The Beginning of the End of White Australia
By Olivia Nolan
Annie O’Keefe’s successful challenge against deportation marked a significant departure from forty-eight years of White Australia Policy.
The O’Keefe case marks a turning point because it ignited popular support against prevailing immigration policy. It is recognised as the protagonist for the abolition of The White Australia Policy and creation of multicultural Australia.
===
The Beginning of the End of White Australia
SOURCE: Annie O'Keefe with her daughter Mary. (1956). [Image] National Archives of Australia, 1501, A429/3. Canberra.
Annie O’Keefe’s successful challenge against deportation marked a significant departure from forty-eight years of White Australia Policy. The O’Keefe case marks a turning point because it ignited popular support against prevailing immigration policy. It is recognised as the protagonist for the abolition of The White Australia Policy and creation of multicultural Australia.
By Olivia Nolan
The Beginning of the End of White Australia
“The discussion of any turning point or crucial moment in history is always likely to produce analysis that is not sufficiently attuned to the continuities of past experience. In other words, the narrow focus on a moment in time can cut it off from the context and experiences that surround presage and flow out from that moment.” Martin Crotty: Turning Points in Australian History.
The O’Keefe High Court verdict is one such moment in time.
Almost 70 years ago, Annie O’Keefe, a WWII refugee, won a landmark victory against the Australia Government, paving the way for abolition of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901. It was a turning point in Australia’s history, marking the beginning of the end of the White
Australia Policy. Even Immigration Minister, Arthur Calwell, acknowledged the O’Keefe verdict as having “knocked down the central pillar of the White Australia Policy.” The case made international headlines, highlighting the cruel implementation of Australia’s immigration laws. The O’Keefe Case (1949) successfully challenged the economic and homogeneity principles of the White Australia Policy, the central tenets of which had long disguised its racist underpinnings.
Annie Maas Jacob, her husband, Samuel, and their family, escaped Japan’s invasion of Dutchcontrolled Aru in the Eastern archipelago of Indonesia in 1942. SOURCE 1 The couple settled in the Melbourne community of Bonbeach, where Samuel joined the Netherlands Indies Intelligence Service. Unfortunately, within two years, Samuel was killed in an air crash leaving Annie to raise eight children. Annie received a widow’s pension from the Dutch Government and was assisted by her landlord John (Jack) O’Keefe.8
Annie, like the other fourteen thousand WWII refugees from Asia, was permitted to remain in Australia only for the duration of war. When the war ended in 1945, refugees were expected to return to their country of origin. Not wishing to uproot her family, Annie delayed their repatriation by successfully applying for Certificates of Exemption from the Australian Government.
To protect Annie and her children, Jack O’Keefe married Annie in 1947, believing this would enable her to become a British subject preventing the family’s repatriation to Indonesia. SOURCE 2 However, the Australian Government did not accept this, and on 12 February 1949, Annie received a letter requesting her departure from Australia by 24 February (i.e. within 12 days) or face deportation. Arthur Calwell, Australia’s first Immigration Minister, aimed to return the last eight hundred Asian refugees who remained in Australia after WWII to their home land.
Minister Calwell claimed that Annie was a ‘prohibited immigrant’ under the Immigration Restriction Act 1901, one of the first laws enacted by the Commonwealth Parliament following
Australia’s Federation. At the root of Australia’s White Australia Policy was the belief that Anglo-Saxons were superior to other races, and that British-Australian cultural homogeneity was crucial for national progress. There was a deep-seated concern amongst Australia’s policy-makers that “coloured people work for next to nothing, lower the standard of living and cause trouble.” According to Governor General, Alfred Deakin, Australia needed a “White Australia”.
To be correctly classified as a “prohibited immigrant” required Annie to take and fail a dictation test. Having escaped from Indonesia during WWII on an Australian naval ship, Annie had never been given this test.19 Consequently, Annie’s legal team argued that if she had never taken and failed the dictation test, she could not be classified as a prohibited immigrant.
Annie’s case captured widespread media attention, and provoked public outrage both in Australia and internationally. With a groundswell of public support, Annie brought her case to the High Court and won. The verdict shaped immigration policy from this point onwards.
The O’Keefe case is a turning point in Australian immigration policy because it ignited popular support against the removal of a non-European immigrant family. The Melbourne Herald and Sydney Daily Telegraph set up fighting funds to finance Annie’s High Court challenge. This represented a significant departure from forty-eight years of White Australia Policy values. Letters to Prime Minister Chifley labelled the Immigration Minister’s treatment of the family as “arrogant and inhumane”.
Many working-class Australians even threatened not to vote Labour in the upcoming election, and Dr Mannix, Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne, pleaded the case for the O’Keefe family to stay in Australia.24
Both during and after Annie’s favourable verdict, the Government’s White Australia Policy came under scrutiny. Ordinary Australians like Robert Ewing from Canterbury depicted the policy as something that “had been created by fallible men who could not have foreseen the possibilities that have since eventuated. The Australia of 1949 was not the Australia of 1901." It was this sort of widespread thinking that forced the Government to re-examine prevailing migration laws and policy.
International condemnation of the White Australia Policy also became vocal because of the
O’Keefe case. The veneer of White Australia’s economic rationale was successfully challenged. The South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) cited Immigration Minister Calwell as a “handicap to his country and world peace.”27 The White Australia Policy even jeopardised the formation of a Pacific Security Pact with the Philippine Government claiming, “Australia was in violation of the United Nations Charter and threatening to freeze Australian passports and close its Sydney consulate.” 28
The Singapore Morning Tribune also reported “Asia’s anger growing faster than Australia’s population, and threatened one day the people of Asia will be compelled to rise and crush this insulting ideology.” India and China were also strident in their condemnation. Australia’s reputation and relationships with Asia were very clearly compromised by what was revealed in the court case. 30
Annie O'Keefe was not a bread-winner; on the contrary she was supported by a Dutch pension and was fully occupied looking after her family. It was clear to many that ‘economics had no relation to the case." Another tenet of the policy, that non-Anglo-Saxons could not assimilate into the “Australian way of life”, was also squashed in the O’Keefe case. All of Annie’s children had been educated in Australia, and in her Affidavits, Annie’s children were described as having “adopted a completely Australia outlook.” Her children spoke perfect English, lived in an Australia household with an Australian stepfather, had Australian friends, wore western clothes and were at the top of their class at the local Catholic school. To attest to the fact that the O’Keefe family had assimilated into Australian society, Mr F. Humphries of
Windsor informed the Prime Minister, ‘To say that they are an asset to our country is underestimating their value. We have never met a finer family. The intelligence and refinement of the children is of high order. We consider ourselves fortunate in our association with them and so have the friendship of this fine family at Bonbeach.’35 He pointed out that the younger children knew no country other than Australia and spoke only English. Humphries told Chifley, ‘Mrs O’Keefe is a British subject and a Christian, and to remove a woman and eight children to a land which would be foreign to the children, where discontent and trouble is rife, would be contrary to freedom and tolerance which we regard as our Australian way of living.’36
SOURCE 3
By a majority of four to two, on 18 March 1949, the High Court found in Annie O’Keefe’s favour. The verdict read that “the plaintiff was not a person liable to be prohibited from remaining in the Commonwealth’ since she had not taken the dictation test upon her arrival in Australia, and five years had passed since she could have taken it so therefore she wasn’t a prohibited immigrant.”
Annie’s success paved the way for many other immigrants to challenge the discriminatory policy. Abdul Samad Amjah, a Malay sea-man who jumped ship to return to Australia to rejoin his wife, eventually failed the dictation test, was prosecuted as a prohibited immigrant and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment pending deportation. He appealed his prosecution in the High Court after the O’Keefe verdict, and the High Court found in his favour stating among other things that the Department of Immigration had no power to order him to leave originally, for the same reasons as Mrs O’Keefe (i.e. not having taken and failed the dictation test within the prescribed period of time). Following the decision, The Department of Immigration abandoned attempts to deport Abdul. Three hundred and thirty-five Chinese evacuees from
New Guinea also benefitted from the O’Keefe decision.
Undeniably, the O’Keefe verdict was also a turning point for the entire post-war immigration program, especially The Displaced Persons Program. This scheme, which brought thousands of European wartime refugees to Australia, obliged refugees to enter into a two-year contract with the Australian Government to perform allocated work. The work was often low-skilled, and refugees were typically steered away from highly-skilled jobs. Certificates of Exemption were issued for the two-year period. If immigrants broke the contract, the Government could deport them. Following the O’Keefe case, displaced persons were also able to contend that the Commonwealth had no power to deport them.
When the O’Keefe family won, Immigration Minister Calwell quickly introduced retrospective legislation to protect both the Displaced Persons Scheme and White Australia Policy. In advising Cabinet he intended to introduce legislative amendments Minister Calwell noted: “It is abundantly clear… if action is not taken, our Restricted Immigration Policy and purposes, become impossible of application.”
Minister Calwell removed the five-year limit on the dictation test. Immigrants could, therefore, be forced to sit the dictation test regardless of how long they had lived in Australia. Further, and to deal with the wartime Asian evacuees and displaced persons, certificates of exemption could now be cancelled at the discretion of the Minister. For Australia’s more than eight hundred wartime refugees, Calwell created The Wartime Refugees Removal Act, which granted The Commonwealth Government blanket rights to remove wartime evacuees at the end of the war.
Despite Minister Calwell’s best efforts to introduce legislation to strengthen immigration policy, the O’Keefe verdict marked a clear turning point in public opinion and brought to light racist undertones within the Immigration Department, and the lengths the Chifley Government was prepared to go to preserve “White Australia.”
The O’Keefe case highlighted widespread demand for more humane treatment of immigrants. During an election campaign speech in November 1949, future Prime Minister Robert Menzies stated that the Government “will continue to maintain Australia’s settled immigration policy, known as the White Australia policy…At the same time we believe in humane and commonsense administration. All cases of alien’s resident in Australia should be considered, not as if the law allowed no human discretion but in the light of the circumstances of each case. Nothing has done both the Policy and our relations with Asiatic countries more harm than some of the stupid and provocative decisions of the present government.”
Luckily, before Immigration Minister Calwell could enforce further deportations following his new legislation, The Chifley Government was swept out of office. When the Menzies Government came to power, Harold Holt, the new Immigration Minister let eight hundred non– European wartime refugees stay in Australia. This marked another step towards less discriminatory immigration policy.
Although it took a further twenty-four years for the Australian Government to abandon its
White Australia Policy, Annie O’Keefe’s case rallied public opinion to such an extent (both in Australia and overseas) that it marked a clear turning point in immigration policy. Her case ignited widespread criticism of Australia’s policies, and is credited with dismantling the economic and homogeneity arguments, which had long been used to defend racially motivated policies. This landmark legal precedent is still relevant today.
Glossary:
1. Immigration Restriction Act 1901:
The Immigration Restriction Act 1901 was an Act of the Parliament of Australia which limited immigration to Australia and formed the basis of the White Australia policy which sought to exclude all non-Europeans from Australia. The Act prohibited various classes of people from immigrating and provided for illegal immigrants to be deported.
2. White Australia Policy:
Another name for the Immigration Restriction Act 1901.
3. Netherlands Indies Intelligence Service:
Netherlands East Indies Forces Intelligence Service (also known by the acronym NEFIS), was a
Dutch World War II era intelligence and special operations unit operating mainly in the Japanese-occupied Netherlands East Indies (now Indonesia).
4. Homogeneity:
The quality or state of being all the same or all of the same kind. 5. Prohibited immigrant:
Any person who when asked to do so by an officer fails to write out at dictation test and sign in the presence of the officer a passage of fifty words in length in an European language directed by the officer.
6. The Wartime Refugees Removal Act:
The War-time Refugees Removal Act 1949 was a piece of Australian legislation that formed part of the White Australia policy. It was introduced by the Chifley Government in July 1949, in order to give the federal government the explicit authority to deport non-white foreigners who had arrived in Australia during World War 2.
SOURCES
Source 1:
Map of the Aru Islands in the Eastern Archipelago of Indonesia
56
56 Blogs.bl.uk. (2018). A Malay document from the Aru Islands - Asian and African studies blog. [online] Available at: http://blogs.bl.uk/asian-and-african/2014/03/a-malay-document-from-the-aru-islands.html [Accessed 22 Jul. 2018].
SOURCE 2
Certificate of Marriage between John O’Keefe and Annie O’Keefe
SOURCE 3
Letter to the Prime Minister from Frederick Humphries page 1
SOURCE 3 PART 2
Letter to the Prime Minister from Frederick Humphries page 2
Annotated Bibliography:
Primary Sources
-Archives
Australia - Immigration - "White Australia" Policy - Press and other Comments. (1945). [Paper Files and Documents] National Archives of Australia, A4144. Canberra.
These archives contain document news clippings from the press, and letters (from 19441945) regarding the “White Australia Policy” or Immigration Policy of 1901.These clippings present the racist opinions of some Australians while also revealing he opinions of those affected by such policy (i.e. Asians). It also presents a shift of some Australians to condemning the policy. These archives were useful in presenting what both Australians, the press and Asians thought of the White Australia policy and illustrated the racist underline of many.
Australian Parliament House (1949). Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives vol. 201. Canberra, p.66.
This parliamentary debate is of Mr Calwell, Immigration Minister at the time. speaking to the
House of Representatives in relation to the O’Keefe case. In such parliamentary debate, Calwell provides defence to the White Australia Policy and believes that “if we allow these people to stay we shall open the flood gates.” This debate was vital in capturing the racist opinions of politicians and their determination to keep the policy intact.
China - Political relations with Australia - Chinese attitude to White Australia Policy. (1950). [Paper Files and Documents] National Archives of Australia, A1838. Canberra.
This contains multiple news clippings from different Asian media outlets and letters to politicians from multiple Asian politicians and Australia citizens. These archives present the negative opinions of the policy and reveal the impact of the O’Keefe case on opinions from overseas. It reveals that such case caused there to be outrage internationally particularly in Asian countries such as Singapore nod Indonesia. And how such case revealed to the Asian countries the underlying racist intentions of the policy.
[Personal Papers of Prime Minister Chifley] Correspondence 'O' [Oakville Progress Association - Owen, Thomas and Company Ltd, includes representations from C Ogilvie relating to Trans-Oceanic Airways Pty Ltd, Miss A O'Hare relating to Katoomba cafes, NSW Omnibus Proprietors Association, representations relating to deportation of Mrs Annie O'Keefe and children]. (1952). [Letters] National Archives of Australia, M1455. Canberra.
These archives contain Immigration Department files and the personal papers of Prime Minister Ben Chifley containing letters written by private citizens and organisations expressing their opposition to the family’s deportation. Many of the letters argued that Calwell’s administration of the policy was causing harm to Australia’s reputation in Asia.
Other letters from friends or neighbours of O’Keefe defended her and pleaded to let her stay. Given that 1949 was an election year, some correspondents threatened Chifley and Calwell with their voting intentions. These letters reveal that Australians were beginning to question the well-worn defence that the policy was informed by issues of economics (protecting the working conditions of Australians) and homogeneity.
Immigration Restriction Act 1901. (1901). [Paper Files and Documents] National Archives of Australia, A1559. Canberra.
These archives contained documents of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901- An Act to place certain restrictions on Immigration and to provide for the removal from the Commonwealth of prohibited Immigrants. This provided a needed insight into the roots of
Mrs O’Keefe deportation notice and showed the racism apparent in 1901 of Asians and other “colour people.”
Mrs Annie O'KEEFE, formerly Jacob and eight children - Indonesians - Return to Indonesia. (1949). [Affidavit to Plaintiff] National Archives of Australia, A432. Canberra.
This contains the high court of Australia’s transcript of proceedings of the O’Keefe case. It contains the affidavit of Mrs O’Keefe, her marriage certificate, the deportation notice and other vital documents in relation to the proceedings of the case. This was useful and reliable in providing an insight into the background of Mrs O’Keefe life before the case and the events causing the deportation.
O'Keefe, A M and family. (1949). [Paper files and documents] National Archives of Australia, 441426. Canberra.
This provides an insight into the public reaction of Mrs O’Keefe’s deportation. It provides multiple press clipping and letters to politicians condemning or supporting her deportation. It is useful in providing a range of opinions on the case and shows the shifting of people’s opinions on the policy.
O'KEEFE Annie Maas versus CALWELL Arthur Augustus; PRIEST Alan Hewitt; The Commonwealth of Australia. (1949). [Paper Files and Documents] National Archives of Australia, A10075. Canberra.
This file contains the arguments of both the defence team and prosecution (Mr Calwell). Thus, illustrating the racist policies and arguments against Mrs O’Keefe. It also provided vital information regarding the Citizenship Test, the rules surrounding such test and the reason why the high court ruled in Mrs O’Keefe’s favour.
O'KEEFE Annie Maas versus CALWELL Arthur Augustus; The Commonwealth of Australia. (2018). [Paper Files and Documents] National Archives of Australia, A10075. Canberra.
O'Keefe v Calwell [1949] A432/82 3 (High Court of Australia).
From the High Court, this provided the High Court proceedings of the case and the ruling of the 7 judges. The proceedings illustrated the arguments of both parties and the eventual ruling in her favour.
O'KEEFE, Annie Maas - Immigration Act 1901-40 - prosecution. (1949). [Paper Files] National Archives of Australia, MP401/1. Canberra.
From the National Archives, this file contains the correspondence of the prosecution team and shows the arguments against Mrs O’Keefe. The file was helpful in showing the underlying racist views of Australians at the time including within the High Court.
Newspapers, Reports
Adelaide (1949). Flaws in the Policy. [online] p.4. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130245875?searchTerm=here%20the%20sum mary%20ejection%20of%20Asiatics%20from%20this%20country%20has%20roused% 20active%20resentment&searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||notWords|||requestHan dler|||dateFrom=1949-01-01|||dateTo=1950-12-31|||sortby [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This editorial newspaper takes about how Mrs O’Keefe can has caused Australia to start to examine its migration laws and policy. The newspaper talks about the case, the Immigration policy and the reactions of both Australians and Asian countries.
Canberra Times (1949). Singapore Attack on Calwell. [online] p.1. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/rendition/nla.newsarticle2789657.3.pdf?followup=8c28e5c59f754219a97502a08f770541 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
From the Canberra Times, this newspaper reports of the reaction from Singapore of the O’ Keefe case. It thoroughly reports the negative opinions of Asian politicians of the Immigration policy. It highlights the detrimental impact of the O’Keefe case on the international relationships with Singapore and Australia. The newspaper was instrumental in indicating in the research the effect Annie had not just in Australia.
Daily Advertiser (1950). •White Australia Policy “Racial Not Economic. [online] p.4.
Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/145353941?searchTerm=White%20Australia %20Policy%20Racial%20Not%20Economic&searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||no tWords|||requestHandler|||dateFrom=1950-01-01|||dateTo=1951-12-31|||sortby [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper indicates the changing opinions of the Australia press and public towards the White Australia Policy during the O’Keefe case. The case has shown to demonstrate the racial underlying features of the Immigration (White Australia) policy and defeated the economic excuse that had been used prior to the case. This newspaper was reliable and useful in highlighting the evolving opinion of the public.
Daily Examiner (1950). White Australia Policy Attacked. [online] p.4. Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/192829239?searchTerm=(white%20australia% 20policy)%20date%3A%5B1950%20TO%201955%5D&searchLimits=q-field0|||qtype0=all|||q-term0=white+australia+policy|||q-field1=title%3A|||q-type1=all|||qterm1|||q-field2=creator%3A|||q-type2=all|||q-term2|||q-field3=subject%3A|||qtype3=all|||q-term3|||q-year1-date=1950|||q-year2-date=1955# [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
The Daily Examiner reports of the opinion of the Church of England regarding the White Australia Policy. The newspaper details the declarations of the Anglican newspaper in which they attack the White Australia Policy. The newspaper, despite being a secondhand account, illustrates how the policy wasn’t being attacked only by the public by also by institutions such as the church.
Daily Telegraph (1945). Curtin Silent on White Australia. [online] p.3. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/194545247?searchTerm=curtin%20silent%20 on%20white%20australia&searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||notWords|||requestHa ndler|||dateFrom|||dateTo|||sortby [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper illustrates the rumours of demands to modify the ban on coloured immigrants to the Australian government. It illustrates the harshness of the Government to sustain the ban and the reaction of rumours from the public. It was useful in showing the opinions of the policy prior to the case and the rigidity of the Australia Government.
Morning Bulletin (1949). O'Keefe Case: Minister Explanation in Heated Debate. [online] p.1.
Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/56893918?searchTerm=Ministers%20hamfisted%20methods%20had%20inflamed%20ill-will&searchLimits=dateFrom=1949-0101|||dateTo=1950-12-31# [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper outlines the debate between Harold Holt and Calwell in the House of Representatives regarding the O’Keefe case. The recollection of the debate underlines the racist views of Mr Calwell, the Immigration Minister and the arguments for her deportation. It indicates the racism which existed within the Australian Government and further out.
Sydney Morning Herald (1949). Court Ruling in O'Keefe Case. [online] p.6. Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/18107661?searchTerm=our%20to%20two%20 majority%20granted%20Mrs%20O%27Keefe%20an%20injunction%20restraining%20 %20Calwell&searchLimits=dateFrom=1949-01-01|||dateTo=1950-12-31 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
Published the day after the ruling, this newspaper details the court ruling by the Full High Court allowing Mrs O’Keefe today in Australia. The newspaper details the reason for the ruling and the reaction of the Australia public and within the O’Keefe household.
Sydney Morning Herald (1949). High Court Rebuff for Mr. Calwell. [online] p.pg 2.
Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/18107727?searchTerm=Whereas%20intelligen t%20Asiatics%20were%20willing%20to%20concede%20that%20Australia%20had%20 a%20justifiable%20economic%20basis%20for%20her%20immigration%20%20policy& searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||notWords|||requestHandler|||dateFrom=1949-0101|||dateTo=1950-12-31|||sortby# [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
The Herald talks about the ruling of the O’Keefe case and the repercussions this has for the White Australia Policy. The newspaper articles mention the positive public reactions to the ruling and how, due to this, many people are questioning the policies’relevance. The newspaper also gives some background information about the White Australia Policy. It also negatively speaks of politicians, Mr Calwell, who was involved in the prosecution of the case. The newspaper was useful in showing the positive opinions of the Australia public on the O’Keefe case and the impact it had on people’s perspective of the immigration policy. It also demonstrates the dislike many had for Mr Calwell, the Immigration Minister at the time. Furthermore, the newspaper is shown to have an extreme bias towards Mrs O’Keefe, further reflecting the approving thoughts many had for Mrs O’Keefe and the lack of racism.
The Adelaide Mail (1949). Church Leaders Oppose Deportation Order. [online] p.pg 32.
Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/55924047?searchTerm=(dangerous%20for%2 0the%20Government%20to%20use%20the%20White%20Australia%20policy%20as%2 0a%20weapon%20for%20racial%20discrimination%20rather%20than%20as%20an%20 economic%20safeguard)%20date%3A%5B1949%20TO%201952%5D&searchLimits=q
-field0|||q-type0=all|||q-
term0=dangerous+for+the+Government+to+use+the+White+Australia+policy+as+a+we apon+for+racial+discrimination+rather+than+as+an+economic+safeguard|||qfield1=title%3A|||q-type1=all|||q-term1|||q-field2=creator%3A|||q-type2=all|||q-term2|||qfield3=subject%3A|||q-type3=all|||q-term3|||q-year1-date=1949|||q-year2-date=1952 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper talks about the Church Leaders such as Reverend A.S. Houston, condemning the deportation of Mrs O’Keefe. It highlights the distaste many had towards the
Immigration policy and Calwell’s actions. It also reports the negative views Mr
Calwell has in relation to Mrs O’Keefe and his rigidity to deport her. The newspaper was vital as it illustrated the opposition towards the deportation but also the racist views of some people such as Calwell.
The Age (1949). Minister Fears Opening Migration Flood Gates. [online] p.pg 3. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/205351872?searchTerm=assimilation%20o%2 7keefe&searchLimits=dateFrom=1949-01-01|||dateTo=1950-12-31|||l-advstate=Victoria# [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper reports the debate within the House of Representatives between Mr Calwell and Mr Holt in relation to the O’Keefe case. It illustrates the stark contrast between Mr Holt and Mr Calwell: one believing in letting Mrs O’Keefe stay while the other believing “it will open the flood gates. However, despite Mr Calwell’s racist comments, he does mention that this case could “weaken the policy. This comment foreshadows the impact the O’Keefe case, being the first of its kind, had on the White Australia Policy, destabilising the foundations of the policy, this newspaper was useful and reliable, giving a non-bias view on the debate, highlighting the impact the case would have soon after.
The Barrier Miner (1949). Mr Calwell Has A Big Problem. [online] p.4. Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/48584912?searchTerm=If%20the%20Govern ment%20persisted%20with%20its%20attempt%20to%20deport%20Mrs.%20Annie%20 O%27Keefe%2C%20in%20view%20of%20her%20apparent%20Australian%20citizens hip%2C%20it%20might%20strike%20a%20legal%20uproar.&searchLimits=dateFrom= 1949-01-01|||dateTo=1950-12-31 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
The newspaper commentates on the case, illustrating the legal uproar it caused within the Government and Australia. The newspaper was useful in giving background information on the case and showing the impact of such case politically.
The Courier (1949). Australia's White Curtain. [online] p.4. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/rendition/nla.newsarticle49674964.3.pdf?followup=07ce7f69878a78711cfbcbaf0539eba3 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This brief article released only a week after the ruling of the O’Keefe case, talks about the embedded racism within Australian society and within Australia’s laws. It commentates on the White Australia Policy and its discriminatory rules and the effects it is having on our international relationship with Asian countries. The article, although heavily bias, demonstrates the negative opinion towards the immigration policy.
The Mercury Hobart (1949). Indonesian Family Must Leave. [online] p.pg 6. Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/26491264?searchTerm=(the%20woman%27s %20Australian%20husband%20saw%20him%20before%20his%20marriage%2C%20an d%20boasted%20that%20he%20would%20marry%20the%20woman%20to%20make% 20her%20a%20British%20subject%2C)%20date%3A%5B1949%20TO%201952%5D& searchLimits=q-field0|||q-type0=all|||q-
term0=the+woman%27s+Australian+husband+saw+him+before+his+marriage%2C+and +boasted+that+he+would+marry+the+woman+to+make+her+a+British+subject%2C|||qfield1=title%3A|||q-type1=all|||q-term1|||q-field2=creator%3A|||q-type2=all|||q-term2|||qfield3=subject%3A|||q-type3=all|||q-term3|||q-year1-date=1949|||q-year2-date=1952 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This article outlines the O’Keefe case and the reason behind her deportation. This was useful in giving some legal background behind the case;
Truth (1952). The White Australia Policy. [online] p.3. Available at:
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/167978748?searchTerm=(white%20australia% 20policy)%20date%3A%5B1950%20TO%201955%5D&searchLimits=q-field0|||qtype0=all|||q-term0=white+australia+policy|||q-field1=title%3A|||q-type1=all|||qterm1|||q-field2=creator%3A|||q-type2=all|||q-term2|||q-field3=subject%3A|||qtype3=all|||q-term3|||q-year1-date=1950|||q-year2-date=1955# Truth Sydney [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This newspaper thoroughly details everything about the White Australia Policy. This includes the creation of it, the actual policy itself, cases in relation to it and the opinions of it in 1952, 51 years after it was written and passed. This two-page research of the White Australia Policy was useful in demonstrating the roots of the policy (why it was created, who created it etc.) and shows how cases, such as the O’Keefe case, have caused many to, in 1952, begin to attack the policy for its racist features.
Interviews and Speeches
Neumann, K. (2018). Interview with Klaus Neumann regarding O'Keefe case.
This interview was conducted between via email. Mr Neumann, a professor at Deakin University has done extensive research on Mrs O’Keefe case and multiple other deportation and refugee crisis including it in his book ‘Across the Seas: Australia's Response to Refugees. Via email, I asked him about the significance of her case, the impact it had on Australia and the abolishment of the White Australia Policy in the 1960s.This interview provided me with useful information in relation to the impact it had for other cases in the future and the parallels of the case with today’s society.
Tavan, G. (2018). Interview with Gwenda Tavan talking about the O'Keefe case and White Australia Policy.
This interview was conducted via email. Gwenda Tavan is Associate Professor and the current Head of the Department of Politics and Philosophy at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. Her research interests include the politics and history of immigration and multiculturalism in Australian, global and transnational contexts. She has in-depth researched Mrs O’Keefe case mentioning it multiple interviews and writing about it in her book “The Long, Slow Death of White Australia.” . In the interview she mentioned the impact the O’Keefe case socially, politically and economically and o provided a difference perspective on Mr Calwell. Furthermore, the interview also gave a great insight into the political repercussions it had for the Government.
Zubrzycki, P. (1994). Arthur Calwell and the origin of post-war immigration.
This speech was given by Professor Zubrzycki to the Migration Division Seminar, Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Canberra, on 6 October 1994.In this speech she speaks about Mr Calwell and the impact he had on immigration policy while in tenure as Immigration Minister. She briefly mentions the O’Keefe case and the harsh criticism he received for her deportation. This speech was useful in shining light upon the backlash Mr Calwell received for the case.
Secondary Sources:
Books, Reports and Journal Articles
Ashton, P. and Anderson, M. (2012). History 10. South Yarra, VIC: Macmillan.
This book provided the features of a government policy that affected immigration to Australia, such as the Immigration Restriction Act 1901 and use of the dictation test to restrict the immigration of non-Europeans it also explains the reasons for the abolition of such policies. It illustrates the evolving views Australians had on immigrants, foreign citizens from 1901, the creation of the White Australia Policy to 2012.This book is reliable with a wide variety of primary sources to support its statements.
Brawley, S. (1995). The white peril. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, p.pg 259
This book, written by Sean Brawley, is about the changing positions towards Asian migration in Australia. In detail, Brawley talks about the O’Keefe case and the effect it had in Asian most specifically talking about the reactions of Malay and its leader Tahu Kalu. Brawley illustrates how the O’Keefe case challenged both the economic and homogeneity arguments of the White Australia Policy. Using a range of primary sources, including interviews with experts in the field and secondary sources, this was a very useful book that I used throughout my essay in relation to the impact of her case.
Brawley, S. (2014). Finding Home in White Australia. History Australia, 11(1), pp.128-148.
Brawley
Drawn from archival research, this article examines the legal arguments that both sides brought to the court. The article talks about how the case raised several issues that went far beyond narrow legal and technical arguments. Under what circumstances could a foreign-born non-European individual call Australia home? The thesis of the article is if
the fate of one Indonesian family but the White Australia Policy and Australia’s entire post-war migration program. A reliable source, this article was instrumental in my research process, giving an in-depth analysis of the legal intricacies of the case and the impact these intricacies had for future immigration policy.
Brawley, S. (2018). [online] Multiculturalaustralia.edu.au. Available at:
http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/doc/Brawley_AnnieOKeefe.pdf [Accessed 31 Mar. 2018].
Published by the National Archives of Australia, this looks at the archives about the case. They include Immigration Department files documenting the family’s time in Australia, and their efforts to stay. Attorney-General’s Department records show the government’s efforts to defend its position in the High Court case, and cables from Australian diplomats in Asian capitals report on the harm the case was doing to the nation’s reputation in the region. Immigration Department files and the personal papers of Prime Minister Ben Chifley contain letters written by private citizens and organisations expressing their opposition to the family’s deportation. The article talks about the letters to the Prime Minister from neighbours and friends of Mrs O’Keefe arguing that that Calwell’s administration of the policy was causing harm to Australia’s reputation in Asia and the Mrs O’Keefe deserved to stay in Australia. The letters also reveal that Australians were beginning to question the well-worn defence that the policy was informed by issues of economics (protecting the working conditions of Australians) and homogeneity (maintaining the racial and cultural integrity of the nation to prevent social dislocation).
Europarl.europa.eu. (2012). Abolition of the 'White Australia' Policy. [online] Available at:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/danz/dv/0220_13_1/02 20_13_1en.pdf [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This short article gives the history of the White Australia policy and the racist views of Australia’s in the early 20th century. It also details the timeline leading to the policies ultimate demise. Although detailed, it doesn’t ‘reference its research to any primary or secondary sources, deeming the information unreliable.
Goldsworthy, D. (2001). Facing North. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, p.pg 88.
Facing North is the first substantial history of Australia's relations with Asia since Federation.
Through the research, two volumes of the book were used. Volume 1 chronicles AustralianAsian relations from 1901 to the 1970s and Volume 2 (in preparation) will carry the story through the last decades of the century just ended. Both make extensive use of official government sources and of the private collections of ministers and public servants. Ever since Federation, Australians in public life have expressed diverse views on our foreign policy and on areas with major domestic consequences, such as immigration. In detail Goldsworthy, talks about the evolution of Asian immigration in Australia and how this has affected Australia and Asia’s relationship. It was a great book, using a range of primary and secondary sources to back up its interesting findings.
Meadows, E. (2018). ‘He No Doubt Felt Insulted’: The White Australia Policy and Australia’s Relations with India, 1944–1964. [online] Hdl.handle.net. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2123/12451 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This book briefly mentioned the O’Keefe case and the negative reaction Nehru, the Indian prime minister had at the time. It talks about the speech he gave to the Australia
Associated Press criticising the Immigration Policy. Through the use of primary and secondary sources, the book demonstrated the tensions caused between Asia and Australia during the O’Keefe case.
Meaney, N. (2018). The end of ‘white Australia’ and Australia's changing perceptions of Asia, 1945–1990.
This article explores a central, question in Australian history, namely, how the Federation's ideal of 'White Australia' and its perception of Asia as the alien other have in the early to mid 20th century came to be discarded and replaced by the notion of the 'multicultural' society and Australia as integrally part of Asia and prospectively a 'Eurasian' nation. In this, Meaney mentions how the O’Keefe case was a turning point for the relationship. Thoroughly researched, the book provided an insight into the international impact of the case.
Neumann, K. (2015). Across the Seas: Australia's Response to Refugees: A History. Melbourne: Black Inc., pp.65-67.
In this eloquent and informative book, historian Klaus Neumann examines both government policy and public attitudes towards refugees and asylum seekers since Federation. He places the Australian story in the context of global refugee movements, and international responses to them. Neumann examines many case studies, including the resettlement of displaced persons from European refugee camps in the late 1940s and early 1950s,the O ’Keefe case and the panic generated by the arrival of Vietnamese asylum seekers during the 1977 federal election campaign. By exploring the ways in which politicians have approached asylum-seeker issues in the past, the books aims to inspire more creative thinking about current refugee and asylum-seeker policy. Neumann illustrates how the O’Keefe case had implications for cases thereafter
Nicholls, G. (2007). Deported. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, pp.pg 28-29.
. Drawing on archival material, case studies, court decisions and parliamentary debates, ‘ Deported’ presents the previously untold story of the use and misuse of deportation powers in Australia over the past 105 years. ‘Deported’ briefly mentions the O’
Keefe case and the support Ms O’Keefe had from media outlets such as The Herald who set up a fund for her support.
Nma.gov.au. (2018). End of the White Australia policy | National Museum of Australia.
[online] Available at:
http://www.nma.gov.au/online_features/defining_moments/featured/end_of_the_white_a ustralia_policy [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
Using interviews by immigration experts, primary sources and university papers, the National Museum of Australia, provides an comprehensive report of the abolition of the White Australia Policy, giving some information about immigration policies leading up to the abolition and after it.
Parlinfo.aph.gov.au. (2018). ParlInfo - Title Unavailable. [online] Available at:
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;orderBy=_fragm ent_number,doc_date-
rev;query=Dataset%3Ahansardr,hansardr80%20Decade%3A%221940s%22%20Year%3 A%221947%22%20Month%3A%2212%22;rec=2;resCount=Default [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This parliament document provides only the date and time of the debate in the House of Representatives between Mr Calwell and Mr Holt.
Power, P. (2014). How one refugee signalled the end of the White Australia policy | Paul Power. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/annie-white-australia-policy [Accessed 31 Mar. 2018].
Only published recently, this secondary source goes into detail in the O’Keefe case, including the backstory to the case, the case itself and the support during the case. It also talks about the repercussions of the case and the reaction of the verdict.
Sharkey, L. (1949). Race Theory and the Labor Imperialists. Communist Review, 2(71), p.pg
20.
This review from the Australia Communist Party reflects upon the deportations of several
“coloured peoples” and refutes the economic foundations of the policy. The review believes rather that the deportations have nothing to do with employment, but it is due to racism of “coloured peoples. This review highlights the true incentive of the Australia immigration Policy. However, much of this review wasn’t based upon cases or evidences rather on personal opinion. Therefore, although useful for evidence of condemnation of the policy, it wasn’t backed up with clear, primary source findings.
Stewart, I., Hohmann, J. and Robertson, K. (2005). Dictating to One of 'Us': The Migration of Mrs Freer. Macquarie Law Journal, 5(2), pp.241-275.
Using a variety of primary and secondary sources, this journal article, In detail, talks about the racist purpose of the White Australia Policy and the purpose of the Dictation Test. Going into the legal and ethical implications of the policy, this was a reliable and useful resource which was used throughout the essay.
Documentaries
Immigration Nation. (2008). [film] Australia: SBS.
This is a landmark series that explores Australia's untold immigration story; a century long struggle to overcome the White Australia Policy that resulted in one of the world's most multicultural nations. Cut up into 3 sections: Federation, WW2,and post-WW2 , this documentary demonstrates the rise of the White Australia Policy and the events which led to its eventual fall.
Sir Robert Menzies on the White Australia Policy. (1951). [film] Australia: Australian Broadcasting Commission
This one on one interview illustrates Sir Robert Menzies, the Prime Minister at the time racist and discriminatory views of “Asiatics”. By showing politicians views of immigrants, it alludes to the views of the outer Australia public.
The Rise and Fall of the White Australia Policy. (1997). [DVD] Directed by P. Kelly. Canberra.
Created in Canberra 30 years after its abolition, this documentary reflects upon the events, including the O’Keefe case that lead to its abolition. Using interviews with experts of the field, this factual documentary presents that its abolition was due to several deportation cases that changed the opinions of the public and Australia’s politicians
The Voice of the People : The White Australia policy. (1952). [video] Australia: ABC.
Only produced a few years after the O’Keefe case, this four corners report asks people on the street their opinions of the White Australia Policy. Although some are racist, many hold the belief that the policy in unfair, unjust and racist towards those of different ethnicities. This report was helpful in highlighting the public’s condemnation and disgust of the policy post O’Keefe case.
Websites:
Aaac.100megsfree5.com. (2018). The O'Keefe case. [online] Available at: http://www.aaac.100megsfree5.com/calwellokeefecase.htm [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This website looks into the O’Keefe case and the reaction it had from Mr Calwell, the Immigration Minister at the time. The article, also talks about the reason or argument for her deportation and the history surrounding wartime refugees. By giving background information to the O’Keefe case, it provided a starting step for further research. However, it doesn’t mention or footnote any sources, therefore deeming it as unreliable.
Adb.anu.edu.au. (2018). Biography - Arthur Augustus Calwell - Australian Dictionary of
Biography. [online] Available at: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/calwell-arthur-augustus9667 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018]
.
This unbiased biography is of Arthur Calwell, an Australia politician who served as Immigration Minister and then Leader of the Australian Labor Party from 1960 to 1967.Although only briefly mentioning the O’Keefe case this biography provides context to his harsh treatment of Annie and her family. But, also, shows the powerful impact his later policies had for immigration including the “populate or perish” slogan. This biography, in detail, talked every aspect of Mr Calwell’s life from political, social and mental.
Buchanan, K. (2015). On This Day: Establishment of the “White Australia” Policy. [Blog] Law Library. Available at: https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2015/12/on-this-day-establishment-of-thewhite-australia-policy/ [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This blog provides the written word of the Dictation Test and Immigration Act of 1901 and explains meaning behind the legal terminology. It also refers to court cases related to the application of the policy and then the abolition of the policy. This blog footnotes all of its sources (of which there are many), providing a reliable and useful source.
Destinationaustralia.gov.au. (1949). Annie Maas O'Keefe vs Arthur Augustus Calwell and the Commonwealth of Australia | Destination Australia. [online] Available at: https://www.destinationaustralia.gov.au/stories/challenges/annie-maas-okeefe-vs-arthuraugustus-calwell-and-commonwealth-australia [Accessed 31 Mar. 2018].
This website provides a brief outline of the case and its implications for the policy. Furthermore, it also provides a few newspapers from the National Archives of Australia written during the time of the O’Keefe case.
Electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au. (2018). Election Speeches · Robert Menzies, 1949 · Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House. [online] Available at: https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1949-robert-menzies [Accessed 3 Apr. 2018].
This website provides the transcript of Robert Menzies election speech against Ben Chifley in 1949.His speech illustrated that although he believed in the White Australia Policy he did find that the way it was implemented to be inhumane and unfair and also disrupting our relationship with Asia.
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2018). White Australia policy | Summary & Facts. [online] Available at: https://www.britannica.com/event/White-Australia-Policy [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This website published by encyclopaedia Britannica looks at the history of the White Australia Policy and the reasons for its implementation. The website also shows anti-immigration cartoons prior to the policy, highlighting the once racist views of Australians.
Homeaffairs.gov.au. (2018). Fact sheet – Abolition of the 'White Australia' Policy. [online] Available at: https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/corporate/information/factsheets/08abolition [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This fact sheet looks at the history of the policy, the infringements of the policy during the Second World War. It also looks at the small changes that amalgamated into the eventual abolition of the policy. Furthermore, it also looks at the present immigration policy and the multicultural society that we have now transformed into.
Ironbarkresources.com. (2018). The Demise of the White Australia Policy - The Media; and Their Use of "Tear-Jerker" Stories to Change Immigration Policies. [online] Available at: http://www.ironbarkresources.com/demise/demise04.htm [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This biased website illustrates the power the media has to change government policy, more specifically immigration policy. It looks at the O’Keefe case and the sympathy gained for her by the support of the media. Furthermore, the website also illustrates that the actions of the media caused, slowly, the abolition of the White Australia Policy. Although slightly biased (against the media) in its views, it illustrates the impact the O’Keefe case and the support for her case had on the Immigration policy.
Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House. (2007). White Australia policy – the beginning of the end 50 years ago. [online] Available at:
https://www.moadoph.gov.au/blog/white-australia-policy-the-beginning-of-the-end-50-yearsago/ [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This government website published by Dr Barry York start of the adjustments of the policy during the 1950s and then the steps leading to its abolition in 1973 by the Whitlam Government. It also talks about the implications of the abolition for immigrants and for Australia’s relationships with other countries.
Myplace.edu.au. (2009). 1960s | My Place for teachers. [online] Available at: http://www.myplace.edu.au/decades_timeline/1960/decade_landing_4.html?tabRank=2&sub TabRank=4 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This educational website talks about the abolition of the White Australia Policy. It talks about the legislative changes that Holt implemented to aid in the abolition of the policy.
Naa.gov.au. (2018). [online] Available at:
http://www.naa.gov.au/Images/Brawley%20Oct%202007%20edit_tcm16-35888.pdf [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This lecture from Sean Brawley, an expert in relation to the O’Keefe, examines the challenges made to the White Australia Policy during the Pacific War and early post-war period. Dr Brawley’s study focused on two extraordinary Australians: Mrs Annie Maas Jacob O’Keefe, the first victorious legal challenger of the White Australia Policy, and Arthur Calwell, the then Immigration Minister and a staunch defender of the policy. By utilising life history as a methodological approach, Dr Brawley intends to close the gap between biography and history and allow the life stories to become the vehicle for his historical pap. Dr Brawley has made extensive use of Dutch sources and has studied early Australian–Dutch–Indonesian relations. This thoroughly researched paper was beneficial to both the research and writing of this essay.
Southaustralianhistory.com.au. (2018). Displaced Persons. [online] Available at: https://www.southaustralianhistory.com.au/displaced.htm [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This website looks at the Immigration Program, directed by Arthur Calwell, that opened the door for thousands of displaced persons (or refugees) after the second world war. However, as mentioned in the website, they were only allowed to stay here for a small period of time. This scheme is in which Mrs O’Keefe deportation is based.
Splash. (2012). Resources for Primary and Secondary Students - ABC Education The White
Australia Policy. [online] Available at: http://education.abc.net.au/home#!/digibook/613054/the-white-australia-policy [Accessed 2 Apr. 2018].
This educational resources uses archival resources, to retell the story of the White Australia Policy, its implementation and later its abolition. Using archival resources, ABC had demonstrated the processes refugees during the 20th century had to embark upon during the White Australia Policy and after.
No comments:
Post a Comment