State Library of Victoria > La Trobe Journal

No 85 May 2010

13

Ian D. Clark
George Augustus Robinson on Charles Joseph La Trobe: personal insights into a problematical relationship

THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES the relationship between George Augustus Robinson, the Chief Protector of the Port Phillip Aboriginal Protectorate, and Charles Joseph La Trobe, the Superintendent of the Port Phillip District of New South Wales. What sets it apart from previous studies of this relationship1 and general studies of the protectorate2 is that it is grounded in Robinson's personal journal,3 which remained largely unpublished at the time of these studies. Alan Gross, in his 1956 biography, commented on La Trobe's attitude to the Protectorate and to Robinson. He noted that after three years into the Protectorate, La Trobe was dissatisfied: 'He had told Robinson he [La Trobe] would forward certain documents to His Excellency without expressing his opinion that, after nearly three years trial, there was but little appearance of order and general system observable in the conduct of his department, and that seems to have been his attitude throughout'.4 Yet, Gross considers La Trobe's comment in 1848 that 'I have hitherto in vain looked to the Chief Protector's department for assistance in establishing serene and friendly relations with the aborigines' as evidence that he had 'got over any disappointment' he may have harboured.5
Vivienne Rae-Ellis in her 1988 biography of Robinson devoted a chapter to his relationship with La Trobe. She characterised it as 'a stormy one: calm one day, troubled the next. On matters relating to personal enjoyment of travel and exploration they agreed, with admiration on both sides for the exploits of the other, but that was their only common ground. For the rest, the next decade offered the two men nothing but confrontation, confusion and compromise'.6 She omitted to mention their shared interest in gardening.
Robinson had a particular view of his status and standing in Melbourne society and reading his personal journal, it is evident that he became convinced that La Trobe did not give him the respect he deserved or the support his position required. Indeed, he became so conscious of this standing that after almost every encounter with La Trobe, whether of an official or private nature, he made some note in his journal of La Trobe's receptiveness – whether his manner was civil, and his demeanour and behaviour polite or disrespectful. Some examples from Robinson's private journal reveal his concerns: 9 October 1840 'Mr La Trobe uncommonly civil'; 2 August 1842 'Saw His Honor, rather cold reception'; 26 February 1844 'conferred with His Honor, very affable'; 6 March 1844, 'went to His Honour, discourteous (very)'; and 23 October 1844, 'friendly conversation, civil and fine'.
14
Robinson at times took umbrage at the means by which La Trobe communicated with him, often sending verbal messages and notes via convict servants. For example, on 1 February 1841, La Trobe's convict servant, Ross, arrived at Robinson's office with two letters 'one about the natives being in town, the other a saucy note requiring my presence at his office in the morning at 10 a.m. It is not possible to get obeyed or command respect when La Trobe acts so insultingly disrespectful, sending verbal messages by convicts and impertinent notes'. In 1842–3, Robinson personally employed an assigned convict named Agnew who ran errands and performed other duties. Robinson allowed him to sleep at his office. On 17 July 1843, James Evans, another assigned convict who was employed as Robinson's clerk, reported that La Trobe had visited the office the previous evening and asked whose stretcher bed was in the office. When Evans explained it was Agnew's, La Trobe told Evans to tell Robinson 'the bed must be removed'. This infuriated Robinson: 'It was most unseemly for a governor to treat the head of a department in such a manner. To come in my absence and of a Sunday evening and take me to task to a convict man, most ungentlemanly conduct and sufficient to bring me into contempt and disrespect' (17 July 1843).
Rae-Ellis considers Robinson was sycophantic: 'sending gifts to the mighty – a habit that caused embarrassment on occasion. He sent melons and grapes and even puppies to La Trobe, only to be deeply hurt when La Trobe's response on meeting him shortly after was nothing but 'a very stiff nod'.7 However, a careful analysis of Robinson's journal suggests her analysis is somewhat extreme and fails to consider that the gift giving was reciprocated and sometimes instituted by La Trobe. Within three weeks of La Trobe's arrival, Robinson presented his first gift to the La Trobes, two young kangaroos (17 October 1839). On 7 March 1844, La Trobe visited Robinson at his home in South Yarra, and 'went over my grounds and round the garden, viewed the house, took wine and water; praised the house and arrangements. Said it was built surely for him, he meant it was fit for a governor. I said I should be happy to transfer it. Was very sociable, sat on soofee [sofa], took the picture of the natives of Tasmania lamenting the loss of their land... Praised my melons and a pup which I promised to send him'. The following two days Robinson kept his promise sending La Trobe some cork melons and the pup. On 29 May 1845, after having dined with La Trobe, Robinson was given a pannikin of flour seed. On 27 October 1845, La Trobe asked Robinson to visit him at home and see his flowers. Robinson visited La Trobe at home on 24 April 1847 and saw his garden; La Trobe gave him some salmon red berries and promised to give him a cutting. On 16 June 1847 Robinson gave La Trobe some deutzia plants after La Trobe had asked Robinson for some from him. On 27 October 1847, La Trobe asked Robinson to call and see his garden. On 25 July 1848 Robinson sent La Trobe the first three volumes of Alder's and Hancock's A Monograph of the British Nudibranchiate Mollusca. On 2 November, La Trobe asked Robinson if he could come and again visit his garden. Finally, on 26 March 1849, Robinson sent La Trobe some grapes. Two days later, when they met at a public
15
lecture, Robinson noted that La Trobe gave him a 'very stiff nod'.

II

From Robinson's perspective, his relationship with La Trobe did not begin well. As there was no official welcoming on 1 October 1839, other than the firing of guns to announce La Trobe's arrival on shore, Robinson decided to seek him out and introduce himself and invite him to meet some of the Aboriginal people in Melbourne. He eventually met him on the morning of 4 October. La Trobe explained however that as he had only been on shore for a few days he was very busy, and he arranged to meet Robinson at a later date when they would attend to business. Robinson did not receive an official invitation to the exclusive reception held at the Melbourne Club later that day to mark La Trobe's arrival – however he was in good company, as neither did fellow officers of the Crown, such as surveyor Hoddle, Dr Cussen, and commissary Howard. The first formal meeting between La Trobe and Robinson on 10 October 1839 did not augur well for their future working relationship. At least three issues were raised that caused their relationship considerable tension: Robinson's residential arrangements; the cost of administrative assistance and travelling equipment and expenses; and Robinson's influence over Port Phillip Aboriginal people.
According to Robinson, La Trobe began the meeting declaring that 'he had so much to say' that he 'scarcely knew where to begin'. Robinson took the initiative and mentioned his need for living quarters and his desire to take the Langhorne residence associated with the defunct Yarra mission on the banks of the Yarra at what is now the site of the Royal Botanical Gardens. At this, according to Robinson, La Trobe 'began a strain of bitter invective for what he called my over-reaching in wishing to turn out Mr Langhorne from the premises'. La Trobe informed Robinson that he 'must have only one object in view – the blacks and the blacks alone or I should never succeed. If he was sure I had only such object he would support me'. Robinson replied that if he 'was actuated by any other object I should not have come here or accepted the appointment. As I conversed Mr La Trobe alluded to the cows and stock yard as he said if I wanted the land for the natives and for their stock it would be different but as yet he was not aware that I had any such intention. I said I had too long experienced the malevolent feeling against myself and the cause I was engaged in not to know that insinuations to my prejudice would be made ... as for the premises I had applied for them in accordance with the police magistrate's recommendations and they were absolutely required. I had received orders to organize the native police and the premises I occupied were required for the superintendent and his men' (10 October 1839).
La Trobe relented and consented to Robinson acquiring Langhorne's premises on the proviso that he was to have possession on 1 September. La Trobe 'said I must not be angry with what he said he must do his duty. Said I ought to do as other people do, take a place for my family, and travel, that he was sure the governor were not aware I was
16
staying in Melbourne. Said I was fully prepared to provide for the accommodation of my family and supposed that as my sons were about settling there could be no objection to Mrs Robinson and family staying with them. Said oh no of course not. I wished to know if I was to have no fixed establishment how the natives could be taught industry or labour &c' (10 October 1839). La Trobe's account of this meeting was considerably briefer than Robinson's: 'Long conversn. wth [Mr Robinson. C. Prot.]. His affair with Mr Langhorne & proceedings abt. The aborigl. reserve. His inaction since his arrival & – indecision abt moving – compld. abt. his Asst. Prot. & of not being supported etc. his requisitions informal – his desire to see the Native Police re-established. They ought to be put upon quite a diff. footing – Give Mr Langhorne two months grace from this date'.8
La Trobe was concerned with Robinson's inability to prevent Aboriginal people from spending too much time in Melbourne (20 December 1839). La Trobe took the view that Robinson should select a day and use force, if necessary, to clear Aboriginal people from Melbourne. Robinson told La Trobe that he had done all he could to persuade the Aboriginal people to leave Melbourne. He did not consider it his place to use physical force. According to Robinson, La Trobe replied that the Aboriginal people must 'be got and made to go away'. Robinson said that he was 'willing to resign my part if other persons could be found to do it better' (20 December 1839).
On 18 October 1839, Robinson met La Trobe to discuss the workings of the protectorate. According to Robinson, La Trobe's response to Robinson's complaint of the absence of personal assistance was that he must pay for this out of his salary. Robinson's reaction was that if he had to meet these expenses himself, he would not be able to support his family. On the matter of travelling through the protectorate, Robinson said he 'should proceed into the interior but of course my movements must be proportionate to the means afforded. I could not do impossibilities and of course if I find as I think as much that I can not give satisfaction to the governor nor with credit to myself in that case I shall have no other alternative but to resign. I did not accept the appointment for the sake of an appointment. I had resolved to exert myself to the utmost for a short period of 12 months or two years, or if it could be done in six months, I was ready to resign my appointment if it was an object with the government for me to hold it. Said he had the cause of the Aborigines at heart and would be ready to assist me as far as he could' (18 October 1839). This was not the first time Robinson threatened La Trobe with resignation: indeed, in the first twelve months of La Trobe's appointment, he threatened resignation on at least six occasions: at their first formal meeting on 10 October 1839; and at subsequent meetings on 18 October 1839, 5 November 1839, 20 December 1839, 6 June 1840, and 26 August 1840.
Travelling expenses and the cost of necessary equipment continued to be a sticking point. La Trobe's view was that Robinson should visit his assistants at his own expense, as it was included in his salary (5 November 1839), and that this included his travelling equipment (4 January 1840). Robinson informed La Trobe that had he 'known
17
what I had to contend with I should not have accepted the appointment. If I have not the means, it is not in my power to do impossibilities, nor could I imagine what object His Majesty's government could have in securing my services, to send me here without means'. Robinson added, 'I said of course I had only one course left open to adopt and that was to retire from the appointment' (5 November 1839). The issue of travelling equipment became a critical issue as La Trobe began to pressure Robinson to visit his protectorate districts and select suitable locations for their central stations. On 6 June 1840, Robinson spoke 'of the miserable way in which I had travelled for want of equipment when Mr La Trobe stopped me by saying he was tired of hearing of it. Sir G. Gipps said I must find my own out of my own salary. I said I had then only one course to adopt to resign after I had completed my visits of the districts'. The issue surfaced again on 4 August 1840 when La Trobe said to Robinson that he 'might buy a spring cart. Said it was out of the question, my salary was all but expended now in the public service. He said that was the disputed point. Said no I did not intend mooting it again. I had done so once and should not repeat it whether I stopped long or short in the office'.

III

From the beginning of 1840 Robinson was no longer in sole charge of the protectorate: he was placed under La Trobe's direct supervision, and much of the responsibility for the department was removed from him.9 Dianne Drury considered La Trobe's taking charge of the protectorate was 'a rare display of authoritarianism'.10 Robinson did not enjoy this level of micro-management, and there is little doubt that under this arrangement the progress of the Aboriginal protectorate suffered as it had to be juggled along with all of La Trobe's other responsibilities.
A tension that soon emerged between Robinson and his superiors concerned Robinson's predilection for lengthy correspondence. For example on 24 February 1841, La Trobe told Robinson to make his forthcoming report short. A week later on 4 March 1841, La Trobe informed Robinson that Governor Gipps was complaining of the length of his correspondence. 'Said moreover that I was not to send him any more returns but keep them for my own office and then that our correspondence must be curtailed and that I was to send only really useful information to the governor he found that in his endeavour to right he had done too much and things which ought not to have concerned him I could have told him that long since' (4 March 1841). At a subsequent meeting, on 6 September 1841, La Trobe pressured Robinson about 'giving up to him the power of corresponding direct with the assistant protectors and for me [to reduce] my rank and pay. I said I [did not have the] means as he might suppose and that for me to be always in the field I could not consent'.
In March 1842, La Trobe sought Gipps' approval to sanction either another management or a complete change of system.10 He believed any advantages achieved by the protectorate in its first three years could have been obtained by a more simple and unpretentious machinery. He believed Robinson, though efficient in making contact
18
with the Aboriginal people, was unequal to the control of a large department, and was, moreover, already very old. (Robinson, at 51, was ten years La Trobe's senior). The achievements of assistant protector Parker at the Loddon protectorate station and La Trobe's favourable report of this progress ensured the protectorate was reprieved. Nevertheless, the protectorate experienced significant reductions in 1843: annual appropriations were drastically reduced, two assistant protectors were replaced by medical officers in charge, and the Westernport protectorate station at Narre Warren was replaced by a depot at the Merri Creek.
Robinson was an avid traveller and during his tenure as Chief Protector he quickly became the most widely travelled public official in Port Phillip. Certainly, regular travel to Aboriginal Protectorate stations was part of his official duties, and Robinson made over 30 journeys from Melbourne, where the central office of the Protectorate Department was based. Robinson was not a 'famous traveller' in the sense of Herodotus or Marco Polo who published accounts of their travels, but he was nevertheless an assiduous diarist and between 1839 and 1852 he became the European with the most experience of travelling throughout the Port Phillip District at that time.11 His travels took him through almost all of Victoria, and he went as far a field as Twofold Bay, Queanbeyan, Yass, and Gundagai in New South Wales, and Kapunda, Adelaide, Kingston and Mount Gambier in South Australia. He travelled extensively along the Murray River and took every opportunity to follow the track left by Surveyor-General Mitchell's 1836 'Australia Felix' expedition. In 1844 he led the first overland expedition that successfully opened a road for wheeled carts from Melbourne to Port Albert. Robinson travelled primarily on horseback and occasionally by a light-spring wagon drawn by two horses. On short trips he generally travelled alone; however, on major journeys that saw him travel for periods longer than three weeks, he was often accompanied by protectorate staff and native police and/or border police. In total, he spent almost three years of his eleven-year appointment travelling.
From March to August 1846, on one of his many forays away from Melbourne, Robinson visited the Loddon protectorate station and then went on to the Swan Hill district where La Trobe had instructed him to select a site at the Tyntynder pastoral run for an Aboriginal station. Once there, rather than return to Melbourne, he elected to travel down the Murray River, and venture into South Australia, where he visited the copper mines at Kapunda, the Native School at Adelaide, and returned to Melbourne via Rivoli Bay. In Adelaide he met with his South Australian counterpart, Dr Matthew Moorhouse. When Robinson returned to Melbourne he learned that La Trobe had suspended his pay from May to July, when he was effectively absent without leave. At his next meeting with La Trobe, on 10 August 1846, La Trobe told Robinson he 'had no business' being out of the Port Phillip District. Robinson's defence was that as he was Chief Protector of New South Wales he was able to go anywhere in that colony. The conversation was difficult and according to Robinson, La Trobe said 'now Mr Robinson
19
[I] must tell you there will be a change in your department when we look at results [you've] let it sleep for [the] last three years but let me say it cannot go on [any] longer [with] no results' (10 August 1846). By 22 June 1847, La Trobe had formed the view that 'no good had resulted' from Robinson's journeys. Subsequently he instructed him to confine himself strictly to visiting the Aboriginal establishments at the Goulburn and Loddon rivers and Mount Rouse, and reporting on them. Robinson was forced to take notice. With the exception of one six week journey of 770 kilometres in 1847, he embarked on no further marathon expeditions, restricting his absences, as ordered, to two or three weeks at a time.12

IV

In 1848, Gipps' successor, Sir Charles Fitzroy, asked La Trobe for his views on whether the Protectorate should be abolished. La Trobe established a Select Committee to investigate the Aboriginal Protectorate. In November, La Trobe recommended the immediate closure of the department on the grounds that every measure introduced for the benefit of the Aborigines had failed, or was failing.13 He considered the improved relationship between blacks and whites in Victoria in 1848 was not due to the Protectorate but the result of changed circumstances of the blacks and their loss of power. In terms of the Protectorate, he noted:
If blame is to be attached, no much greater degree is to be ascribed to Mr Robinson ... Mr Robinson was induced ... to undertake a duty for which he was totally unsuited. That he possessed some valuable natural or acquired qualifications for the work, will not be denied – but by withdrawing him from that position wherein under peculiar circumstances these had been developed, and by imposing upon him the task of bringing his past experience to bear upon a field of different character ... through an agency, the management of which was quite beyond his powers, his efficiency, such as it was, was destroyed.14
The 1849 Select Committee concluded that the Protectorate had failed, and advised its abolition. It was, however, unable to recommend a replacement for it. It is noteworthy that this committee did not consider it necessary to consult the protectors in its deliberations. On 10 July 1849 Robinson received official correspondence informing him that the office of Chief Protector would be abolished at the end of the year. In his final annual report of the Protectorate, sent to La Trobe on 11 February 1850, Robinson alluded to his recent dismissal and to the 1849 Select Committee report. He noted: 'It may not be out of place here now that my official connection with the aborigines has terminated, to observe that I have endeavoured in all my dealings to do justice to the aborigine, and to the white settler, and I am not aware that aught [sic] to the contrary has been stated. ... It is not necessary here to advert to a recently published official document, although my Assistants have done so, I may state however, that whilst there is much that is creditable there is a vast deal that is erroneous'.15
Robinson closed his office at the end of March 1850, and surrendered official
20
Protectorate papers to staff in La Trobe's office. His last duties as Chief Protector occurred on 5 April 1850 when he visited La Trobe and handed in the Protectorate's bank book, showing a balance in the Government's favour of £231. La Trobe signed his pay abstracts for January and February 1850, and advised Robinson that 'Thomas would be kept on as before, Parker magistrate and have run, allowed Simpson clerk his pay'. On 10 July 1850, Robinson visited La Trobe, at his request, to go over the Protectorate's wool account with himself and Thomas. This is the last reference to La Trobe in Robinson's private journal despite the fact that Robinson remained in Melbourne until 30 May 1852, when he departed for England.
An undated jotting in Robinson's private papers provides us with some insight in to how he viewed the relationship between La Trobe and the Aboriginal Protectorate:
Protectorate part experimental, viz. civil protectorate is a certainty and not an experimental. Schools and religious are experiments. I should not have accepted appointment nor have consented had it been experiment nor allowed any experiment to be made in my person. If an experiment was confined to the colonists and to the government to see how far the office of the Chief Protector could be sustained without the aid of the executive to encourage the Department. Had the office been created in the colony it would have had support and had La Trobe been in my place would have acted different to which he did to me. How could I educate the native population except by going through the country and among them. Mrs Robinson had suffered considerable mental anxiety occasioned by a squib of Mr L.T. played off and precious without a thought or by a silly joke of Mr. L.T.16
It has not been possible to determine what the squib or silly joke was, if in fact there actually was one. Whatever it was, Robinson considered it had a deleterious effect on his wife. This jotting captures one of La Trobe's primary objections regarding the protectorate. In March 1839 he had told Assistant Protector James Dredge that he was convinced it must fail because of its essentially civil character.17 He was of the view that it should be undertaken by missionaries who were free from government rules and regulations. In 1841, La Trobe told the Reverend Joseph Orton that the protectorate must come to an end as it was 'like an entangled thread, and must be broken up'.18
By early 1844, Robinson had formed the view that La Trobe was doing his best to undermine the Protectorate: 'he gives me no encouragement nor does he wish me to be useful – he does what he can (quietly) to upset the department' (6 March 1844). Five years later, Robinson was more expansive of his views:
No confidence whatever was reposed in me, no employment of Honor, and I was with studied care kept in the back ground. Mr La Trobe brought strong prejudices with him and received his intelligence from men whose aims or interest it was to increase these prejudices. Memo: I have done all in my powers to live in peace with La Trobe. I have omitted nothing in my powers. I felt the indifference of my situation, was aware it could not efficiently be carried on without his joint cooperation and assistance, but I have been neglected. I was placed under him and
21
he was to direct and I thought it my duty not to complain. I am in the hands of the Secretary of State &c (4 March 1849).
Assistant Protector Dredge agreed with Robinson noting that 'the measure of protection to the natives is extremely unpopular here, and that this government, though unable to set aside the appointment, will do everything it can to neutralize its efficiency'.19 Wrote Dredge: 'Could I have dreamed that the humanity and benevolence of the Home Government would have been so perverted and rendered nugatory by the colonial authorities, I would never have been their victim – I would never have left England to be duped as I have been'.20

V

This article has reviewed La Trobe's official correspondence on aspects of the Aboriginal protectorate and on Robinson and compared this with Robinson's views on the support or otherwise of La Trobe. This use of personal correspondence is distinctive and sets it apart from previous studies of this relationship. The study has confirmed that Robinson's and La Trobe's relationship was a very difficult one and that neither had confidence in the other. La Trobe was convinced that Robinson was unsuited to managing a government department; that his reporting and correspondence suffered from prolixity; that he was unable to 'control' the Aboriginal people who were his charges – in short he regarded Robinson as totally unsuitable to the role of Chief Protector. Within three months of his arrival in Melbourne, La Trobe had taken control from Robinson, placing him under his direct supervision. Robinson bristled at La Trobe's treatment of his position, he felt that La Trobe failed to show him the respect his office deserved and he fundamentally disagreed with La Trobe over the issue of the use of 'force' in encouraging Aboriginal people to leave Melbourne. He took the view that La Trobe had been against the Protectorate from the beginning, partly because it was imposed by the Home Government, and partly because it followed a secular or civil plan of action and not a religious plan managed by Christian missionaries.
Foxcroft's analysis was that the failure of the protectorate was due to the inadequacy of contemporary anthropology making it impossible to have an effective native policy in Victoria during the nineteenth century, and not the individual shortcomings of the protectors. The latter view was favoured by contemporary commentators of the Protectorate such as pastoralists and officials including La Trobe.21 Foxcroft agreed with Robinson that much of the criticism of the protectorate was partisan: 'The New South Wales Government tended to resent the imposition of this department upon it from overseas'.2223 I agree with Foxcroft that the protectorate suffered from two fundamental weaknesses: insufficient public and state support and its own inherent weaknesses attributable to the inadequacy of nineteenth century anthropological knowledge.

1

Vivienne Rae-Ellis, Black Robinson: protector of Aborigines, Carlton, Vic.: Melbourne University Press, 1988; Alan Gross, Charles Joseph La Trobe: superintendent of the Port Phillip District 1839-1851, Lieutenant-Governor of Victoria 1851-1854, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1956.

2

M. F. Christie, Aborigines in Colonial Victoria 1835-86, Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1979 & Edmund J. B Foxcroft, Australian Native Policy: its history especially in Victoria, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1941.

3

Ian D Clark, ed., The Journals of George Augustus Robinson, Chief Protector, Port Phillip Aboriginal Protectorate 1 January 183930 September 1852, 6 vols, 2nd Edition, Clarendon, Victoria: Heritage Matters, 2000. References are generally cited as journal entries. The State Library of Victoria holds microfilm copies of the originals in the Australian Manuscript Collections at MF 1–5.

4

Gross, p. 54.

5

Gross.

6

Rae-Ellis, p. 196.

7

Rae-Ellis, p. 252.

8

Dianne Reilly Drury, Charles Joseph La Trobe Australian Notes 1839-1854, Mansfield, Vic.: Boz Publishing, 2007, p. 75.

9

Rae-Ellis, p. 96.

10

Dianne Reilly Drury, La Trobe: the making of a governor, Carlton, Vic: Melbourne University Press, 2006, p. 194.

11

New South Wales (Aborigines), New South Wales Legislative Council Votes and Proceedings, Sydney: Government Printer, 1843. Foxcroft, p. 55.

12

Clark, The Journals of George Augustus Robinson.

13

Rae-Ellis, p. 246.

14

New South Wales Aborigines and Protectorate. Report from the Select Committee on the Aborigines and Protectorate, with Appendix, Minutes of Evidence, and Replies to a Circular Letter, Sydney: Government Printer, 1849, p. 4.

15

Aborigines and Protectorate, p. 8.

16

Ian D. Clark, ed., The Papers of George Augustus Robinson, Chief Protector, Port Phillip Aboriginal Protectorate, Annual and Occasional Reports 184149, Clarendon, Victoria: Heritage Matters, 2000, p. 174.

17

Clark, The Journals of George Augustus Robinson, p. 146.

18

James W. Dredge. Diaries. Entry for 26 March, 1839, MS 5244, Australian Manuscripts Collection, State Library of Victoria.

19

Dredge. Diaries. Entry for 26 of January 1841.

20

Dredge. Diaries. Entry for 11 of October, 1838.

21

James W. Dredge. Letterbook 20 April 18393 January 1845. Entry for 3 of July 1840, MS 11625, Australian Manuscripts Collection, State Library of Victoria.

22

Christie; H. G Turner, A History of the Colony of Victoria, 2 vols, London: Longmans, Green & Co, 1904.

23

Foxcroft, p. 64.