A promising start: what went wrong with Tasmanian cricket in the nineteenth century?

As throughout most of the British Empire, cricket took solid root in the Australian colonies. A total of seventy-five intercolonial matches were played on the Australian continent between 1851 and 1892. Cricket was played as early as 1825 in Van Diemen’s land, later rechristened Tasmania. The colony was also the site of the earliest first-class cricket to be played in the Australian colonies. (1) The first intrastate game between North and South was held at the geographical mid-point at Oatlands on the 20^th of April 1850. (2) When “Tasmania” defeated Victoria in Launceston in March 1854 by 8 wickets it was termed ‘the conquering match’ as each had previously won an intercolonial match on their own ground. (3) While Tasmania had begun as one of the ‘strongest cricket colonies’, it was excluded from the inaugural Sheffield Shield competition in the 1892-93 season. (4) In fact the state did not join the competition until the 1977/8 season. (5) So exactly what factors retarded the development of cricket in Tasmania during the Nineteenth Century? I have identified several potential candidates: elitism, aversion to professionalism, resistance to round arm bowling, rivalries between North and South, population and poverty. Do any of these adequately explain the stifled progress of the sport in Tasmania?

While the game of cricket was diffused across most of the British colonies, among all the territory that was once held by the British, it appears to have failed to take root in North America, specifically the United States and Canada. That was also despite evidence of early popularity in both countries and its enduring success in the Caribbean. Sociologists Jason Kaufman and Orlando Patterson have argued that the success of its diffusion was dependent on two main factors: use of the sport as a hegemonic tool and popularization by cultural entrepreneurs. (6) Additionally, is it possible that the reasons for the sport’s overall failure in North America could shed some light on its qualified success on the island state?

 

 A game of cricket by Francis Hayman 1743, British Museum, Public domain, Wikimedia Commons

From its inception, cricket was both a creation and a creature of the social elite and this elitism could be managed in order to include or exclude. Kaufman and Patterson allude to the ‘hegemonic’ power of the game of cricket. The British appreciated its capacity to “discipline and civilize men”. If diffused in an inclusive manner, the game appears to have been very effective in allowing the colonized to pay ‘symbolic homage to British cultural and political hegemony’. The game could also allow those who suffered various forms of social and economic stratification to find a way above or around them. This may have been one of the reasons they in turn argue that the sport was diffused so successfully in the ‘West Indies’. While this kind of inclusive diffusion could be seen as indoctrination, it was however much more positive than its counterpart. (7) There is little evidence of this occurring in Tasmania, as the Derwent Club found it difficult to secure a permanent ground before 1843. Their first two grounds were confiscated by the government, the first to be used as a drilling ground for troops and the second was required for a road after extensive improvements had already been made. Finally, the Director General of Roads obliged and transferred the first ground to them for the 1843-4 season. (8) 

The game of cricket was undeniably very often a game used by the social elites to exclude. Its early adoption into English public education reflects its role as a socialization agency emphasizing specific values and behaviours. With the introduction of professionalism, a practice called ‘stacking’ became common, which allowed the elite and the professionals to co-exist but at the same time remain segregated in relation to everything from separate change rooms to listing on score cards. Kaufman and Patterson argue however that while exclusive elements were transplanted into the culture of the game in the Australian and New Zealand colonies, the elites themselves were limited in their capacity to insist on exclusivity in these European settlements because of both their size and isolation. The process of diffusion of the sport was still essentially top down though, although the extent to which the elites could ‘cultivate their Englishness’ through acts of exclusion were qualified. But they tried. The Melbourne Cricket Club reportedly employed a grounds man specifically to eject non-members from the club grounds. (9) The South Australian Cricket Association (SACA) in the 1870s had a policy of preventing the poor from attending games at the Adelaide Oval until intervention from parliament ensured there was facility for those who could not afford the cost of admission to attend in ‘the outer’. (10) At the same time, there appears to be little evidence that the mainstream were excluded from engaging in the sport, although they likely had little involvement in its government. (11)

The biggest controversy of the early period appears to have been acceptance of the professional player. The game had originally found popularity among the social elites in England who found they could gamble on the outcome and that inevitably led to the engagement of professionals to secure better results. (12) However, it was often thought that the game departed from being a gentlemen’s preserve when professionalism was permitted; instead it became one led by publicans, associated with various social vices. (13) Indeed, Joseph Bowden, owner of the Lamb Inn in Hobart (perhaps qualifying as one of Kaufman and Patterson’s cultural entrepreneurs?) organized one of the first cricket matches there on Easter Monday 1826 in the Domain. It involved a match between gentlemen from the Counties of Sussex and Kent against the choice of the whole island with a stake of 50 guineas! (14) Despite the clear potential of the sport on the island, Northern and Southern cricket interests remained doggedly opposed to the inclusion of professionals for decades. This was despite some of the more successful players representing the mainland colonies increasingly being drawn from the ranks of professionals. For instance, Gideon Elliott had originally played for Surrey and had migrated during the gold rushes. (15) Australian born Tom Wills played for Kent and the MCC while away in England for his education before returning and representing Victoria. (16)

One of the central negative outcomes of diffusion identified by Kaufman and Patterson is the danger of ‘status insecure first-adopters’ capturing the game for themselves, for which they credit the failure of cricket to succeed in North America. While the sport had also become popular there during the mid-Nineteenth Century, it was effectively eclipsed by the sport of baseball at the turn of the century. While the potential reasons are clearly numerous and complex, (ranging from the climate to a dislike of the slow nature of play) they explain:

Over time, the sport’s snooty image took a toll on the popularity of cricket among Americans at large, an image the elites sought to cultivate, In contrast to the robust English tradition of  “gentlemen and players”, American cricket clubs strictly forbade professionals from play, even if it meant bitter defeat at the hands of travelling English and Australian teams. (17)

The same reluctance to hire professionals was evident in Tasmania during the same period. When the Tasmanian side was totally routed by the visiting Victorians in the first intercolonial match of 1858, it was clear that the Victorian side reflected a sporting culture that prized first class play, rather than one that still viewed the game as merely a preserve for gentlemen. The contrast between the sides was evident not only in the disparity between the ratio of runs for wickets but also in the high level of maiden overs produced by the Victorian bowlers. (18) Tasmania not only lacked round arm pace bowlers but, perhaps as a consequence of not allowing them to play in the state, also lacked batsmen with the ability to play them. In contrast professional players by their nature normally had experience of many types of conditions and styles of play and it is likely that their contributions as both players and coaches may have prevented such overall poor performances as were witnessed in those matches. (19) There appears to be some level of symmetry between the decline in the competitiveness of teams in Tasmania and North America during the Nineteenth Century as a result of attitudes to professionalism.

At the time of initial settlement in Australia in the late Eighteenth Century, all bowling in the developing game of cricket was underarm. It was a very informal game involving smoking on the field. Round arm bowling became increasingly popular in England throughout the 1820s. It was originally devised by John Willes of Kent but first used to devastating effect in the local game by leading exponents William Lillywhite and James Broadbridge. The style was declared legal by the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) at Lords in 1828. Colonial players and enthusiasts were able to follow the English game only by virtue of newspaper coverage. The development in the style of play was likely transmitted to the antipodes in that way.  One of the early pioneers of the style in New South Wales was Captain Edward Ward. Ward was particularly noted for his jerky style of delivery. (20) The change in the nature of the game necessitated the use of gloves and pads, however primitive. William Still in May 1834 became the first player in Australia to make use of these items, presumably in order to deal with the increasing pace of the ball as a result of round-arm bowling. (21) 

The game developed concurrently in Van Diemen’s Land. The very first game of cricket in Tasmania may have been played at Christmas in 1814 as The Reverend Robert Knopwood makes a reference to it in his famous diary. (22) The Hobart Town Cricket Club was inaugurated on 27 October 1832. Subsequently the Launceston Cricket Club which survives to this day was formed in 1843 and several other regional clubs also began to form at this time including Sorell, Richmond and New Norfolk. (23) However, before the 1850s, the round-arm style bowling was simply not part of the game in Van Diemen’s Land. The accepted style in Van Diemen’s Land in this period remained ‘lob bowling’ which involved tossing the ball high in an attempt to beat the batsman with an arc that could hit the stumps. This style of bowling was no longer used anywhere else in the cricketing world. (24)

It was only a matter of time before the new style of play crossed the strait. Melbourne was settled by pioneers from Tasmania between 1834-5. A match between ‘Port Phillip’ and a Tasmanian team was proposed and organized in Launceston in 1850 and Governor Denison granted the Launceston club land near the racecourse for the purpose. Somewhat reluctantly, the Hobart club dispatched players to help fill out the local side. However, due to an administrative bungle the Victorians did not arrive when expected in June 1850. (25) The game was reorganized and took place between 11-12 February 1851. There is some indication that the locals were unprepared for the pace of round-arm bowling as there were no runs scored in their first innings for almost four overs! (26) This was Australia’s initial first-class match and the local team won by 3 wickets. A rematch was proposed for Melbourne and this began in late March 1852. This time the Victorians won by 61 runs. Despite some controversy over the Victorian use of professional players, relations between the two colonies and their teams remained cordial. (27)

It was the next two intercolonial matches between Tasmania and Victoria in 1858 that was to draw attention to the lingering issue of round-arm bowling. Victoria only had to bat once in the first encounter of the tour:  Tasmania produced a mere 33 in their first innings and 62 in their second falling short of Victoria’s tally of 106 by 11 runs! The Tasmanians were hounded in turn mercilessly by the pace of Gideon Elliott and Tom Wills. Elliott tore through the Tasmanian batting order in the first innings finishing with eight wickets. Wills was the star of the fielding side the next time the Victorians took the field taking five wickets. In response to what the Sydney Morning Herald later declared an ‘ignoble defeat’, the Launceston Examiner lamented that: ‘we have not one round arm bowler with command of pace in the whole country’. (28) The Hobart Town Daily Mercury reported that: ‘The round hand bowling seemed to astonish the nerves of the Launcestonians’. (29)

 

 Victorian Cricket team 1859, Gideon Elliott far left & Tom Wills far right, Uncredited, Public domain, via Wikimedia commons

The carnage continued in the rematch held in Hobart in March at the Domain led again by Elliott and Wills. In their second innings already on the second day and before a local crowd of an estimated 2000 people, Tasmanian batsman Jamieson was struck on the leg three times in the second over and afterwards required a runner. Tasmania finished their second innings with a tally of just 25 runs. (30) This game was actually later classified as the initial first-class game to be held in Hobart wherein Elliott finished with match figures of 7 for 25 yet still only supporting Tom Wills who finished with 11 for 35. Jack Pollard in his analysis of these games has argued that these poor performances by the Tasmanian team can be directly attributed to an inability to play round arm bowling – a method that was still considered on the island to be ‘unsportsmanlike’. Perhaps as a direct result of these poor performances, Tasmania did not accept further invitations for another intercolonial match for several years, while the other colonies benefited from such competition. (31)

Regardless, the intercolonial matches between 1851-8 and the match with the ‘All England team’ in 1862 had served to increase awareness of the modern round-arm style of play. The technique made the local game more dangerous and demanding and it was asserted that it drew on the ‘convict element’. This likely contributed to those among the local gentry (referred to as ‘passengers’) who could not play well being slowly weeded out from the game. The method was only slowly accepted on an official level in the state. Tom Hogg was no-balled for ‘lifting his arm above the shoulder’ in an 1863 senior match. His action was the subject of much scrutiny and fear, but he became the first Australian player to dismiss W. G. Grace. (32) It is difficult to understand how the administrators of the game in the colony could expect their players to remain competitive on any level if they could not embrace this fundamental change in the nature of the game. Perhaps they did not and that was the reason Tasmania did not participate in any intercolonial cricket for several years, content to enjoy an insular gentleman’s paradise while the world moved on? (33)

From the inception of colonization of the island from 1804, there was a demarcation line established between the North and the South at the 42^nd parallel. Both of these separate colonies, based on the Tamar River in the North and the Derwent River in the South, were answerable to the Governor in Sydney. It was not until 1813 that the administrations of both were fused. Lingering tensions between the two though are often attributed to (perceived?) inequities in the allocation of services. It is generally agreed that this rivalry has affected the administration and government of the island on all levels. (34)

North and South rivalries may have hampered the development of a co-ordinated and efficient administrative system in the colony. The Derwent and Launceston clubs did all the organizing of inter-colonial matches. Jack Pollard specifically singled out rivalries between the Northern and Southern forces of the game as the reason that there wasn’t another intercolonial game involving Tasmania after 1852 until 1858. (35) The resumption of inter-colonial competition does appears to coincide with the amalgamation of three Southern clubs (the Derwent, Break O Day and Wellington) into the Southern Tasmanian Cricket Club in 1858. (36) Even so, the first ever English tour of the Australian colonies in the 1861-2 season led to a disappointing encounter in Hobart. Significantly the local team of 22 was comprised of 11 players from each end of the colony and even then, the visitors won by four wickets. (37) In comparison, a crowd of 500 in Launceston were privy only to an hour’s exhibition play! (38)

Roger Page has argued that that North and South interests ‘clashed bitterly on any and every issue’ in the 1860s and 1870s. (39) The Southern Tasmanian Cricket Association (STCA) was formed in 1866 and arguably instigated some professionalism in relation to the administration of the game in the colony. (40) The treatment or behaviour or both of Tasmanian James Alexander Ferguson during the 1877 tour to Adelaide and Melbourne was a symptom of the simmering tensions between North and South. The trip was organized by the SCTA, but three Northerners from Launceston were included in order to make it a ‘Tasmanian’ team. Ferguson fell out with team management during the trip and was refused a place, although he did play as substitute. The ill feeling continued during two matches in Victoria staged on the way home. The Launceston Cricket Club took Ferguson’s side in relation to a dispute over travelling expenses. Relations between North and South broke of entirely between 1877-8. (41)

The standard of the game at least did rise in the second half of the Nineteenth Century as organization, pitches, equipment and play steadily improved. But the process was gradual, too gradual. Part of this improvement at least could be attributed to the formation of the Northern Cricket Association in 1886 which helped to remedy a perceived imbalance of authority and influence. (42) Aside from the clear damage inflicted by an innate conservatism among administrators, rivalries between North and South were officially acknowledged as being instrumental in retarding the development and success of the game in Tasmania. Ric Finlay has posited that insistence on ‘equal representation’ from both North and South historically led to sides not being wholly selected on merit. (43) Persistent rivalries then were regarded as the main reason Tasmania refused to join the Australian Board of Control on its formation in 1905. Consequently, the Board and the Victorian Cricket Association in turn encouraged the formation of the Executive Cricket Council of Tasmania in 1907. Tellingly, this body was comprised of six delegates, three from both the North and the South. Subsequently the Council was able to send a representative delegate to the Australian Board of Control to represent the state’s interests. (44)

The problems inherent to a small population and poverty are intertwined in Tasmania. Between 1851-2 the male population of the colony dropped by 33% and this had an immediate impact on the economy. The demographic dive caused wages to rise, caused spiraling inflation and saw land use fall by 18%. While the population drain soon after halted it is reasonable to argue that both socially and economically, the colony never fully recovered from this set back. (45) Historian Jack Pollard identifies one of the main factors in the retardation of the game in Tasmania as the effects of the gold rush. (46) While the impact of the gold rushes on the economy was probably more self-evident, there was effectively also smaller pool of men from which the sport had to draw on. The enlistment of men during the First World War and subsequent casualties similarly weakened the available pool to the extent that the 1916-7 domestic season was the last to be held until the 1935-6 season. (47) Ric Finlay identifies a ‘crippling poverty’ that decimated the potential for the sport effectively until the post-war period. Attempts to allow the state to both engage on an interstate level and play competitively consistently floundered during this period. (48) Tasmania grapples with the problems associated with a small population to this day and to some extent still, its competitiveness relies on imported players from other states and overseas. (49) At the same time over the next few decades the state produced several players of note, some even selected for the national team, including Burn, Bailey, Eady, Nash, MacDonald, Badcock and Windsor. (50)

 

 Tasmanian team that played South Africa in Hobart in 1932, Uncredited, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

 

There were indeed several central factors that held back the development of the local game of cricket in Tasmania during the Nineteenth Century and they likely included elitism, aversion to professionalism, resistance to the adoption of round-arm bowling, rivalry between Northern and Southern strongholds of the game, population and poverty. However, none of these were the central cause of the decline: conservatism. In fact, its arguable that the first three factors were symptoms of this all-pervading conservatism. The only factors that consistently rivalled the problem of conservatism across the entire history of cricket in the state were North South rivalry as well as the perennial issues of population and poverty. The mistrust and animosity between Northern and Southern cricket organisations appears to have further damaged the potential of the game in the state. When all that was combined with both the debilitating issues of a small (and often declining) population as well as sustained poverty, it is probably not surprising that Tasmanian cricket fell far behind the cricketing standards of the other Australian colonies and therefore failed to join the Sheffield Shield competition from its inauguration in the 1892-3 season. 

Although the government authorities in early colonial Tasmania did not seem to recognise the hegemonic power of the sport, it still developed an enduring popularity with the mainstream population. While the subsequent management of the sport by the social elite in the Nineteenth Century was not focused on exclusion, it was selfish in the sense that it attempted to preserve the game in a genteel form and thereby slowed its natural development into a professional competitive sport. Despite their actions, they unrealistically expected other colonies to pander to their preoccupation with amateurism, sometimes with humbling results! This was unfortunate considering the ‘promising start’ made by the colony as a hub of cricket from around 1826.  There is some symmetry then between the course of cricket in Tasmania and North America. The game was arguably captured by self-interested elites in both places which served to stifle its development to varying degrees. In contrast, it was to be ‘far-sighted administrators’ in the 1960s who reformed the state game in co-ordination with the Australian Cricket Board that allowed restricted entry into the Sheffield Shield in 1977 and full membership in 1982. (51) If we return then to the ugly two match intercolonial series held in Launceston and Hobart in 1858, wherein Tasmania was routed by Victoria, the response printed in the Mount Alexander Mail seems particularly astute:

We hope that the Tasmanians will be taught one lesson, and that is, not to allow any one set of men to have the right of assuming responsibility of challenging a neighbouring colony to a contest in which the character and reputation of Tasmania are involved. (52)

 

 

- Dr. Colin Woollcott Mallett, 17 December 2022.

 

Endnotes

(1) John Pollard, The Formative Years of Australian Cricket 1803-1893, The Book Company, Sydney, 1995, pp. 21, 94.

(2) A. G. Moyes, Australian Cricket: A History, Halstead Press, Sydney, 1959, pp. 16-7. The Northerners won that match by 12 runs!

(3) Courier 08 March 1854, p. 2.

(4) A. G. Moyes, op.cit.., p. 243. After Lord Sheffield’s tour of the colonies in the 1891-2 season, he donated a sum to the Australian Cricket Council who had the Sheiffield Shield trophy made. The initial competition consisted of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia.

(5) Ric Finlay, ‘Cricket’ in The Companion to Tasmanian History Online, accessed on 05 October 2022.

(6) Jason Kaufman & Orlando Patterson, ‘Cross-National Cultural Diffusion: The Global Spread of Cricket’, American Sociological Review, vol. 70, no. 1, 2005, pp. 82-84, 97-9. In sociology, diffusion theory seeks to explain how a concept is transmitted, adopted and acculturated by a recipient group and the sport of cricket is used in the paper as a case study.

(7) ibid., pp. 91, 99.

(8) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 15.

(9) Jason Kaufman & Orlando Patterson, op.cit.., pp. 93, 100-1.

(10) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 65.

(11) In fact, one game that was advertised in The Independent on 14 December 1843 gave notice that a game involving ‘22 commoners’ of Launceston! A. G. Moyes, op,cit., p. 16.

(12) Jason Kaufman & Orlando Patterson, op.cit., p. 91.

(13) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 58-9.

(14) Hobart Town Advertiser 24 March 1826, p. 4 accessed on 03 October 2022. There is reportedly evidence of a previous match in an ‘anonymous report’ organised by Bowden for 1 March 1825 held on ‘Stanley’s field’ on Elizabeth Street Hobart between Liverpool and Bathurst Streets. It consisted of a match between the military and civilians and was won by the former by 15 runs. Refer to Roger Page, A History of Tasmania Cricket, L. G. Shea Government Printer Tasmania, Hobart, 1957, p. 9.

(15) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 27, 99.

(16) W. F. Mandle, ‘Thomas Wentworth Wills (1835-1880)’ in The Australian Dictionary of Biography, accessed on 03 October 2022.

(17) Jason Kaufman & Orlando Patterson, op.cit., p. 97.

(18) Launceston Examiner 27 February 1858, p.2 accessed on 03 October 2022.

(19) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 37.

(20) ibid., pp. 2, 9, 12, 20, 29.

(21) A. G. Moyes op.cit., p. 5.

(22) Ric Finlay, ‘Cricket’ in The Companion to Tasmania History Online, accessed 5 October 2022.

(23) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 15.

(24) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 29.

(25) ibid., pp. 27-8.

(26) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 19.

(27) John Pollard, op.cit., pp. 96-7.

(28) Sydney Morning Herald 4 March 1858, p.2 & Launceston Examiner 27 February 1858, p. 2 accessed on 03 October 2022.

(29) Hobart Town Daily Mercury 27 February 1858, p. 3. The reference to ‘Launcestonians’ seems odd as according to the Argus, three of the team were from the South – almost suggesting that a Hobart based team would be better prepared (?). See: 27 February 1858, p. 5. It also seems clear from the first article that the arrangements for the rematch that was to occur in Hobart had not yet been set. Both accessed on 03 October 2022.

(30) Hobart Town Advertiser 06 March 1858, p. 2.

(31) John Pollard, op.cit., pp. 98-9.

(32) ibid., pp.28-9, 35-6.

(33) A mindset reflected in the comment in the Launceston Examiner’s coverage which stated: ‘…we think it would have been better if the Victorians had not availed themselves of such skill, if only on the ground of not making the match on( e ) sided.’ See: 27 February 1858, p. 2 accessed on 03 October 2022.

(34) Judith Hollingsworth, ‘North-South Relations’ in The Companion to Tasmanian History Online accessed on 29 September 2022.

(35) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 98.

(36) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 17.

(37) Mercury 21 February 1864, p. 4. The English team returned to the state in 1874 with W. G. Grace. A good summary of both these tours can be found here: Examiner, 28 January 1908, p. 2.

(38) Ric Finlay, Island Summers, A History of Tasmanian Representative Cricket, St. David’s Park Publishing, Hobart, 1992, p. 8, 13. This practice of fielding local teams of 22 was continued on the English tour of Australia in 1873-4. At total of 14 of the 22 made ducks in their first innings!

(39) Roger Page, op.cit., p. 29.

(40) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 17.

(41) Ric Finlay, Island Summers, A History of Tasmanian Representative Cricket, op.cit., pp. 14-7. More would likely be known and understood of this whole affair (for instance why Ferguson played at Ballarat and not Beechworth?) if not for a fire at the Pavillion in 1950 which destroyed the club’s records. Refer to Roger Page, op.cit, p. 5.

(42) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 17.

(43) Ric Finlay, Island Summers, A History of Tasmanian Representative Cricket, op.cit., p. 1. Furthermore, he argues that insistence on duplication of facilities in both the North and the South along with competition over the hosting of home games have persisted to the present day and resulted in an overall failure to attract the kind of sponsorship that mainland states enjoy.

(44) John Pollard, op.cit.., pp. 31-3 & originally related by A. G. Moyes, Australian Cricket: A History, Halstead Press, Sydney, 1959, p. 25.

(45) Wendy Rimon, ‘Gold Rush in Victoria’ in The Companion to Tasmanian History Online accessed 29 September 2022.

(46) John Pollard, op.cit., p. 94.

(47) A. G. Moyes, op.cit.., pp. 16-17.

(48) Ric Finlay, ‘Cricket’, op.cit.

(49) Tim Lane, ‘Sport Thought: Revisiting Tasmania’s days of cricketing glory’ in The Sydney Morning Herald Online, 09 March 2019. Indeed, our first state Captain was former England and Lancashire player Jack Simmons who led the state to an unexpected victory in the Gillette Cup in January 1979.

(50) A. G. Moyes, op.cit., p. 31. We’ve continued to punch above our weight per capita in terms of producing talented cricketers in the post war game including national stalwarts David Boon and Ricky Ponting.

(51) Ric Finlay, ‘Cricket’, op.cit.

(52) Mount Alexander Mail 15 March 1858, p.3. Ouch!

 

Bibliography
 

Primary Sources:
 

Argus

 
Courier

Hobart Town Advertiser

Hobart Town Daily Mercury

 

The Independent

Launceston Examiner

Mercury

 
Mount Alexander Mail

Sydney Morning Herald

 
 
Secondary Sources:

Finlay, R. Island Summers, A History of Tasmanian Representative Cricket, St. David’s Park Publishing, Hobart, 1992.

Kaufman, J. & Patterson, O. ‘Cross-National Cultural Diffusion: The Global Spread of Cricket’, American Sociological Review, vol. 70, no. 1, 2005, pp. 82-110.
Moyes, A. G. Australian Cricket: A History, Halstead Press, Sydney, 1959.

Page, R. A History of Tasmania Cricket, L. G. Shea Government Printer Tasmania, Hobart, 1957.

Pollard, J. The Formative Years of Australian Cricket 1803-1893, The Book Company, Sydney, 1995.
 

 

Online Resources:

Finlay, R. ‘Cricket’ in The Companion to Tasmania History Online, accessed on 05 October 2022.

Hollingsworth, J. ‘North-South Relations’ in The Companion to Tasmanian History Online, accessed on 29 September 2022.

 
Lane, T. ‘Sport Thought: Revisiting Tasmania’s days of cricketing glory’ in The Sydney Morning Herald Online, 09 March 2019.

Mandle, W. F. ‘Thomas Wentworth Wills (1835-1880)’ in The Australian Dictionary of Biography, accessed on 03 October 2022.

Rimon, W. ‘Gold Rush in Victoria’ in The Companion to Tasmanian History Online, accessed on 29 September 2022.

Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, accessed 29 September 2022.

Not taking sides: Australia and the American Civil War

While Australia was geographically quite removed from the theatre of the American Civil War, its ripples did carry across the Pacific Ocean to the continent. The Civil war - which lasted from 1861 to 1865 - was a brutal one, arguably the first industrial war, permanently scarring both the political landscape of the US and its people. (1) It’s effects were legion and long lasting; in fact the very last Civil War widow was to pass away as recently as 2020. (2) Australia in 1861 was not even a nation but instead a conglomerate of independent British colonies—all in their separate forms of development on the road to self-government and a sense of individual political identity. In that sense there was no ‘Australia’ yet, the nation had yet to be born. However, the British subjects that populated our handful of colonies looked on with a degree of interest and shared horror as their ‘cousins’ waged war on themselves essentially over the issue of slavery. (3) It’s not the purpose of this essay to present a potted history of the American Civil War and thereby provide a description and analysis of the causal factors involved or the political and/or social outcomes of the conflict. (4) Rather it is my intention to establish how and to what extent the American Civil War affected the Australian colonies on different levels and particularly how it was received and responded to by them.

So, what was the ‘Australian’ attitude to the issue of slavery? Did the Australian colonies support the Union or the Confederacy? How specifically, if at all, were the Australian colonies affected by the American Civil War?

 

The Battle of Gettysburg, Nathaniel Currier and James Merritt Ives, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

One of the precursors to the conflict had been the attempt by farmer, tanner, surveyor, and later abolitionist John Brown to instigate a slave rebellion at Harper’s Ferry, Jefferson County in West Virginia and his subsequent trial and execution in 1858. Brown’s actions were born directly of his Puritan faith combined with an insistence on the righteousness of the American constitution that noted the equality of all men. (5) There was a large degree of sympathy for John Brown and his cause in the colonies. A South Australian editorial declared in 1860:

We have already deprecated the wild attempt of Old John Brown with his score of followers to liberate the slaves of Southern America, and we repeat our conviction that the Harper’s Ferry scheme was the offspring of literal insanity. But the fate of that brave old man, whose worst acts sprang from the holiest of motives, and the impetuous inhuman mode in which that fate was inflicted by Virginian slaveholders, redeem his memory from disgrace and elevate him to the dignity of a martyr. (6)

The shared sense of Christian values between the states and the Australian colonies made Brown a common sympathetic figure.

It was possible to be an inherently racist society yet still be largely opposed to the economic policy of slavery. The passage of the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 and the subsequent Emancipation Act of 1834 had sought to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire by 1840. Despite this ‘enlightened’ development which was already ‘history’ by 1861, newfound freedom did not translate into equality. (7) The battle for the abolishing of slavery in the British Empire had been a long and bitter one. Many had ruminated during the transition on the economic impacts of the reform including scarcity of labour in the West Indies and lower productivity in sugar plantations. (8) But these were largely economic arguments and they eventually floundered when pitched against ethical ones. Abolition in the British Empire marked the end of an economic practice and not, by any scale of measurement, the end of racism. Henry Melville, in his observations on Mauritus in 1828, argued that freedom could even be seen as ‘valueless’ as slaves were often happier there at least, before they were freed. Their disadvantages in an overtly racist colonial society made their subsequent lives challenging and a law was passed mandating that slaves had to be awarded land or at least 500 piastres before being granted their liberty. Tellingly, Melville also concluded that life as a slave anywhere in the British Empire – as appalling brutal and exploitative as it may have been - was eminently more desirable than life as an indigenous Aboriginal of Van Diemen’s Land! (9)

 

Slaves working on a cotton plantation, James Richard Barfoot, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Racism was, of course, transplanted to the Australian continent as a byproduct of British colonialisation. Aside from the violence and discrimination perpetuated against the indigenous population, one of the most obvious early examples of it being inflicted on another immigrant population, was that perpetuated against Chinese miners during the gold rush period. Certainly, the reaction to the employ of ‘Kanakas’ in Northern Queensland was arguably another plank in the emergence of a white Australian policy. (10) After Australia became a nation, one of the first pieces of legislation passed by its new Commonwealth Parliament was the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901. Increasingly Australia was seen as rightfully a place for Europeans only and Asian or anyone of colour was to be discouraged. Yet even though racist prejudice was clearly evident, and exclusion of the ‘other’ was increasingly seen as justified, abolitionism by contrast represented the ‘holiest of motives’. (11)

Perhaps the best measure of colonial neutrality or otherwise to the American Civil War was the visit of the USS Shenandoah in 1865. The ship, a clipper-built screw steamer of 709 tons, arrived in Australian waters in January r to arrange repairs. The crew included a nephew of General Robert E. Lee. (12) While it was built for mercantile service, it had been outfitted with ‘four smooth-bore sixty-eight pounders, and two thirty-two-pounder rifled Whitworths, together with two smooth-bore eighteen pounders, used principally as signal guns’. On Wednesday, 25 January 1865, the Shenandoah arrived at Hobson’s Bay, Victoria. The ship had previously suffered damage to its shaft in the South Atlantic. (13) After a two-hour emergency meeting between the Governor Charles Darling and the Executive Council, they were somewhat cautiously allowed to dock. Specifically, the confederate ship was granted permission by the government to ‘…coal, provision, and effect the necessary repairs to her machinery’. But clearly the subsequent interaction was more complex and lively than anticipated. The crew and the ship proved a popular social curiosity during their stay with thousands visiting to take tours of the ship. In fact, the Sydney Mail reported that visitors ‘showed their Southern sympathies by cheering the Shenandoah heartily as they took their departure from her’. (14)

C.S.S. Shenandoah destroying whale ships, B. Russell, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The reason for the initial delay in processing the arrival was without doubt concerns over the official British government policy of neutrality particularly following the instigation of the ‘Alabama claims’ by the United States against the United Kingdom from 1862. (15) Soon after its arrival in Hobson’s Bay, the Adelaide Observer related an edict from Lord Russell which had been gazetted a few days earlier, openly insisting that no vessel of war or privateer should be allowed when at port in British territory to take on any more than subsistence rations or coal that was what was necessary for them to their own country or some near destination. (16) There may have been a more negative attitude towards the presence of the ship due in part to the fact that the Shenandoah boarded another ship named the Nimrod off the coast of South Australia on arrival in British waters before allowing it to go on its way unmolested only after it was satisfied that it was English and not associated in any way with the Union. (17) A second reason may have been that Adelaide was missing out on all the fun! (18) Any negative reaction to their presence in Melbourne was attributed by John Thomson Mason to the American Consul and a small group of American shipping merchants who ‘…tried in every way to involve us in a dispute of some kind with the authorities, with a hope of some kind that the ship might thus be detained or seized…’. (19) Regardless, it is likely that international tensions were the reason for a collective sigh of relief amongst the colonial media on the Shenandoah’s prompt departure rather than any personal objections to the crew. (20)

Indeed, there proved to be an unequal exchange of men during the Shenandoah’s time in Melbourne. By some accounts, the ship had a crew of only 23 men although it was augmented by several prisoners. At least eighteen of its own crew were rumoured to have deserted! (21) However, when the Shenandoah departed from Williamstown on 16 February 1865 it had in turn gained an unspecified number of crewmen. Indeed, four men who were believed to have been concealed on the ship were caught escaping soon before its departure. However, Captain James Waddell refused permission for Victorian authorities to search his ship on departure from Williamstown noting that to allow such a search was ‘contrary to the dignity of the Confederate flag’. (22) Its new recruits were officially enlisted just outside of British territorial waters. The ship was the last of the Confederate fleet to surrender in November at Liverpool, England and there it was found to contain forty-two colonials aboard! (23) At least 100 Australian and New Zealand colonists were known to have served on both sides in the American Civil War. (24) There appears to be no discernable bias to either the Confederate or Union sides of the conflict among these colonial recruits—it’s likely that that other factors such as poverty and perhaps even the call to adventure were responsible for their engagement in the war, rather than any kind of coherent abolitionist political philosophy.

When President Lincoln was assassinated on 14 April 1865, there was certainly an outpouring of genuine official and public regret throughout the Australian colonies. The emphasis appears to have been on his personal tragedy and perhaps some fascination with the nature of the conspiracy rather than his leadership of the Union or his advocation of a policy of emancipation. ‘Honest Abe’ was variously described in editorials as a ‘revered’ President, America’s ‘Cromwell’ whose death had thrown a ‘gloom’ across the world. His record of suspending habeus corpus and suppressing the press were now virtually forgotten – perhaps with some admission that his motivations in maintaining the union had been as much economic as it had been abolitionist or emancipist. (25) The platitudes were more reflective of the loss of a man in his political prime and a leader during testing times rather than a deeper collective preoccupation with his ‘cause’. 

There proved to be two direct effects on the Australian colonies resulting from the American Civil War. Once war was declared in the United States, Australia became the subject of heightened international strategic machinations. Geo-political alliances were evident even in 1861 and as a result Russia threatened to attack the Australian colonies if Britain politically recognised the Confederacy. The Russian Empire was after all an ally of the Union and despite the Tsar abolishing serfdom in 1861, the support was pragmatic rather than ideological. (26) In December 1864 the news broke that Russian Admiral Andrey Popov who had visited Melbourne aboard the Bogatyr in 1863, had received orders in the middle of that year to institute an attack on British ships stationed in the territorial waters around the Australian colonies. This secret was revealed by a former officer of the Bogatyr, Lieutenant Zbyszewski. Although there was clearly some skepticism over his motivations and the delay in his release of the information, the revelation clearly concerned both the colonies and the British authorities. (27)

There had been consistent concerns over the threat the Russian Empire posed to British interests in the region since the Russian sloop Neva wandered into Port Jackson in June 1807. The alliance between the United States and Russia presented the distinct possibility of Australia being drawn into an international conflict if the British government had chosen to support the Confederacy on an official level. These concerns were heightened by the neglect of the colonies’ military defences. In 1862 the Russian ship Svenlana arrived in Port Philip Bay and fired a ceremonial salute which could not be returned as there was a shortage of gunpowder! Even in May 1870, the arrival of the Russian Imperial corvette Boyarin in the Derwent River caused panic in Hobart when it was feared it was the head of an invasion armada. (28)

Newspaper illustration of people waiting in line for welfare at a Provident Society office in Manchester, Uncredited, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The Lancashire Cotton Famine occurred as a direct consequence of the American Civil War. A blockade of southern ports by the Union navy led to a shortage of cotton supplies to Europe. Production ceased from October 1861 and mill closures and widespread unemployment became endemic in the Lancashire economy. The war proved, despite initial hopes, to be a sustained one and there were subsequent riots in Stalybride, Dukinfield and Ashton. The British Government were characteristically slow and incompetent in their response to alleviate poverty and distress. (29) As a direct result of the shortage, cotton became the young colony of Queensland’s biggest crop between 1861-3. However, in addition to cool resistance from British ‘cotton lords’ at the time who doubted the feasibility of the industry on the Australian continent, the climate proved very unsuitable, and the project was a failure. (30)

Another inadvertent effect of the war was an upsurge in Irish migration to the antipodes in preference to the United States or North America more generally. There was an increase in the percentage of the total share of Irish global emigration to Australia from 3.8% of total between 1846 and 1855 to a sustained 11.5% between the 1856 and 1880. This fell away abruptly to 5.7% between 1881 and 1900. While some could be attributed to family reunions as a result of sustained transportation from Ireland to the Australian colonies until 1853, as well as the US recession of 1858, the increase was also very likely a reflection of a widespread aversion to the conflict on the North American continent. (31)

Despite obvious xenophobic and racist sentiments evident throughout the British colonies established on the Australian continent during the period of the American Civil War, there was strong mainstream sympathy for the abolitionist cause. After all, slavery had been officially abolished throughout the British Empire by 1840 and perhaps to the British Subjects resident in the Australian colonies, the practice seemed antiquated and cruel. John Brown was perhaps a sympathetic character because his actions were strongly rooted in Christian beliefs although a Puritan brand and the Australian colonies naturally enjoyed a shared Judeo-Christian heritage with a large cultural section of the United States. While apartheid by any name was acceptable to the Christian conscience in the colonies, slavery was not.

While most Australian colonists would have likely argued for the cause of the Union for reasons previously discussed, the reception for the crew of the Shenandoah in 1865 indicates that Australian colonists felt no widespread animosity towards the Confederate side. The civility with which the crew were treated, at least by the public, would have convinced them at least of their hosts neutrality. Similarly, the grief exhibited over the death of President Lincoln was as much a result of his loss as a leader and the unfair nature of his death as the cause he championed. The war was seen by these proto-Australians as a tragic but remote internal conflict of another Empire in relation to which, they were if nothing else, pragmatically neutral.

There were two main effects of the conflict on the Australian colonies. The onset of the American Civil War raised alarm in Australia over the increased probability of a Russian invasion. Whether there was any danger or not, it was obvious that the general public and perhaps the governments of the age believed there was a real pre-existing threat that was exacerbated by the conflict. However, the war also inadvertently created economic opportunities by triggering the Lancashire Cotton Famine which in turn provided an interim boon to the nascent Queensland economy and increasing Irish immigration to the antipodes generally in preference to North America.

- Dr. Colin Woollcott Mallett, 20 November 2022.

Endnotes

(1) The mortality rate was approximately 2% of the population of the nation in 1860. It is perhaps more correctly considered a transitional war in the sense that it was the last traditional war, but it encompassed various technological innovations which were to fully culminate with intensity on the battlefields of the First World War. Warren W. Lassler & Jennifer L. Webber, ‘The Cost and Significance of the Civil War’ in Britannica Online. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(2) Elizabeth Elizdale, ‘Helen Viola Jackson, America’s Last Civil War Widow dead at 101’ in New York Post on 06 January 2021. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(3) President Lincoln was elected on an abolitionist platform in 1861 and on his assumption of power, no less than 11 states succeeded from the union. The Editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Causes and Effects of the American Civil War’ in Britannica Online. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(4) On this point I am not a ‘revisionist’: two of the main causes appear to have been the size of the slave population and the fear of rebellion this engendered in addition to the profitability of the system. Whatever the reasons, it is clear then that the Southern States during the 1850s were threatened by abolitionist policies in the North and felt that the Federal government did not have the right to decide where or how it was practiced on the state level. There have been more books written about the American Civil War than any other: approximately 60, 000! Warren W. Lassler & Jennifer L. Webber, ‘The Cost and Significance of the Civil War’ in Britannica Online. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(5) It could and has been argued that there was something of the charismatic zealot about Brown. His approach to resisting slavery contrasts with the non-violent one shared by the Quakers. Although antiquated one of the best biographies of him is: Richard J. Hinton, John Brown and his Men, Funk and Wagnells, New York, Revised Edition, 1894, pp. 14, 22-38. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(6) ‘The Latest Martyr’, Adelaide Observer, 11 April 1860, p.6. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(7) Odeen Ishmael, ‘Emancipation – The End of Slavery in British Colonies, August 1 1834’ in Guyanese Online, 08 January 2020. Accessed on 27 September 2022. 

(8) ‘Slavery – Story of Abolition’, Morning Bulletin, 3 January 1933, p. 1. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(9) Henry Melville, Observations Respecting the Islands of Mauritis Written During a Short Sojourn There in 1828, James Dally, Adelaide, 2004, Facsimile Edition, pp. 67-9.

(10) Fact Sheet 8 – Abolition of the ‘White Australia Policy’. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(11) ‘The Latest Martyr’, op.cit. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(12) ‘The Confederate War Steam Shenandoah’, The Australian News for Home Readers 23 February 1865, p. 3. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(13) John Thomas Mason, ‘The Last of the Confederate Cruisers’, Century Magazine, August 1898, p. 606. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(14) ‘The Confederate War Steamer Shenandoah’, Sydney Mail, 04 February 1865, p. 8. Accessed on 27 September 2022. In fact, two of the officers were inducted into honorary membership of the prestigious or at least elite ‘Melbourne Club’ and two visited the Legislative Assembly in person. Refer again: ‘The Confederate War Steam Shenandoah’, The Australian News for Home Readers 23 February 1865, p. 3

(15) Several confederate ships were slyly ordered and constructed in British ports disguised as merchant vessels, the most successful in combat being the Alabama. This initially led to the United States claiming damages but ultimately to improved diplomatic relations after the case was settled in 1872. Unattributed, ‘The Alabama Claims, 1862-72’ in Office of the Historian. Accessed on 30 September 2022.

(16) ‘The Shenandoah’, Adelaide Observer, 04 February 1865, p. 6. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(17) Brian Thomsen, Blue and Gray at Sea: Naval Memoirs of the Civil War, (St. Martin’s Press, New York) 2004, pp. 282-283.

(18) Four of the officers (minus their Captain) even attended at ball held at Craig’s Royal Hotel in Ballarat on and were described as ‘all quite young men’ with a ‘quiet gentlemanly demeanor’. Ballarat Star, 11 February 1865, p. 2. Accessed on 30 September 2022.

(19) John Thomas Mason, op.cit. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(20) ‘The Shenandoah’, Launceston Examiner 28 February 1865, p. 2. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(21) Philip Van Doren Stern, The Confederate Navy: A Pictorial History (Da Capo Press, New York) 1992. If this is true then the ship may have contained more prisoners than crew and Waddell may have deemed it necessary to accept these new recruits, however ‘illegal’ his actions. This was despite there being some concern that some Union sympathisers might try to infiltrate the crew and ultimately seek to take the ship! Indeed, Mason mentions in his account that due to the desertions they were ‘deplorably short-handed’.  

(22) ‘The Shenandoah Affair’, Bendigo Advertiser 18 February 1865, p. 1. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(23) John Thomson Mason, op.cit. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(24) Barry Crompton, ‘Civil War Participants Born in Australia and New Zealand’, Archer Memorial and Civil War Library & ACWRTA inc., September 2008. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(25) Refer to: The Age 26 June 1865, p. 5; Kepunda Herald and Northern Intelligencer 28 July 1865, p. 4; South Australian Register 28 June 1865, p. 2; Freeman’s Journal 1 July 1865, p. 409; Empire 25 July 1865, p.2. All accessed on 27 September 2022. In fact, Lincoln once stated in August 1862 that: ‘If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.’ ‘Abraham Lincoln to Thomas Greely’ in Digital History. Accessed 27 September 2022.

(26) Oleg Yegorov, ‘What Role did Russia play in the American Civil War?’ in Russia Beyond, 16 August 2017. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(27) ‘The Russians are Coming! By Fairplay’, The Argus 27 December 1864, p. 7. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(28) Georgy Manaev, ‘How Australia prepared for war with Russia’ in Russia Beyond, 29 April 2019. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

(29) Ben Johnson, ‘The Lancashire Cotton Famine’ in Historic UK. Accessed on 27 September 2022. There is evidence of a proposal to relocated perhaps 100 families or more affected by the famine in the region to the Australian colonies, a policy that would have mutually beneficial although it appears to have been rejected on the basis of cost. Hugh McCall & Alexander Turney Stewart, The Cotton Famine of 1862-3: with some sketch of the proceedings that took place in connection with the Lisburn Relief Committee, William McMillan and Son, London and Belfast, 1881, Revised Edition, pp. 96-103. Accessed on 30 September 2022.

(30) Jean Farnfield, ‘Cotton and the Search for an Agricultural Staple in Early Queensland’, Queensland Heritage, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1971, pp. 20-5. Accessed on 30 September 2022.  In fact, aside from the distance from markets, the unreliable climate as well as lack of local expertise, the experiment highlighted the demand for cheap ‘coolie’ labour in the agriculture industry and may have helped pave the way for further examples of exploitation in the colony. This is ironic as overall the enterprise was seen by reformer Rev. Dunmore Lang as a way to build a better (Protestant) society free of both popery and slavery!

(31) David Noel Doyle, ‘The Irish in Australia and the United States: Some Comparisons, 1800-1939’, Irish Economic and Social History Vol. 16 (1989), pp. 79–80. Accessed on 27 September 2022.

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Adelaide Observer

Age

Argus

Australian News for Home Readers

Ballarat Star

Bendigo Advertiser

Empire

Freeman’s Journal

Kepunda Herald and Northern Intelligencer

Launceston Examiner

Morning Bulletin

South Australian Register

Sydney Mail

Secondary Sources:


Doyle, David Noel. ‘The Irish in Australia and the United States: Some Comparisons, 1800-1939’ in Economic and Social History, Vol. 16, 1989, pp. 73–94.

Farnfield, J. ‘Cotton and the Search for an Agricultural Staple in Early Queensland’, Queensland Heritage, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1971, pp. 20-5.

Hinton, R. J. John Brown and his Men, Funk and Wagnells, New York, Revised Edition, 1894.

McCall H. & Stewart, A. T. The Cotton Famine of 1862-3: with some sketch of the proceedings that took place in connection with the Lisburn Relief Committee, William McMillan and Son, London and Belfast, 1881, Revised Edition.

Mason, J. T. ‘The Last of the Confederate Cruisers’, Century Magazine, August 1898, p. 600-10.

Melville, H. Observations Respecting the Islands of Mauritis Written During a Short Sojourn There in 1828, James Dally, Adelaide, 2004, Facsimile Edition.

Thomsen, B. Blue and Gray at Sea: Naval Memoirs of the Civil War, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 2004.

Van Doren Stern, P. The Confederate Navy: A Pictorial History, Da Capo Press, New York, 1992.



Online Resources:


Crompton, C. ‘Civil War Participants Born in Australia and New Zealand’, Archer Memorial and Civil War Library & ACWRTA inc., September 2008. See: https://web.archive.org/web/20090217060350/http:/users.bigpond.com/bcrompton/Ausborn.htm accessed on 27 September 2022.

Editors (The) of the Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Causes and Effects of the American Civil War’ in Britannica Online. See: https://www.britannica.com/summary/Causes-and-Effects-of-the-American-Civil-War accessed on 27 September 2022.

Elizdale, E. ‘Helen Viola Jackson, America’s Last Civil War Widow dead at 101’ in New York Post on 06 January 2021. See: https://nypost.com/2021/01/06/helen-viola-jackson-last-known-civil-war-widow-dead-at-101/ accessed on 27 September 2022.

Ishmael, O. ‘Emancipation – The End of Slavery in British Colonies, August 1 1834’ in Guyanese Online, 08 January 2020. See: https://guyaneseonline.net/2020/08/01/emancipation-the-end-of-slavery-in-british-colonies-august-1-1834/ accessed on 27 September 2022.

Johnson, B. ‘The Lancashire Cotton Famine’ in Historic UK. See: https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Lancashire-Cotton-Famine/ accessed on 27 September 2022.

Lassler, W. W. & Webber, J. L. ‘The Cost and Significance of the Civil War’ in Britannica Online. See: https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Civil-War/The-cost-and-significance-of-the-Civil-War accessed 27 September 2022.

Georgy Manaev, ‘How Australia prepared for war with Russia’ in Russia Beyond, 29 April 2019. See: https://www.rbth.com/history/330300-how-australia-prepared-for-war-with-russia accessed on 27 September 2022.

Unattributed, ‘Abraham Lincoln to Thomas Greely’ in Digital History. See: https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=393 accessed 27 September 2022.

Unattributed, ‘The Alabama Claims, 1862-72’ in Office of the Historian. See: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1861-1865/alabama accessed on 30 September 2022.

Unattributed, ‘Fact Sheet 8 – Abolition of the ‘White Australia Policy’ in European Parliament. See: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/danz/dv/0220_13_1/0220_13_1en.pdf accessed 27 September 2022

Yegorov, O. ‘What Role did Russia play in the American Civil War?’ in Russia Beyond, 16 August 2017. See: https://www.rbth.com/politics_and_society/2017/08/16/what-role-did-russia-play-in-the-us-civil-war_823252 accessed on 27 September 2022.

Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, accessed 27 September 2022.