Dubious Selections

 

In 1891, a decade after John Robertson's death, his Struan legacy was described in a government summary as an "estate". Totaling 74,162 acres, it was spread over 4 Hundreds in the County of Robe: 21,277 acres in Robertson, 38,803 acres in Joanna, 9,201 acres in Jessie, and 4,871 acres in Comaum.

[LG MacGillivray, 1982, 'Land and People: European Land Settlement in the South East of South Australia, 1840-1940', PhD thesis, University of Adelaide, Appendix 8]

The significance of this figure lies in more than just its size. Struan was certainly large. But the acreage accumulated by Robertson also reveals a plan. His was a methodical, disciplined approach to acquiring freehold title, maintained over 3 decades.

Of an initial 89,827 acres occupied under Pastoral Lease No. 169 in 1851 (Struan) and an additional run of 23,680 acres taken over in about 1858 (Wrattonbully), approximately 65% had been converted from leasehold to freehold by 1880.

Crown Land, bought from the colonial government, had become private property. This was a strong statement by Robertson. He was no longer 'squatting' on land at Her Majesty's pleasure. He was there by right of ownership.

Buying up land was a regular part of station expenditure before The Waste Lands Amendment Act (1868-9), also known as the Strangways Act and a key piece of land reform legislation, was eventually passed.

John's son Alec recalled that "when resumptions took place in 1868 the opportunity was seized to convert large areas of the Mosquito Plains country, into which Struan extended for some miles, into freehold, thus consolidating those rich flats with other parts of the station already made secure of tenure".

['Struan, Narracoorte, South Australia, The Property of Alexander Robertson, Esq.', The Pastoral Review, vol 121, 16 February, 1929]

In other words, when the government began 'resuming' pastoral leases to make land available for "agriculturalists", John Robertson had already 'secured' most of the "Open Forest" or Red Gum country to the homestead's east.

The Context of 'Resumptions'

This map, a compilation of the relevant Hundreds, shows the outline of the 'leased Struan' according to the boundary fences marked by surveyors at the time (Robertson 1882, Joanna 1879, Jessie 1876, Comaum 1879). It also shows the sections converted to freehold by Robertson. This is according to clerical annotations made on 3 of the Hundred maps after 1882. 

Unfortunately the relevant map of Jessie is missing from the series, so the picture presented here understates the real position. It can be assumed that most of the sections in Jessie below the boundary fence line were freehold too (9,211 acres). Neither does it represent the Elderslie run, purchased by him in 1875, an adjoining station of 35,420 acres, but on the Victorian side of the South Australian border.

What this map illustrates is Robertson's foresight. The freehold blocks on the western side of the Naracoorte-Penola Road were the work of the 1870s. But in the 1860s he, and at least one of the Commissioner of Crown Lands' eight survey teams in the Colony, had been very busy in the east.

In addition, the map demonstrates the intersection with Agricultural Area No. 2, declared under the Strangways Act in the Hundred of Naracoorte. The effect on the Struan operation was relatively mild. Consider the much greater impact it had on Naracoorte station to the north. Moy Hall, on Struan's north western boundary and owned by John's nephew William Robertson, was also reduced.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. In 1861 G.W. Goyder was a newly appointed Surveyor-General, responsible to the Commissioner of Crown Lands. In 1862 he was named the Colony's Valuator of Runs by a nervous government. In 1864 Cabinet finally found the courage to issue Goyder with their instructions. He was to 'go forth' and devise an appropriate rental that fairly represented "the present annual value of each run".

     "The pastoralists, although they may not have known of Goyder's appointment, soon became aware of his duty as he visited station after station to the North of Adelaide. He did not announce his coming. More often than not he found the owner absent, and their managers, no doubt off guard, freely gave information of stock numbers and sales, carrying capacity and improvements...

    The first valuations for the new rentals were made public on 12th August 1864, after the Government had been forced by a vote in the House to publish the figures as they were completed...In the Mid-North, 28 station rents increased from £4,903 to £30,190. All of a sudden public agitation reached a pitch...The pastoralists attacked the valuations."

 

[K.R. Bowes, 1950, 'Land Settlement in South Australia, 1857-1890', PhD thesis, Australian National University, pp 154, 151, 159]

To bring this home to Struan, on 23 November 1864, Certificates of Annual Leases of Waste Lands of the Crown were issued. Certificate No. 76, in the name of W & J Robertson, for 78 square miles, came in at £240/10/- (including Annual Rent £58/10/- and Annual Assessment £182/-/-). In 1865 the bill arrived for 59 square miles, assessed at £750/-/-.

Robertson's personal reaction to the revised 'impost' is not known, although it might be guessed. However, his steady purchase of land continued as before, with annual applications for surveys, followed by attendance at public auctions at the Land Office in Adelaide.

     29 September 1864     Sections 27-39 & 59-63           Joanna     2,017 acres

       8 December  1864     Sections 580-581 & 610-620   Joanna     1,477 acres

     19 January      1865     Sections 202-218                    Comaum   2,845 acres

       3 August        1865     Sections 65-76                         Joanna    2,170 acres

[South Australian Government Gazette, 1Sep 1864, 10 Nov 1864, 29 Jun 1865, 15 Dec 1865, <classic.austlii,edu.au/au/other/sa-gazette>]

Bidding began at the upset price of £1 per acre, with 20% deposit payable by the successful bidder. Indications from a clerk's marks on early Hundred maps are that Robertson bought all but 2 of the sections that were sold at the above sales.

The Strangways Act

The Act of 1868-9 allowed the purchase of sections of surveyed land within proclaimed "agricultural areas", up to 640 acres, and on credit. Twenty percent of the purchase price was deemed interest to be paid up front, while the balance, at £1 per acre, was to be paid at the end of four years.

The land was to be "applied for bona fide [in good faith] for the use of the applicant in his own proper person, not as agent, servant or trustee for any other person". Any attempt to transfer or assign the land within the term of the Agreement was considered to be "a fraud under this Act". Further, any purchaser was required to "take possession of the said land within six months" and to "continue to occupy the same during the term of the agreement, and after the first twelve months shall continue to reside on the said land."

[An Act to further amend the Wastelands Act, VR 1868-9, No. 14 of 32 Vic, sec 18 & sched 5, assented 30 January 1869 <www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewed by/au/legis/sa/num-act/wla14o32V18689206>]

The South Australian Register mocked the idealism of Henry Strangways, calling him "The Saint George of land reformers". It reminded readers of "Mr. Goode's Select Committee on the Sale of Crown Lands", which heard witnesses in 1865:

"Question 508:   'Do you think it is possible to devise any system to prevent squatters from taking up country on the proposed system?' -- 'I don't think so. What is to prevent them doing it if they have the money?'

 Question 509:    'But if a system of leasing with deferred payments were adopted, very little money would be required?' -- 'Yes'.

 Question 510:    'Would that not tend to throw large quantities of land into the hands of squatters, without necessitating the provision of a large amount of purchase money?' -- 'Yes'."

['Three Years of Land Reform - Its Initiation', South Australian Register, Sat 28 Nov 1868, p 2]

And so it proved to be. "By the end of 1875, of the 45,923 acres for which purchase had been completed in the South East, 34,134 acres had been sold to pastoralists and only 7,742 acres were retained by the original selectors." Charles Bonney of the Crown Lands Office tried to stem the tide. "Upon inspection, and through local report, Bonney was certain that many were holding land in the interests of others". His "persistent plea to the Commissioner was to render personal residence compulsory". Finally given permission, he "enforced forfeiture of the selection where dummyism was obvious". Even so, from 1869 until 1876, only "283 agreements were revoked because conditions were not fulfilled."

[KR Bowes 1850, pp 276, 271, 275]

In March 1872, Bonney wrote, "A long experience in the carrying out of regulations relating to the acquisition of land has taught me that various methods will be resorted to and the most unscrupulous means adopted to evade any regulations which stand in the way of land monopoly."

The Employment of Dummies

John Robertson's neighbour on the northwest boundary of Struan was William Robertson of Moy Hall, his nephew and son of brother Duncan on Gringegalgona in Victoria. "In 1860, Moy Hall was bought by William Robertson, who had spent some time on the goldfields before going to Struan to learn the the job of farming [sic] from his uncle." (William Robertson died a bachelor in 1897, and the property was taken over by his sister Ann, who lived on it until her death in 1928). "The two properties always remained closely linked especially with regard to social and sporting affairs." (Horse racing and dog coursing were shared passions). 

[J Murdoch & H Parker, 1974, A History of Naracoorte, p 56]

But William Robertson chose a different response to his uncle when confronted by the 'resumption' of the Hundred of Naracoorte. The story of his decision is told retrospectively by the official documents.

On the 5th day of July 1871, the Colony's Governor, Chief Secretary, Treasurer and Premier, and the Commissioner of Crown Lands, met at the Executive Council Office in Adelaide. At this meeting they issued, among others, 9 Notices of Revocation of Agreements for the Purchase of Land on Credit to 5 individuals, all of whom bore the surname Robertson. These notices, together with advice of Tribunal dates "for the purpose of hearing your defence, if any", declared these individuals had "violated one of the conditions" -- they had not "continued to reside on the said land after the first twelve months."

    William Robertson, of Moy hall, sheep farmer, as purchaser, ss 100, 102, 103, 129, 130, Naracoorte Hundred, 640 acres.

    James Robertson, of Narracoorte, settler, s 135, 138, 139, Naracoorte H., 448 acres.

    James Robertson, of Narracoorte, settler, s 140, Naracoorte H., 100 acres

    John Robertson, of Moy Hall, sheep farmer, ss 449, 452, 454, 482, 613, Naracoorte Hundred, 354 acres.

    John Robertson, of Moy Hall, sheep farmer, ss 449, 450, 611, Naracoorte H., 204 acres.

    Peter Robertson, of Narracoorte, settler, s 444, Naracoorte H., 166 acres.

    Peter Robertson, of Narracoorte, settler, s 440, Naracoorte H., 182 acres.

    Lachlan Robertson, of Narracoorte, as purchaser, ss 614, 618, Naracoorte H., 314 acres.

    Lachlan Robertson, of Narracoorte, as purchaser, ss 438, 439, Naracoorte H., 252 acres.

[South Australian Government Gazette, 6 July 1871, <classic.austlii.edu.au/au/other/sa-gazette>]

William Robertson's 'dummying' through the names of his relations in Victoria was not subtle. (Presumably all letters addressed to James, Peter, and Lachlan Robertson of Narracoorte went straight into the mail bag for Moy Hall). His design to thwart the advance of agricultural selectors onto land formerly leased as part of his sheep run is also obvious when plotted on the Hundred map. The arrogance of such a blatant attempt to manipulate the Act is breath-taking, but it was not uncommon.

A Lesson Not Learnt

Meanwhile, John Robertson got on with minding his own business and complying with the law. No matter what his personal views might have been after a few whiskies, he had a reasonable working relationship with public servants like Bonney and Goyder. He made a decision not to put this at risk, and stuck to it. It is likely he achieved more in safeguarding his domain legally than others who chose to twist the legislation. 

There was an ethical basis to the men who worked for the Commissioner of Crown Lands in South Australia. Squatters often did not like the regulations that they administered, but generally acknowledged the absence of corruption within the Land Office. This was a critical reputation to have when elsewhere in the Australian colonies the opposite was held to be the case. Perhaps Robertson was one who recognised integrity and valued it.

It is therefore strange to read of another dummying scandal involving the Robertson name, this time in the 1880s, so soon after the patriarch's death and while the memory of his stealth-tactic to gain freehold of Struan was still fresh.

    "In April 1882 the Commissioner of Crown Lands gave notice of forfeiture under the Crown Lands Consolidation Act of 1877 to 19 selectors in the South East". Included among these were "Alan and J.S. Robertson (as acting for the late Mr Robertson of Struan House)." The squatters came together and chose a test case, Rankin Vs Catt, to defeat the Commissioner's claims. In August 1882 they won. To rebut their legal challenge, clause 17 in the Lands Act of 1882 was specifically enacted, "declaring that the violation or evasion of the provisions of the earlier acts was a fraud under those Acts". Notes of forfeiture were reissued to the nineteen, "and again the selectors...instituted fresh actions against the Commissioner. Robertson Vs Catt was selected as the test case".

[GH Manning, 'South Australia - Miscellany: Squatters and Pastoralists', The Manning Index of South Australian History, State Library, <manning.collections.slsa.sa.gov.au/sa/misc/squatterhtm#squatters>]

The wisdom of Robertson's method does not seem to have percolated down to those who administered his vast estate.