The topic of Aboriginal civil rights in Australia has been extensively debated over the past century. Numerous events have influenced the progress of these rights from the 1920s to the constitutional referendum in 1967. Due to the significant number of important occurrences during this time, it is impractical to discuss them all. However, I will attempt to address Aboriginal people’s rights prior to this period, the rise of political activism within Aboriginal communities, notable events like the Day of Mourning and Cummeragunja walk off, international pressure placed on Australia, and lastly, the significance of the 1967 referendum.
The strength of the Aboriginal rights movement grew during the late 1930s and 1940s as a result of international pressure on the Australian government and increased political activism among Aboriginal people. To understand how Aboriginal rights progressed before the 1967 Referendum, it is crucial to recognize the state of Aboriginal rights at that time.
The Australian Constitution, implemented in 1901, designated Aborigines as a “state responsibility” (Prentis, 2008), resulting in limited political influence and marginalization from Australian citizenship (Chesterman, 1997). Over the next seventy years, two sections of the Constitution sparked intense debate and an ongoing struggle for Aboriginal rights.
Section 51 of the Constitution declares that the Parliament has the authority to create laws for the well-being and governance of the Commonwealth, including laws that pertain to races other than the Aboriginal race in any State, if deemed necessary (Attwood, 2007). Some argue, such as Chesterman, that this section of the Constitution overlooks the Aboriginal race when it comes to legislation. However, it is important to note that this provision primarily addresses the regulation of “alien races,” rather than native races.
The confusion surrounding this matter stems from the differing interpretations by the States, who had been granted control over Aboriginal affairs within their respective territories. Section 127 of the Constitution specifically states that Aboriginal natives are not to be included in Australia’s population count. This provision highlights the prevalent racist attitudes held by Australians during that era. As both sections were written and implemented in 1901, the Commonwealth effectively denied Aborigines their rights to citizenship.
The rights of Aboriginal people were further reduced when the Commonwealth introduced the Franchise Act in 1902. According to the Franchise Act of 1902, no Aboriginal person from Australia, Asia, Africa, or Pacific Islands (excluding New Zealand) could have their name on an electoral roll unless they met the criteria specified in Section 41 of the Constitution (Attwood, 2007). This politically motivated racial discrimination effectively prevented Aboriginal people from exercising their right to vote.
The Commonwealth Franchise Act of 1902 resulted in the disenfranchisement of Aboriginal individuals for nearly six decades. In the 1920s, various political organizations promoting Aboriginal rights emerged, including the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (AAPA), founded and led by Fred Maynard in 1925. The establishment of the AAPA marked an early example of an Aboriginal political group during that period. Its objectives set a precedent for subsequent Aboriginal protest groups by seeking to articulate opposition against the political oppression experienced by Aboriginal people (Maynard, 1997).
Although the group had a short lifespan, it played a significant role in advancing Aboriginal rights. During its early stages, the AAPA approached the Protection Board to advocate for civil rights and land rights. Fred Maynard and the AAPA were at the forefront of promoting Aboriginal assimilation and autonomy in raising their children (Flood, 2006). The main importance of this organization lies in being one of Australia’s earliest Aboriginal political groups actively opposing state and federal legislation.
Aboriginal political activism in Australia experienced a surge during the 1920’s and 1930’s. Multiple Aboriginal political organizations were established in New South Wales, Western Australia, Victoria, and South Australia. These included the AAPA, The Native Union, the AAL, the Australian Aborigines Association (AAA), the Euralian Association, and the Aborigines Progressive Association (APA) (Attwood, 1999). While these organizations had a shared goal of advocating for Aboriginal rights, their focus was primarily local. However, two national organizations emerged: the Australian Aborigines League and the Aborigines Progressive Association. Despite operating in different areas of Australia, these groups collaborated to organize two significant events during the 1930’s.
Arthur Burdeu founded the Australian Aborigines League (AAL) in the 1930’s, which transitioned from a local to a national organization based on its members’ perspective of the League’s role. According to Burdeu, the AAL represented the Aboriginal problem from the perspective of the dark man (Attwood, 2004). Similarly, William Cooper believed that the AAL was an effort by the Dark Man to improve his own race (Attwood, 2004).
Both Jack Patten and William Ferguson were important members of the Australian Aborigines League, advocating for Aboriginal rights and empowerment. They believed it was the Aboriginal community’s responsibility to fight for their own rights and used their organization as a platform to voice concerns in Australia. In the late 1930s, Pearl Gibbs co-founded the Aborigines Progressive Association with Patten and Ferguson, playing a crucial role. The APA’s primary goal was to strive for citizenship for Aboriginal people and promote assimilation into white society, as explained by Broome (1982).
However, according to Broome, assimilation in the late 1930’s faced racism as it was considered a radical policy due to the belief among most white Australians that Aborigines would eventually die out. The Australian Aborigines League and the Aborigines Progressive Association were the most influential Aboriginal political groups during this time. These groups primarily employed conventional interest group tactics such as meeting with government officials, submitting petitions to the Crown, and participating in government organized conferences on Aboriginal issues (Gurr, 1983). Their significance is evident in their ability to articulate Aboriginal expectations regarding civil rights, exemplified by the 1938 Day of Mourning protests, which was organized in part by the APA (Prentis, 2008).
The Day of Mourning Protests in 1938 were organized by the Australian Aborigines League and the Aborigines Progressive Association. The primary objective of this protest was to express to the government the significant problems in Australia’s history and to secure rights that other Australians had enjoyed for a long time. According to Alexander (1997), the manifesto marked a new and more radical form of protest, which was necessary to raise public consciousness about the ongoing exclusion.
The two leaders of the organizations discussed the political agenda and contended that numerous Indigenous individuals were cultured and should have the right to complete citizenship. They stated, “We demand equal education, equal opportunity, equal pay, equal rights to own property, or to have control over our own lives – in short: equal citizenship!” (Patten, 1938). This was in reaction to the recently enacted 1939 Child Welfare Act, which allowed for the removal of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children from their families if they were deemed uncontrollable or neglected (Chesterman, 1997).
The second Major event was organized by the APA and AAL. In 1939, the Cumeragunja walk-off served as a symbol of Aboriginal people taking direct action in response to deteriorating working conditions and ongoing neglect of policy change. Arthur McQuiggan became the new manager of the Cummeragunja station. He was known for his harsh authoritarianism, leading residents to complain. Cooper and Patten created a petition to request McQuiggan’s removal, but it was returned and the grievance was disregarded (Attwood, 2004).
The inaction resulted in residents taking additional measures and organizing a walk off. They crossed the Murray River and set up camp on the riverbank (Attwood, 2004). The Australian Aborigines League and the Aborigines Progressive Association effectively advocated for Aboriginal rights. However, it is important to note that not all of their actions, including the Day of Mourning and the Cummeragunja walk off, resulted in immediate and highly significant legislative changes.
Both the Aborigines conflict and World War II in the late 1930s increased national awareness, but the war ultimately undermined this progress. The Cummeragunja “walk off,” along with propaganda efforts by the APA and a critical report by the Public Service Board, resulted in the enactment of the New South Wales Aborigines Welfare Act in 1940. This act officially promoted assimilation as its policy. However, it took almost a decade for the act to become effective.
During the 1960’s, Aboriginal political activism groups were instrumental in achieving significant changes to acts and legislation. Australia, as an original member of the United Nations since its establishment in 1945, faced international pressure from the organization that aided in advancing Aboriginal civil rights. A notable breakthrough occurred with the UN’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, which emphasized various articles that Australian States had disregarded from the early 1900s until the 1950s.
Articles 1, 3, 7, 9, and 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights highlight issues that persist in Australia. The Declaration stresses the importance of protecting individuals from racial discrimination (Chesterman, 2001). However, one drawback of the Declaration is its lack of strong legal power, making enforcement challenging in its initial phases. Australia has demonstrated its dedication to promoting human rights globally by actively assisting other countries in developing and strengthening their own national human rights organizations (Barker, 1997).
The issue that arose was how a country participating in international human rights could struggle with enforcing human rights within its own borders. The United Nations served as a platform to discuss matters pertaining to race and racism, as well as establish universal human rights. Australia faced criticism on the global stage for its handling of civil rights for Aboriginal people. This international spotlight revealed that the states, rather than the Commonwealth, primarily held responsibility for Aboriginal affairs.
In a 1951 paper, Henry Wardlaw expressed the hopes of Aborigines to implement the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Wardlaw remarked that the treatment of Aborigines in Australia exposed the Australian Government to valid accusations of hypocrisy, as its representatives criticized other countries for depriving their subjects of basic human rights. Wardlaw urged that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the Australian representative at the United Nations endorsed, be adopted as the foundation for necessary reforms in the treatment of Aborigines (Wardlaw 1951). The international attention on civil rights issues concerning Aboriginal people resulted in increased effectiveness of Aboriginal political activism groups in instigating legislative changes. In 1959, the Commonwealth granted Indigenous people who were not nomadic or primitive access to social security benefits such as maternity allowance, widows’ pensions, and old-age and invalid pensions (Chesterman, 2001). These changes brought significant improvements for Indigenous people.
According to Chesterman, in the late 1950s, as international tolerance towards state-endorsed racial discrimination decreased, lobby groups became more active and had a significant impact. The increased international attention on aboriginal rights in Australia allowed Aboriginal political organizations to exert more influence on the Commonwealth for policy change.
The Nationality and Citizenship Act of 1948 declared that all individuals born in Australia would be considered citizens of Australia (Rowse, 2000). However, this law was not fully effective because there was a clear divide between the acquisition of Australian nationality and the limitations on personal rights imposed by both the Commonwealth and State governments (Chesterman, 1997). Given the complications arising from federal and State legislation, there was a pressing need for federal oversight in matters concerning Aboriginal affairs.
During the 1960s, due to increasing pressure from both international and domestic sources, the Commonwealth began taking significant steps toward rectifying previous failed legislation. One notable milestone came in 1962 when the Commonwealth amended its Franchise Act, granting all adult Indigenous individuals the right to vote in Commonwealth elections. This action by the Commonwealth parliament marked the first instance in which an Australian parliament specifically enfranchised Aborigines without any limitations (Chesterman, 1997).
After years of international pressure and embarrassment, integrated with Aboriginal political organizations, the rights of Aboriginal people were successfully affected. The 1967 Constitutional Referendum is widely regarded as one of the most significant events in the advancement of Aboriginal civil rights. This referendum amended sections 51 and 127 of the constitution and transferred responsibility for handling Aboriginal affairs from racist and neglectful state governments to the Federal Government in Australia. The Commonwealth assumed control of Aboriginal affairs, eradicated racial discrimination, granted citizenship rights to Aborigines, and strived for equality for the Aboriginal people” (Attwood, 2007).
H. C. Coombs recommended that the government take time to consider the organization’s structure before making any rush decisions. He suggested that an initial appointment be made for a small council supported by an office with a strong research basis. Their role would be to study the nature of the problems they would face and provide advice to the government on policies, as well as administrative and executive measures to implement them” (Coombs, 1994).
Even though the referendum held in 1967 carried great significance, it was not until the Labor Party came into power in 1972 that the true potential of the referendum was fully realized (Attwood, 2007). The powers granted to the Federal Government through the referendum were neglected for a period of five years following its passing. Some interpreted this as a lack of action from the government, but I believe it was a time when the government was uncertain about how to rectify six decades of injustice.
To summarize, the connection between significant events and protests organized by Aboriginal political organizations centered on periods when Australia was facing negative international attention regarding Aboriginal rights. Both the actions of Aboriginal political groups and the global perception of Australia played a crucial role in promoting Aboriginal rights starting from the late 1940s.
References
Alexander, John. (1997): Following David Unaipon’s footsteps, in Journal of Australian Studies, 21:54-55, 22-29 Attwood, B. nd Markus, A. (1999) Introduction. In The Struggle for Aboriginal Rights: A Documentary History (pp. 1-29). Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Attwood, B., & Markus, A. (2007). The 1967 referendum: Race, power and the Australian constitution. Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Attwood, B., & Markus, A. (2004). Thinking black: William cooper and the Australian Aborigines’ League. Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Barker, B. (1997). Getting government to listen: A guide to the international human rights system for Indigenous Australians.
East Sydney, NSW, Australia: The Australian Youth Foundation.
Broome, R. (1982). Aboriginal Australians: black response to white dominance 1788-1980. North Sydney, NSW: George Allen & Unwin Australia Pty Ltd.
Chesterman, J., & Galligan, B. (1997). Citizens without rights: Aborigines and Australian citizenship. London, England: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Chesterman, John. (2001): Defending australia’s reputation how indigenous Australians won civil rights part one, In Australian Historical Studies, 32:116, 20-39
Coombs, H. C. (1994). Aboriginal Autonomy Issues and Strategies. New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Flood, J. (2006). The original Australians: Story of the aboriginal people. Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Gurr, T. (1983). Outcomes of public protest among australias aborigines. American Behavioral Scientist, 26(3), 353-373. Maynard, John (1997), ‘Fred Maynard and the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association’, Aboriginal History 21: 1–13. Patten, J. T. and Ferguson. W. ‘Aborigines claim citizen rights! In J Horner, (1974) Vote Ferguson for Aboriginal Freedom. (pp 192-199) Sydney: Australia and New Zealand Book Company. Prentis, M. (2008). A concise companion to aboriginal history. NSW, Australia : Rosenberg Publishing. Rowse, Tim (2000). Indigenous citizenship: The politics of communal capacities. Change: Transformations in Education 3. 1: 1-16. The 1967 Referendum document 14, pages 99-100. Henry Wardlaw, Secretary, Council for Aboriginal Rights, to Rt Hon. Paul Hasluck, Minister for Territories, 28 August 1951
