity.[27] But, still another six months later (1 February 1825), Brisbane again forwarded Oxley's requisition.[28] Oxley in writing to Brisbane referred to his previous letters of 29 January 1822 and 4 August 1824, and said:

I respectfully beg to enclose a quadruple of the requisition I then made and I am sorry to be obliged to represent to Your Excellency that the great delay which has attended the supply of instruments has been attended with very serious inconvenience to the public service.

Bathurst advised Brisbane, on 21 August 1824, that he had appointed two assistants to the Surveyor General: that these were men

whose education and rank in life will not only add to the respectability of the Department but tend to place it on that footing, with respect to its efficiency which Mr Commissioner Bigge in his Report so strongly recommended to be done as well as afford at the same time those additional facilities in the location of the settlers in the which so many inconvenient delays have...taken place.[29]

The two men were Mr Heneage Finch, who had taken a high degree in mathematics at Oxford, and Mr Rodd, who had been "highly recommended by Lord Harrowby".

In October 1823, Oxley had been again sent away from Sydney on exploration: this time by sea to examine Port Bowen, Port Curtis, and Moreton Bay.[30] He returned after an absence of three months, having discovered the Brisbane River. Brisbane, transmitting the report of this journey, commended Oxley's zeal and intelligence.

Events were moving slowly, but with an irresistible momentum. Brisbane reported (24 July 1824) that stock in the colony were increasing at a rate which rendered it quite impossible to suppose that the liberality of the Crown could keep pace in extending grants with the increase of stock.[31] This is surprising in view of the liberality of Brisbane who, during his term, granted more than one million acres according to Oxley's report already mentioned. Such generous disposition of free land inevitably brought multiplying difficulties of boundary surveys.

Ultimately the Home Government decided on more definite action. Bathurst wrote to Brisbane (1 January 1825) a long despatch "respecting the granting and settlement of the waste lands of the Crown" and communicated "the decisions which His Majesty's Government have formed on the questions thus brought under their notice"[32] These decisions proceeded to repeat, as an official order, Bigge's recommendation that the whole territory of New South Wales was to be divided into counties, hundreds, and parishes: declaring that this was a measure of the highest importance which must accompany or precede every other plan of general improvements; and "to give the greater solemnity to this measure, and to carry it into effect with the utmost possible accuracy" Brisbane was instructed to issue a commission under the great seal of New South Wales empowering three competent persons, of whom the Surveyor General was to be the First or Chief Commissioner, to make a survey of the whole colony.

The instructions then proceeded, without full realization of the difficulties or of the magnitude of this task, to order that

having thus distributed the Territory of New South Wales into the necessary political divisions the next object of attention is that of making a general valuation of the land throughout the Colony.

The first Commissioners were J. Oxley, W. Cordeaux, and J. Campbell.[33] Oxley received no special remuneration other than his salary, but the others received £1 per diem each.

Brisbane left, and Darling arrived, in December 1825: Darling's Commission contained similar instructions to the effect that a survey and valuation should be made of "our said Territory of New South Wales". These instructions were in the conventional form of such documents, and began with the usual "George R.", although they were in all respects instructions by the Government and not Royal commands. Although the Royal prerogative of independent decision had not, at this period, been entirely surrendered, it is hardly likely that George IV, being what he was, would have been personally greatly concerned about the survey of "Botany Bay".

The elements in this official episode have to be given their true value, because, as will be seen, Mitchell repeatedly invoked "the King's instructions" throughout his official career, although at the time these instructions were issued he was not in Australia.

Darling soon gave attention to this troublesome matter of surveys. The Survey Commissioners made their first report to him on 11 March 1826.[34] But before this Oxley had been moved to write a report to Darling (26 January 1826). In this report he referred to the Home Government's instructions as to the disposal of Crown lands and the division of the whole colony into counties, parishes, etc.; he said that every effort had been made to bring the surveys up-to-date, to prevent the disappointment of free settlers arriving from England. But, he pointed out, the area to be covered was 250 miles long, and 140 miles wide.* While there was no real difficulty in the proposed division into counties, etc., an extensive and detailed survey was necessary: and he added:

As soon as the necessary local arrangements can be made I shall submit the extent of practical assistance which may be required in field surveyors, draftsmen, etc.[35]

[* He was then referring only to the districts in which "settlement" and grants of land had been distributed.]

The Survey Commissioners considered this very comprehensive report, but pointed out that the great obstacle to any progress in the policy for disposal of Crown lands was the great lag in the work of the Survey Department, "owing to which a very considerable extent of the lands, already located and granted, remain to this day unsurveyed (11 March 1826)".[36] Then they recommended that every practicable means should be used to ensure that the survey should overtake, keep pace with, and precede, the demands for land by sale and by grant. They also endorsed Oxley's requests for more staff.

This period was one of rather leisurely action. Oxley had asked for more staff in January 1826; the Commissioners had supported his request in March:[37] Darling reported all this to Bathurst in July, stating that he had given instructions that the general survey must be commenced at once, but that Oxley was totally unprepared to commence the general survey or even to deal with arrears with his existing staff, and asked that half a dozen "respectable men, good practical surveyors", be sent out immediately; he added:

the remissness in this branch of the service appears highly culpable, it bei