Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Norfolk Island Affairs - Report of Royal Commission

Download PDF Download PDF

1 487







P1·esented by Command ; ordered to be pTinted, 12th A ugust, 1926.

[Cost of Paper :- Preparation, not given; 846 copie•; approximate cost of printing and. pubUt h!ng, £96.1

Printed and P ublished br the GOVERNMENT of the C OMMONWEALTH of AUS'fltALIA by H. J. GREEN, · Government Printer for the State of Vi. ctoria .

No. 62.- Pru c:m: 2s.-F.8557.


GEORGE V., by the Grace of God,- of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 11'eland mul of the British Dominions beyond the S eas King, De,fendet· of the l!'with, E'mpemr of India.

, ..,

TO Ow· brusly wul welt-beloved .FRANCIS WHYSALL; E sq·u·ire.


KNOW YE TfiAT We do, by these Lette:rs Patent, issued in Our name by Our Governor-General of mu· of

A-ustmlia, . acting with tlie advice of Ow· Pedemll!Jxecutive Council, and in of the Oon.Stitution of Owr said Commonwealth, the Royal Commissions Act 1902-1912, and all othe·r powers him enabling, appoint you to be a Commissioner to inquir·e into and rep01·t ·upon the syste·rn of Administration in forc e in and in connexion with the 11eri·itm·y of N01jolk Island, and to investigate any

complaints by :residents of the 1'erritory ·in regaTd to local conditions, with a view to the suggestion of · remedial measures as mny nppear to yo'u to be desimble.

AND \VE you with as l-ittle delay as possible to report to Our Gove·rnor-General of Ow; .mid Commonwealth the result of your inqui1·ies into the ·matters entrusted to yon by these O'nr L etters Pa.tent.

IN TESTIMONY vV e have th ese Our Letters to be nuule pntent and the Seal of Owr said Comnwnwealth to be

thereunto affixed.

WI'l'NESS 01t1· r'ight t1"ll8ly and well-belovecl JoHN LAWRENCE, BARON S'I'ONEHAVEN, a .Member of His J.Vlnjesty's Most Honomb(e Privy Coun.cil, Knight Gmnd Cmss of the J11ost Orcle1· of Saint Michael and Saint George, Compa..nion of the Dist·inguished Servi(:e Order, Gove·hwr-General and Commctn£le1'-i·n-Chief of the Commonwealth of Austntlia, tkis twentieth day of Jamw.Ty, in the yea1· of Otw· Lord One tho'usand nine and twenty-s·i:c, ctnd

in the sixteenth yem· of Reign.

By His Excellency'<> C01nmanrl, S Jlf. BRUCE,

Prirrw 'J.'l!I inister . .

STONEHA Vl!JN, Govenwr-Gene1·al.

Entered on Reconl by me; in Register of Patents, No. 25, page 436, this twentieth day of Janua1'y, One thm1sand nine h:und1·ed and twenty-six.


1 4

I i




Administration of Justice Administration-System of Agriculture and Fruit-growing-Instruction in effort

Table of

Boats and Boatmen-Licensing of Brands Ordinance .. Bulls-Depasturage of Companies Act Conclusion Custo:t.m!

Evans, Ivy Chlorine=-Gomplaint Evidence-Index to Subjects Executive Council-Constituti0n and Functions . Exhibits-Statement of Qf

Harbour ..


Introduction Land Matters-Part I. (Claim of Pitcairners) Part II. (Anomalies and Difficulties) III. (Difficulties in Ad.winistratiop of Estates)

Landing Law.s, _aad :&gulatio®

Liquor Laws and matters relating thereto lVIcPhttil, Roher!F=-Complaint of Mails= Transhipment o£ New Zealand- Suggested cession to

Noxious Weeds Patching, Thomas H.-Complaint of Population and Prosperity Pub lie Services Public Works and Roads Rea:ff.orestation Royal .Commission-Letters Patent

Shipping . . ; .

Social Unrest Stephenson, Ernest- Appeal against dismissal .. Stock- Live · ·

Trust Funds-Norfolk Island Trust-Rawson Hall Summary o£ Suggestions Warner, Frances Mary-Complaint of

Witnesses-List of Yeaman, Francis Alexander- Complaint of


12 10 25 43

65 23 23 42

25 56

25 26 52 60 20

63 57 44

43 9

15 17

18 45

39 30

47 26


35 52 46

38 32 40 3

36 55 50 40 29 30


51 58 53




Without curtailing the benefits derived by the inhabitants from the educationai, medical, banking, postal, and othe1· services provided, material alteration in the present system of cannot be effected.


. It is suggested that provision be made for the appointment of honorary justices, and that the law in relation . to civil and crimin,al appeals be amended. .


An increased activity on the part of some of the Islanders is marked, but there is apparent a general lack of com.mercial enterprise and failure to fully appreciate the possibilities of gain from more extensive agricultural pursuits. ·


It is suggested that an Ordinance providing for licensing be not promulgated.


The need of provision for rebranding stock at each change of ownership is not apparent, and it is considered that an Ordinance providing for rebranding is unnecessary.


Section 9 of Ordinance 2 of 1920 relating to pasturage and enclosure should, it is suggested, be amended in order that the depasturage of bulls over the age of twelve months be prohibited absolutely.


The requirements of the residents have been met by the application of the Companies Acts of New South Wales to the Territory of Norfolk Island.


It is suggested that the existing Customs procedure be not departed from.


It is considered that the present system of seconding teachers from the Department of Education, New South Wales, should not be departed from ; that the School Laws should be repealed substituted by provision for less elaborate administrative arrangements, and that the opportunities

available for higher education be_notified for public information. .


The cause of complaint is attributed to the actions of the Administrator's wife who, under instructions. from the Administrator, investigated an allegation of impropriety against complainant, a public omcer employed at Norfolk Island SchooL At her own request complainant has withdrawn from the Norfolk Island Schoot


EXECUTIVE COUNCIL-:-CONSTITUTION AND FUNCTIONS. The right of selection of nominee members should be carefully exercised by the Administrator. Attention· is drawn to mismanagement on the part of the Executive Council in the performance of public works. (See Noxious Weeds, Public Works, and Live Stock.)


The appointment of a visiting fruit and agricultural expert is not considered necessary ..


The question of fu rther deepening and widening the entrance to Emily Bay should be favorably considered.


The claim of the original Piteairners to the whole of the lands of Norfolk Island is reviewed, and the rights of the Crown in its properties are stated.


With one exception, claims to special consideration in the matter of titles were not satisfactorily established. It is suggested .that consideration be given to the issue .of a free grant to George Edward Nobbs in respect of Portion 156 (b) .


Three cases in which difficulties in administration of estates have arisen are reviewed, and means of overcoming the apparent difficulties stated. ·


It is suggested that the dangerous condition of the cliffs at the Cascades landing place should receive the early attention of the Administration.


It is suggested that the laws of Norfolk Island be consolidated, and that the Public Trust Funds Control Ordinance of 1926 be repealed. · ·


It is considered that a restricted issue of liquor to residents and tourists would be in with the general policy of the Commonwealth and not likely to prejudicially affect the welfare of the Island or its inhabitants. Amendment of the existing law is not suggested.


In the review of this complaint it is suggested that pardons be granted to Mary, John, and Thomas McPhail, and that the convictions recorded against them for stealing and receiving stolen property be expunged from the Court Records of Norfolk Island.


The cause of dissatisfaction on the part of boatmen engaged in handling· mails has been removed by payment of increased rates as from the 1st April, 1926.


In 1896 the British Government decided against the transfer of Norfolk Island to New Zealand ; . the evidence submitted to this Commission does not warrant consideration of . the suggested change.



There is ample provision in the existing law for the eradication of noxious weeds, and it is suggested that unless a tnarked improvement in the work of the . Council is apparent within the next two years, the question of placing responsibility for weed destruction in another direction should be seriously considered.


. The verdict of the Court, which forms the basis of this complaint, is considered to have been correct, and it is suggested further action be not taken. . .


The conditions of the population have vastly improved in recent years, and there is sufficient scope for four or five times the number at present residing ?n the Island. .


It is suggested that provision -be made by Ordinance to regulate the appointments of officers employed within the Territory and other matters connected with the Government service.


It is submitted that the present system should be given a further trial, and that suitable equipment be supplied by the Government and maintained thereafter by the Executive Council. Owners of unoccupied freehold or leasehold land . should, it is suggested, be called upon to pay a tax equal to one-half of the amount they would be required to contribute in lieu of labour if resident upon the Island, not to exceed the equivalent of one shilling per annum per acre of land owned or leased, or in its total the sum of 30s. per year, irrespective of acreage. With better management

and a proper co-operative spirit, the labour available could be used to greater advantage.


Early action in the direction indicated by the Commonwealth Forestry Adviser in regard to the reservation of certain areas for reafforestation, and the introduction of a tree from overseas to supply the hardwood needs of the Island is suggested.


Although the amount of freight conveyed to and from Norfolk Island does not warrant the employment of a larger ve·ssel, the need of a more up-to , and faster steamer than the s.s. " Makambo " at present engaged in the Norfolk Island-:-New service is fully ·



The Administrator is shown to have been responsible for a great deal of unrest in evidence at the present time, and a suggestion, with a view to the restoration of public confidence, is contained in the conclusion of this Report. · .


It is suggested that Mr. Stephenson, who appealed against dismissal from the administrative service, be reinstated to the office of Registrar of Courts, and that he receive salary as from the 1st April; 1926.


· There is urgent need for limiting the number of stock depastured, and this could be accomplished by the rigid enforcement of the Ordinance relating to pasture and enclosure and increase of the rates of pasturage. It is suggested that favorable consideration be given to the purchase ·of a suitable bull for use atta ·nominal fee. .. .. -



· __ The have no control over the . Trust funds, the application of which has been in compliance with the terms of the Trust Deed. ·


There is no evidence of betrayal of trusts by the present trustees, but certain members of the Trust have displayed an apathy that should debar them from future appointment.


The defamatory statements complained of are shown to have been made by the Administrator and his wife. It is suggested that suitable acknowledgment to complainant be made.


In the matter of this complaint against proceedings instituted for recovery of certain moneys and alleged fraudulent appropriation, it is suggested that a pardon be granted and the conviction expunged from the Court Records of Norfolk Island.


Under this heading, and for the reasons stated, the removal of the present Administrator from the control of the Territory _in favour of a successor of legal ability and proved temperamental suitability i( suggested. . •





To His E xcellency the Right Hono'rable JoHN LAWRENCE, BARON STONE­ HAVEN, a mermber of His Majesty's Most HonoTable Pr··ivy Council,

Knight GTand Ot·oss of the 111ost Distinguished Order of Saint 1J1ichael and Saint George, Companion of the. Distinguished Service Order, Governor-General and in and over the Commonwealth

of Australia.


Pursuant to Your E:x:cellency's commands contained in Letters Patent dated the twentieth day of January, One thousand nine hundred and twenty-six, requiring your Comlnissioner to enquire into anq report upon the system of administration in force in and in connexion with the Territory of Norfolk Island and to investigate any co1nplaints by residents of the Territory in regard to .local conditions with a view to the suggestion of such re1nedial measures as may appear desirable:

Your Commissioner has the honour to report as follows 2. Evidence in matters. within the terms o£ the Commission vvas received in Bydney on the 22nd and 25th January, 1926. On the 27th idem your Commissioner embarked for Norfolk Island, reached that Territory on the 2nd February and was met on landing by the ·Administrator and a .number of the leading residents. Con1munications were at once despatched to the Administrator and the of the Council and Progress Association intimating the scope of the inquiry and the time and date appointed for the opening of the Norfolk Island Session, while notices conveying shuilar information to the residents were prominently exhibited at several points in the Territory. Between the 2nd and 8th February your

Con1.missioner, in order to become intelligent on matters relating to the Island geographically, the residents and their pursuits, traversed the whole of the Territory and closely observed local conditions. .

3. At the Court House, Norfolk Island, on the 8th February, in the presence of a large gathering of the inhabitants, the Commission was read, its scope and the method of conduct of the inquiry explained, and the announcement 1nade that the services of the Commission's Secretary would be available to any resident who might experience difficulty in the presentation of evidence in any matter. This assistance was fully availed of during the Island Session.

4. On the 9th February, 1926, a large and representative public meeting convened by resolution of the Norfolk Island Executive Council, deputed Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs to place before the Commission evidence in relation to adn1inistrative ·and other matters the conditions of which were considered disadvantageous to the Islanders. Among the more important subjects submitted fron1. this public meeting for consideration of your Commissioner

(a) the ·failure of the Government to honour a promise to the Pitcairn lslanders in regard to Crown lands in Norfolk Island; (b) the application of the Norfolk Island Trust Funds ; (c) the ;need for the adjustn1ent of land anomalies; (d) the for instruction in agriculture, &o. ;

(e) the necessity for effective steps in rea:fforestation ; (f) the inadequacy of existing · shipping and educational facilities; (g) the need for amendment of the Liquor Laws ; (h) the constitution of the Executive Council;

(i) the depasturage of stook and the provisions of the·Brands Ordinance;

l 49 b

Evidence, pp. 276-282.


5. The Secretary to the Fanners and Growers Association tendered evidence of alleged disadvantages under which the members of his Association laboured, and the executive members of the Progress Association represented 1natters in which they considered investigation should be 1nade and advanced suggestions for the arrwlioration of conditions regarded as unsatisfactory.

. 6. Between the 9th of February and the 14th April, 1926, _ the reception of ev1dence relating to affairs of administration and alleged public grievances occupied the attention and consideration of your Commissioner. To con1ply ·with the peculiar conditions of the Island the proceedings of the Commission ·were conducted, as far as possible, with freedom from legal formalities and solen1nities, and, with the exception of one complaint, were open to and largely attended by the public. Consequent upon

the limitations in education, range of life, and experience, considerable difficulty was encountered in eliciting evidence from a number of witnesses and the examinations were more protracted in their character than in the case of the few who were capable of lucid statement and the free expression . of their views. · · . -

7. The Administrator, Colonel E. T. -Leane, was present during the whole of the Island proceedings, with the exception of one day-lOth March, 1926-and was provided with convenient accommodation. In the early stages of the proceedings he was not permitted to cross-examine witnesses, the intention being to receive evidence­ in-chief before this course was allowed. However, in the case of the witness Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, whose evidence was incriminatory in character and a direct reflection upon the personal qualifications of the Administrator and Chief Magistrate,

the right to cross-examine was extended · and freely exercised. In the rna tter of a complaint of defamation of character which seriously involved the Administrator and his wife, the right of cross-exan1ina tion was again exercised and the Ad1ninistra tor produced evidence in defence of the charges made. In matters of appeal against

judgment or conviction, heard by the Commission as co1nplaints against the adjudication of the Administrator in his capacity as Chief · Magistrate, testimony in support of the judgment or conviction was elicited and witnesses for the appellants submitted to cross-examination by him. At the conClusion of evidence in general matters and before submission of his sworn statement in reply, the Administrator

was supplied with a full copy of the minutes of evidence, but he declined to recall witness for the purpose of further examination or cross-examination. _

8. An investigation of the School Administration Laws and of alleged private grievances arising from disabilities in connexion with leasehold land and other matters was conducted between the 15th and 30th April, on which date your Commissioner left the Territory. Additional evidence was received in Sydney and Melbourne. The inquiries made disclose a disturbed state of the public mind, due in the main to-

(a) loss of public confidence in the system of administration of justice, and particularly in the present Administrator as Chief Magistrate; (b) disabilities in shipping, land, and other matters; . and (c) social unrest attributed in evidence to the actions and attitude of the

present Administrator, Colonel "E. T. Lean e. Ninety-seven witnesses were examined, and 183 exhibits, chiefly documentary in character, were tendered. The minutes of evidence, together with the exhibits recei.ved, are submitted with this Report.

SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION. The Commonwealth of Australia assumed authority ·over the Territory of Norfolk Islarid under the provisions of the Norfolk Island Act, No. 15 of 1913, which became operative on the 1st July, 1914, control being vested in the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia. The Executive Government of the Territory is vested in a Resident Administrator, who acts as Chief Magistrate. He is under the immediate

direction of the Right Honorable the Minister for Home and Territories, who is charged with the administration of the Norfolk Island Act, and whose Department controls territorial affairs. The Adininistrator is required in pursuance of the .authority vested in him to exercise a general supervision over the- affairs of the Island, and from time to time, when required by the Governor-General, to report to him upon the condition of the Island and all matters occurring therein. He is accountable for the enforcement of obedience to the laws in operation iii the Territory and the proper exercise of other functions prescribed by the Norfolk Island Administration Law, No. 2 of 1913.


2. At the time · of transfer of authority · from the Governn1ent of New South Wales to the Commonwealth, the laws, rules, and regulatio1is in force in Norfolk were, by section 4 of the Norfolk Island Act 1913, continued in force. Since

controlled by the Commonwealth, Acts passed by the Parliaments of the Co1nn1onwealth and of New South Wales considered necessary for the better government of the Territory have been, from . time to time, applied to Norfolk Island by Ordinances issued by · the Governor-General. All Acts, Laws, Statutes, Ordinances, and

1 497

Regulations in force within the Territory are set out in Appendix A. Appendix A.

3. Power is vested in the Governor-General to a:i:nend or repeal by Ordinance any of the Laws in force in Norfolk Island, and to make and amend. Ordinances for the peace, order, and good government of the Territory. 4. A proportion of the time of two officers of the Home and Territories Department, Melbourne, is occunied in the administrative affairs of the I sland.

Within the Territory the officers the administration comprise-- .

(a) the Administrator ; (b) the Government Medical Officer; · (c) the Registrar of Courts, who performs duties appertaining to associated offices ; ·

(d) a Police Constable ; (e.) a Postmaster; .

(/) the Secretary to the. Executive Council; and (g) several part-time and temporary officers such as tide-waiter, fore1nan of works, &c. ·

A school teacher and two assistant teachers are seconded from the Depart1nent of Public Instruction, New South Wales, while two junior pupil teachers are lo cal residents. All appointments \vithin the Territory are rnade by the Governor-General · under the authority of section 9 of the Nmf6lk Island Act 1913. There is, however,

no Public Service Ordinance in force in the Territory to regulate the appointments of officers and other matters connected with the Government service. 5. The salaries and emoluments of . the local staff, with the exception of the Appendix n. allowance postmaster, who is remunerated from a sum provided by the Department of Postn1aster-General, are debited against the· Norfolk Island Trust Account, to Appendix c.

the credit of which is paid all moneys derived as revenue from the Island, supplemented by an annual Commonwealth grant which has varied from £3,000 to £4,000 during the financial years 6. Succinctly · stated, the administrative policy of the Government is directed

to the material, 1noral, and social well-being of the inhabitants, special consideration being given to the improvement of facilities for trade and intercourse with the mainland and the interests of the original islanders.

7. · The Executive Council of Norfolk Island consists of the Administrator, six members elected annually by vote of the natural-born or naturalized adult residents, and six 1nen1bers appointed annually by the Administrator. The Executive Council is charged by section 17 of the E xecuti1.)e Council Ordina-nce 1925 with the fo llowing

duties:-(a) the care, construction, and management of the public roads of Norfolk Island; . .

' (b) the care and management of such commons and public reserves as by law or by proclamation of the Governor-General may have been or may be placed under the care and managen1ent of the Council, but subject to any conditions and exceptions contained in the law or proclamation ; (c) the care, construction, and management of such public works as may

· be entrusted to it bv the Administrator : ·

· Provided that the Administrator may revoke any authority granted by him under this paragraph ; . ·

(d) to olear and keep free from noXious weeds, as defined in the laws relating thereto, all public roads, and all such commons and public reserves as aforesaid, and all other Crown lands in Norfolk Island ; and (e) report .to the Minister, through the Ad1ninistrator, on any 1natter

referred to· the Council for that purpose by a 1nessage signed by the Administrator.

Exhlbn 1.


The Council may transmit to the Administrator, for submission to the Minister, proposals for new ordinances or for the repeal or amendment of existing ordinance or laws ; is empowered to make by-laws which may be enforced, after approval by the Minister, providing for the carrying out of the public works above-mentioned by the labour of all persons domiciled for at least six months in Norfolk Island over 21 and under 55 years of age; for the payment of a rate in lieu where such labour is not provided by such resident, and for the payment of a sum equivalent to the rate in lieu in the case of a domiciled person of or over the age of 55 years who is not exempt from payment by certificate from the Chief Magistrate. The Cmmcil has the further power to make by-laws for the regulation of matters in connexion with its procedure and meetings, and in any other matters within its control, care, or management, and may recover, by summary proceedings instituted before the Chief Magistrate, any penalty not exceeding Two pounds prescribed in such by-laws for any breach thereof. These powers have been exercised and by-laws governing matters within the control of the Council are in operation within the Territory. Sub-section 4 of section 17 of

the Exec·utive Council 01·dinance 1925 provides that the Council may enter into agreement with any person or corporation for the performance of the duties imposed on the Council "rith respect to any specified roads, commons, reserves, and Crown lands, and for the exemption of any person from performance of labour or the payment of rates in lieu thereof. During the currency of any such agreement, which is not effective until approved by the Administrator, the Council is discharged from any duties imposed on it and from any liabilities consequent thereon with respect to such roads, commons, reserves, and Crown lands. No action in this direction, however, has been taken by the Council.

Observations. - The system of administration has been closely examined and mature consideration given to the evidence for and against alteration to the question of general taxation, and to the representations alleging excessive expenditure contained in the petition submitted by the residents to the Right Honorable the Minister for Home and Territories. Without detriment to the welfare of the inhabitants, no

material alteration in the system of general administration can be recommended, nor can any substantial reduction in expenditure be suggested without serious curtailment of the benefits derived by the residents from the educational, medical, postal, bank, police, and other services provided by the Government. Suggestions for the alteration of the present system of administration of justice; for the repeal of the existing School Administration Law and Regulations, and the substitution of provisions for improved and less elaborate administrative arrangements; the repeal or amendment

of:certain sections of other laws and regulations to conform with present requirements, and for the consolidation of the Laws of Norfolk Island, are hereinafter made under thelheadings of the subject matters reviewed.


There is very clear proof in the evidence relating to the administration of justice that the present system is the cause of much dissatisfaction and unrest in the minds of the inhabitants of Norfolk Island. A large number of witnesses, including :aererenc;:e Index the representative of the public, tendered evidence against the present system which

%. justifies the claim that a method of justice administration in keeping with the ideals

E 'd of a British community should be substituted for that at present obtaining. The

1;;: u, formation of . the Progress Association resulted from the dissatisfaction of those 17 '

247 " connected with the initial movement with the method and manner of justice

administration, and the fact that legal redress was not available to aggrieved parties in cases in which it was believed justice has miscarried. The ostensible purpose of Exhibit 1. the petition from the residents to the Right Honorable the Minister for Home and

Territorie.s was to fattract attention to the alleged unsatisfactory system of administration and excessive expenditure, but it is patent that the underlying motive of those responsible for the formation of the Association and submission of the petition was the investigation of matters dealt with by the Magistrate's Court in its civil and criminal jurisdiction, and the amelioration of conditions relating to affairs of justice. It is contended in evidence. generally that the present system, which admits partiality, is responsible for the miscarriage of justice in cases dealt with both by the Administrator as Chief 'Magistrate, and a recently appointed Justice, sitting alone.


2. Under the present law an accmsed. person has not the right of appeal. against vBrdiot · or judgment reeord.ed in the Gou.rt of Summary Jurisdiction. Against the final judgment or order of the Magistrate's Court in its civil and probate jurisdiction, the right of appea,l to the Governor-General .lies iD. section 22 0£ the Adrnin'i$tration Law HH3, but ·only in re~pect of a,ny inun or m.atter at i 1ilsue Ol' respecting property OT any 0ivil right _abov.e the amount or value of One hundred pounds. In indictable

o-ffences against the laws of the Territory provision is made by the Appeal Ordinance 1919 for ippeal to the ·Higb Oourt of Australia on questio;ns of law when application i(ii roade before verdict by· or 011 behalf of the a.ccu.sed persou, Under the provision;;

of this Ordi:o.a..nce, th/'M'.agistrate'$ Court i1'))1y in it£ disGretion, .\3itlwr before or ::.i,fter judgment and withou·t application by or on behalf ~f the accused person, reserve any question 0£ law which arises on the trial for the consideration of the High Court of Australia. In t he event of the convictions of an accused per;;on in whose case a question of law has been r eserved before judgment, the Court may either pronounce

judgment on the conviction and respite execution of the judgment or po i::;t pone the judgment until the question hfis been con$ldered and decided, and ma,y either commit the pf;l:rfe.lon convicted- to pri~ou or admit him to on r~cogniza.nce to appear ttt sucb. time and place a£ directed by the Court and render himself in .execution or to r ~ eive

judgment as the case may be. The Chief Magistrate is required to submit a stat ement of th.~ caee i::iigned by him on}the que$tion of J..a,w r .ese:rv.ed, :together with & ucl1 legal argument or arguments as are~_subm.itted by or oi1 be:W,H of the accus!ild or the 0:rown on the question 0£ faw so reserved.. At the hearin.g of the l:lippea,,l it is uot necessary for the parties to appear ox by Counsel, ·but thlsl q11estion reserved '.!TI.ay be argued l:>y O.!' on beh~l£ of the Crown, and the convicted person or persous if t~y so

desire, T~ High Court ~y~ · ·

(q) comirro the judgment giveu ;:it the tri~l ; (b) ~et a,si

(d) amend the judgment ; ( e) OTder a new t1:ial ; or (f) make such other order &S justice reql:lires : ~ • • L 0 Pr(')Yided that a, coJJ.viction c/;\,nnot be ~t ~~ide t1pou t h e grounc:4s

of jp:),p:rope:.i; aidmis~im1 o.£ evid,e:ac~ if it fLppe::J,rs to the High Comt th;:1,t t).~ evideXl.C.e w;:i,s .IAei'ely of a for ni~l char.a.cter µn. d 119t ma tt1:rial IWT u,pon the g1;01md!3 of im.p1;oper admi$~ion of evid.enGe adduced for t~ defence. · -

3. E;&;iJept a!3 .b efow s~t Pllt. and ~40@ pt iA th.e cas~ of ;:i,n er.roI a.ppa;r.ent on tb.~ f~c e gf tne proceeding§, sect.ii;m. 6 of the Appeals Orilirw,noe i919 p;r;-9 vides t h:;i.t a :i;1 appe,al shall iwt, without t.he §peci~l wave of th.e :S:igh Cou;rt, be brought t o the E~gh Comt from a judgment or sentence pronounced on the trial of a person charged w.itb

an indictable offence against any law in the Territory.

4. There is agreement inthe statements of t·he Admi_nistrator and the testimony of the·ity of the witp,es~es rega;i:din.g the n~~a.. for :;i,ppointnwnt of lo cal Justices ve§t!ild with the nece§~~ry power.I'), ta,1;i,tho;riti0s, p:i;ivileglils, litll.d im.:n;rnnitil:$s to hea;r l;t:P.d determjn.e matt~:ni ip. 1mmina,;ry jurfailiction. '1'.h.e Ad]Jll:pjst:i; ~tor is folly appreciative

of the di:fli{lulties pon;f_ :nm.ting /in oflwer o~tged with. the dual :responsibiliti~s of 1,;,-;c1,"' "'';rator ~nd Chief Ma,g~trate, ;:i,n.d h~ tend~r~d ev:ide:Q.ce di;rected, to the p;i,esent PP· 364 - 0 1.ID.S:;1,tiii;fa cto:i;y position, and S1Jggestio;o.s for ;:1 propedur1t more appropriate than that

at p;rese:o.t followed. lri,ter .ali,,;t,, he sJi,y;;-. .. . . . . . . I have from. the beginning of my tel'm realized the anomaly of the

Adm.itii;;pr l!- t.or, who &h1 mJ..d lroow ev.erythio.g a,nd ip:terest himself in ev.erything and give ad·vice whe11 necessary, being also Chief Magistrate and the only one allowed to adjudicat e in the Cou;rt . . . . . I wtmlq welcon;i.e the l'!,ppointm. ent pf a J ustic.e to assist the Magistrate oµ the B.ench ; my suggestion is that two Justices should decide on questions of fact anel that I should guicle their deliber ations in points of law . , . . . . . In my opinion a '.Eeach aonstituted as suggest f.l cl 1.,y me would be t he· mast

s~t~faqt_ 9q sqlwtj.c;ii:i pf tl+!:l 4j.;fij.p uJtj.e§l M l-9- ,qpe I ear:!l@st!y .d.f:!~Je. . ; . _ . . .

I:n an :Qffic.i;}l ~port t.9 thE} S~.oret~ry, D@pa;rtmen.t pf Rome ;:i,nd Tw;rj.t9ri es , <4ted 3rd June, 19f,;!5~ in th.e :rna, of oo;i;i,vioti.Qn.s re.oordad by mm f,l, fi! Chief M:agistr.ate ip. cases of theft and receiving stolen property charged against members of the fa m.ily

1 49


of Robert McPhail, and in respect of one of which convictions His Excellency the Governor-General was later pleased to grant a free pardon to the convicted person, the Administrator said- · ·

ExhJI,;t su. Might I here suggest that it is an anomalous position for the Administrator to be also the Chief Magistrate. A::; Administrator, I am to all intents and purposes the father of the people, and many times disputes have come before me in my position as Administrator (which I have encouraged to be done from the time I reached the Island so as to endeavour to avoid litigation). In many of these disputes, compromises have been effected and justice done, but, had those cases eventually come before me in the Court as Chief Magistrate, I would have been forced into a position of having knowledge which practically it would be impossible for me not to be influenced by, although theoretically I am supposed not to allow it to influence me, and I recommend that some arrangement might be made by which the Chief Magistrate should be empowered to ,call upon an assistant in such cases where he feels that his own personal knowledge must bias him in his judgment, or that the Ordinance be amended to enable him to call other Justices ou the Bench, so that their aid would be available and-their majority verdict weigh

with him where they would only know the evidence which came before the Court. The position of unconscious bias might be illustrated in this way. If I knew a witness was perjuring himself when he gave certain evidence, must that not cause me to discredit the evidence of that witness ? Assuming I had that knowledge, while two Justices had not, and the decision hinged on his evidence and the majority opinion was against my opinion, I would give a verdict in accordance with the majority opinion of those who were not influenced by that knowledge, but only by the evidence which they had heard.

5. Following these representations, Mr. Hemy Stephenson Edgar was appointed a Justice of the Peace by commission issued on the 27th August, 1925, and the powers, authorities, privileges, and immunities of the Chief Magistrate were, by Proclamation dated 25th November, 1925, conferred upon him. This appointment, however, has not improved the system nor removed the causes of dissatisfaction. The provisions of the Administration Law require the .Magistrate--in the case of the recent appointee, a. man 77 years of age without legal qualificatious or knowledge in procedure---to

sit alone for the purpose of adjudicating in respect of any information or complaint or any proceeding or matter, civil or criminal. The Magistrate is therefore at the time of bearing and determining any civil or criminal matter without the counsel of any other justice in the reception of evidence, the arrival at judgment or verdict, and in matters of assessment.

6. A single .Magistrate without legal qualifications or a sound knowledge of the laws of evidence and procedure- particularly in their application to criminal jurisprudence-combined with ability to correctly assess evidence, must inevitably fail in the satisfactory discharge of the judicial or quasi-judicial functions of his office.

Apart from the dangei· of a Magistrate without such qualifications and without guidance failing to correctly interpret and apply the law in criminal charges and civil actions, there is the possibility of prejudice, originating in the mind of a single justice from a prior lmo,vledge of circumstances not admissible in evidence. Actual prejudice was created by beforehand knowledge of circumstances not disclosed by the sworn testimony of witnesses, and did infii.1ence the Court to the detriment of the accused, in a case , in which the Administrator as Chief Magistrate presided. In a criminal charge (Police v. McPhail) the Chief Magistrate, before recording a verdict of " guilty " , said-

. . · . . . . . . I have a knowledge of this case which has not come out in evidence, and

I vvish to make it clear that a prosecution a_ bsolutely for this reason.

· 7. Legal advice or representation is not available locally, and in this respect accused persons or parties to civil actions in Norfolk Island are at a disadvantage. This is not, of course, advanced against the system, but it is submitted that the provisions of the laws and ordinances governing the administration of justice, together with the silence of the law on -the right of appeal, except in such matters as are prescribed, exemplify the need of a system more appropriate to a Territory of the Co mmomNea.lth than that now in operation. U£1der existing conditions there must inevitably remain that lack of confidence stressed in evidence before this Commission

by the many residents from whom testimony was received upon the subject of justice administration. 8. It is considered that the right of appeal to the Governor-General should lie a,gainst the verdict or judgment of the Court in any criminal matter which does not co me within ·the meaning of the Appeals Ordinance 1919, and against the final judgment or order of the Court in its civil or probate jurisdiction in respect of any sum or matter at issue and respecting property or any civil right above the amount or value of Twenty pounds-in Norfolk Island an amount large in comparison with values on the mainland.



(a) That provision be made by amending ordinance for the appointment of of the peace with the necessary powers, authorities, privileges, and immunities,

enabling any two Justices sitting with the Chief Magistrate as Chairman of such bench of magistrates to hear and determine by majority any matter within the civil or criminal jurisdiction of the Court, except in respect of any sum matter at issue or respecting property or any civil right above the amount or value of Twenty pounds, and except upon the investigation of any charge declared indictable or upon the trial of any person charged with an indictable offence against any law in force within the Territory.

(b) That four reputable residents of Norfolk Island be appointed to the Commission of the Peace in equal numbers of original Islanders or their descendants and of other persons who have acquired interest in the Territory.

(c) That the Administration Law, 1913, in relation to Appeals, be amended by provision for the right of appeal to the Governor-General against the judgment or order of the Magistrate's Court in its civil and probate jurisdiction in respect of any sum or matter at issue or respecting any property or civil right above the amount or value of Twenty pounds, provided that any such appeal be filed with the Registrar of Courts, Norfolk Island, within fourteen days of such judgment or order, and a fee of One pound be paid at the time such appeal is filed.

(d) That provision be made for the right of appeal to the Governor-General against the verdict or judgment of the Magistrate's Court in all offences against the criminal laws in force within the Territory where such right of appeal is not prescribed in the "Appeals Ordinance 1919," provided that any s1:1ch appeal be filed with the Registrar of Courts, Norfolk Island, within fourteen days of such verdict or judgment, and a fee of One pound be paid at the time such appeal is filed.

(e) That provision be made in the proposed Amending Appeals Ordinance for regulating such appeals, and the proceedings in, relating to, and consequent on such appeals.



It is not considered necessary to deal exhaustively with the subject of the claims advanced by the original Pitcairners still living at Norfolk Island, or to review at length the history of the removal of the inhabitants of Pitcairn's Island to Norfolk Island in 1856, but it is deemed advisable that certain representations made in evidence and by memorial should be brought under notice in this Report. On behalf of the original Islanders, Mr. Henry Menges submitted in evidence that the definite promises of the authorities that Norfolk Island should be the absolute property of the Pitcairners their descendants had not been honoured. Extracts from Parliamentary Papers dealing with the transfer of the Pitcairners, and the policy of the Government for some years :Exhibit 16· subsequent to the transfer in regard to land grants to the exclusion . of outsiders, were advanced in support of the claim. Witnesses, including Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, whose

evidence represents the views of the residents of Norfok Island as expressed at the public meeting on 9th February, 1926, and Mr. Cornelius Quintal, an original Pitcairner, 1 , .

claimed that the Government had departed from the promises under which the original Pitcairners transferred to Norfolk Island. Of nineteen residents who on the 26th February, 1926, were the last surviving Pitcairners, twelve submitted to the Comn:1ission a memorial requesting that their grievances be represented to the Government. Of the

seven whose signatures are not subscribed to the memorial, two ·were absent £rom the Island, three were unable to sign owing to infirmity, and two declined.

2. Norfolk Island was formally proclaimed a British possession in 1838. After its final abandonment as a penal settlement in 1855 , and consequent upon their solici­ tations to the British Government, arrangements were made for the transfer of the Pitcairn Islanders. The limited area of Pitcairn's Island, and the privations endured by the inhabitants, gave rise to the expressed desire for removal .to a larger and tmoccupied island. In advising the Pitcairn Islanders of the British Government's decision to

allow the inhabitants to remove to Norfolk Island, Mr. B. Toup Nicolas, British Consul

1 501

l'arl. Papr r:;, House of Commons, .

5th Febnmry, 1857, p. 11.


of the Society Islands, through whom ·th~ Islanders' representations were submitted, wrote as followe :-To th~ Pitcairn Islander~.

lVly Mar :E'.ri?n®, fo aQCOJ.daP,~~ with yow wiSM/'l, 90.nv~yed to me tbJ;pug_h r~ur l1;1te lam~nt£Jd_ Chief M.agwtrn~~ l\fotth~w McCoy, I s:1idwes~ed the Earl qf l\faln:H~Bbuxy oPc the i;mPJ~Qt ot ygm- r~moyA,l ~!ther wholly or !Jl p_art to ::ijorfolt Island, provided tb.e Goverpmen,t would con~ent to ced~ it to you. ..... No;riolk Island, will be available for the settlemel'.lt of the '.Pitcairn Islande;rs o·r a£ mariy as will remove thither by the end of the year 1854. Her Majesty1s Government will also take meastll'es ii<:> pPovide a vessel which shall call off Pitcairn's Isla.nd towards the close of that year for the purpose of removing -the people to Norfolk fala.IJ.d , ·

While communicating this intelligence to yo1.1., l a,m at the same time to acquaint you that you wil be pleased to understand that Norfolk Island e:timot be ' ceded ,, to the Pitcairn Islander·s, but that grants will be made for allotments of land to the difa:u;ent families ; and I am desired fwther -to make known to you that it is not a,t present intei;ided to ;1llow .any other clas~ of se ttlers to resip.e or occupy ll}nil on the Island .. .... .


The,l wa,,a affoot~d by t.he Gove;rn.roent iP J uue, 1856. · 3. Th.e el€1ii1,n of the Pitcairners and th@ir d0sDeJJ.dant£ to posoos&ory rights in the whol~ .of the land at Norfolk Island has b6~n p1:evwuij}y submitted em their behalf, and the decision of the-authorities has been conveyed to the p@titioners. - It is claimed that the re~son for the apparent change of Gov~r;ument policy .i!! hi:ud wattfrrs, ~nd in co.:u.nexiou with certain ·hous~iS which w~re in the pos.sessio11. of the Isl~nd~rs jor a n1unbe:i:· of yeariS ~ft~;r &nival at Norfolk I~land1 h~s. n~v~;r; b~e11 t?tat~d to the ~a,ti.Bfocti011 of th(;. Islande:riS c911.ce.rned. lnv~stig.atio:n§ we:r~ iJJ.tQ the cliilNl 0£ th~ '.P.itoai1rD.ers, a:g.d. the deciiion QJ the~ Gov~1:.ui11e.nt th~t the'S ?ind th~iJ_ d~~cend~nts haY~ no claim in Crown lands or the Governm~l}t h91JS(;;S. which they w~~e :a,llow~d tQ occupy at the time of arrival at Norfolk Island was intimated to the Islanders. 1VIr. F. JYl.

Bladen, F.R.G.S., Bfti-rister -.alPlaw and I.Jib:rarian, who, in oollecting th~ leading data r~garding th~ s~ttlemeni of the Pifoairners mi Nor.folk l~land, exa:ouned .tLll Parlia,J;Mnta:ry Papers and records dealing with the transfer, and after an exhaustive investigation, in which he believes that not a single source of information was overlooked, says-

" ~:rha t the Islanders have no good, legal backing for their claim to possessory rights·in the soil of the whole of Norfolk Island is unquestionable."

4. In September, 1857, Governor Denison visited the Island, drew up a code of laws, and left with the Chi~{ lv.fogistrnte G~J'tAiin. i~trnQtion~ de;~,ljng, inwr al!ia, with the l'arl. .Parers apportionment of )p,nd. a~ directe

6~~:o~s,. allotment, "not in · any ca~e e~c~edin~: 50 acre.s. ~R In reg~rd to pro,perty other thaµ 16th May, 1863, 1 d b h G · D : d d . l . h - I 1 d h h

PP· 10, 20. a,n - 1 _ ot._ _ oyerno:rs .. emson an _ oun,g ina.. e 1t c ~a+ to t e s a.:n · .. er£ t flit t e

Bladen. up_alienated live stock7 stores1 tools2 and ·public buildings were the prQp~rty pf the C;rown and 110t the community. I:µ a .communication to Georg~ H . . Nobbs (clergyman, and l(?ader of the community,·, dq,ted 19th Jun.e, 1859? Governor J)eni50IJ. informed hi1;n ~f{j~Jl:~lLife, that1 unless allotments were ·surveyed and gra,:µted, they r~mained Crown lands. Yol. I., p. ,ns. r=- Wh t d ti.. · · 1 I l d b ti.. ffi h

D. . ~ :ever WMl . tq :-4:tl origin.~ .. ~ a,u, &rn y ,-1!,€} o car~ w o

SUI)~rvised th~ji :v~roovail, ~nd which mjght ht1,v~ giv~;q_ rise to the l;)eljef th~t the i.gla.,nd w~§ to b~ th~ir ff~Glµ~ive p;roperty, wais without t;he, ~~n.ctio1_1 of th~ GQvt=rr:µrn~nt, aind was ce;rt~inly not bi.ridi;ng Qn th~ C:rowp.. ;B~tw~en 1856 a;r,id 1885 la:qµ w~s ~9qµ-j;r~d jn }".etlt~ (~~ . Ninfolk Jala,p.d by g;rai:nt o;r; pu1;Ghs1se by 25 n~w s.~ttle:rn who, . with f~w exc~ptio:µs, ifil 1 ~i~s~nS~s5. appij&J.' to have b~~P- ~dmitt~cl by t .h~ I~ljl,nders tlu~m~elvea 90:qtrnry to thei.:r; wi~h

or.igin~lly ~x.:p:r~~~ed and the jntentio;ns of Gov~rnor Peniimn tD r:~q~lud~ ·st;,;1a,ng~f~. 0. Due to the fo,ct that (he Govern}'.Ile1rt hot1,se.s, situat~ w.ithm the Q9vernment Reserve at Kingston? Norfolk Island~ were falling into :i:uill-s, the Governor of N~w South · ,v&les depided · in 1903 that, oonditfonal up0:p. · the n+aintenance o:f the premises in a

proper state of repair and in good order ~nd condjtion, 9ontinµ~d possession free of rental would be granted to the 'Pitcai:rners or their children or grand-ehHclren who were in Q<;pup~tjg:n of the p:r;optH=tin~. Subs~qµ pro:pp~~J~ to 09ntinu~ ocpvprlition under su9Ji 9911dition~ were pW;Gijd befQ,re th~ Pitc~irmrrf o:r th@ir d~~G~~dflint~. W4e.r~ p:,;qpot?~l~ w~:i:~ rej~gted, it Wfi¥ cJ.~0ide.~ th~ hoµ~tJ~ sJwnld be va,oatijd. · by th~ OpGUpa,gts and 1)9.~S.~S§jg:J} t~~@n by th.~ QrQW!]., 4 p~tjtjQ:q W4Wh ~111b<1ruad ~ Plaim tG aill . the l~nds -of th.~ i§l~nd, slJP.-{l to th.e !lQl\S.~~ iP- th~ G9V~P-ro{(nt R~~~;rv~ at 1\iµg~tmi, W~§ ~mbmitte.d. to t~ Gove,mmeJJ-t by ~Qnl~ of the IsJa,nQ}~f~. r~ petiti91J. W,t§ ;rei.~JT~d to the

Gove.wor .pf N~w .8.ontli W a,les, who soiigh-t tht3. a,dviq~ of th~ State. .A-bwm~y~Gep.ernl,


and an op:il'1io11 was obtained from the late Sir Edmund Barton, K.C.1VI.G. , an eminent jurist and Judge of the High Court of Attstralia. The opinion \vas to the effect that the houses situated in the :r,eserve were the property of the Crown, and that the only land which had been granted to the residents was that conveyed . to them in their Deeds of Grltnt (each head of a family liavitigreceived a free grant bf about 50 acres). The Crown's rights in its propertie~ at N'orfolk Isl_ a_ nd_ ~vas later decided by tlt~ linp~r~al Gov.eriiinent, su~h decisi~n beµig co:nfumed by His ~Iajest;y the late King Edward vp .. Notices were subseq11ently served upon the occupiers of the houses; and occupation licences were submitted to them for completion. Some of the Islanders accepted the conditions_ and remaiiied in u11distmbed possession ; others rejected the proposals, and were; in the early part of 1908; compelled tb vacate the premises;

Observations.-Although the rights of the Crown in Norfolk Island were decided many years ago, and such decision was communicated to those responsible for the petition, the representations made tu this Co:tn1:nission have b_ een briefly dealt with, in order that the inhabiutnts might beMme folly acquainted with the facts. This should make the position clear to the Islanders, and remove what has been advanced as a factor 1

in the Uhi'est in evidence at the present time.


. The followifig resolution was cattied at the public meeting held 01:i 9th February, 1926 · ~~

.- "L~nd matters ~hould be thoroughly investigated and any anomalies set right."

Under this heading the cases of Albert Edwar~ Quintal;, Ge~ald_ Allen1 and George Edwatd Nobbs were advanced in the matter of l~nd selected u1_1der the "Ca~rington" system, which ·

1 503

provided for the granting of land conditio~al upon eligibility of the applicant and upon certain improvements being effected. '.l.'he names submitted are those of Islanders E,idcucc, who; it is stated, sel'ec!~d allotmen~ a~d effect.ed the necessa_ry improvements, but pp. 44' 4 5 · were ~e~ed gF~P~· . The clailll_ ?f. Albert Edward Quintal was dealt with by g~l~!~:s i1~i~rt

Comm~ss1~mer. O~ver p~ 1906. Claimant was then refused _ a gr~nt o:q. the grounds PP· 25, 26. • that his link m the title was bad, but was granted a lea~e of port1cm of 54 (c) 1 25 acre~ 2 roods, 22 perches, on the usual terms and conditions. Mr. Quintal regards the annual lease rental of £2 excessive.

Observations.- Considering t4e situation

The allegation of_ ifijtistice .in . ~his case, therefore, i.s iiot supp~t1x:d by evidence in the matter of the otlgmal applicatidn or the lease now held by Mr. Qumtal. 2. In the case of :M.r • . Geral~ Allen, _lessee of Lot 155 (c), comprising 23 acres, a 28 years' l~se ,vas.granted m.1900 at the assessed annual lease value of 6d. per acre.

Mr. Allen did_ ~o.t ma~e. any_ representat~o:ns_ to t~e Colll¥1ission on ~ath, but inqu~ed as to the poss1b1lity of his bemg grahted the land m fee srmple. Of the 23 acres, twelve are under intense cultivation. Observation.- 1VIr. Allen's appp.cation for a grant was lodged after the

" Carrington " system had been withdrawn, and it is not therefore possible to effect any alterntion in the conditions under which the lease is held. 3. I :q. 1906 investigaticm was made in the matter of the claim submitted by Mr. George Edward Nobbs for a @'.~nt under the " Carrington " system in respect of

Portion 156 (b), of 21 acres 1 rood. 1'he decision was that a gTant might be issued to the Commissioner claimant provided no adverse c~aim wa.s disclosed, and .subject to the production of ?Jt';,".r;_ ~P""t, proof to the satisf~ction 0£ }~e B?ard of}nspectorn tha~ improvements were ?ommenced under the authority of a Carrmgton. system penmt, and the completion of the

prescribed improvements. Pri~r to the investigation, cl!l,imant had executed a lease under protest. All conditions have been complied with, and there appears no reason _ to doubt the claimant's statement that the improvements were commenced under the authority of a permit, and that he is entitled to the issue of a free grant in respect

Gf the portion herein referred to. Mr. N0bbs submitted to this Commission a statement of his case; together with copies of co:tnmunications which. passed between hi m and · the.1s,1iibit w. Chief Magistta te. ·


That .ta.vorable considira-tion be given t·o the issue 't)f :a free grant to G~orge Edwarrd Ntibb's in t~sp-ec-t of Portton 15'6 (b) of 21 ,cres t rood o perches. F.8557.-2



.1 '


4. ..A.ttention was drawn to the circumstances co!lnected with the granting of l!lvidence, p. 66 leases of Lots 98 (a) and 99 (b). The witness said-,--

.Appendix . Jlap.

. . . . There has also been considerable dissatisfaction in Crown leases which have eventually come under the control of one individual. I refer to blocks 98 (a) and 99 (b), or two blocks in that vicinity. The leases were granted to two individuals named Werner, who, I understand, were not on the Island when the application was made. Both of the original lessees have left the I sland and the property is now sub-let to Major Down. What is felt as a great injustice is that these .blocks could be taken up and the applicants having left the Island apparently not conforming with the conditions of the lease as far as it is generally understood . . I understand that one of the lessees did live on the block and worked for a part of the time. It was generally believed that these blocks were not available to Norfolk Islanders. I consider that if the allotment of these blocks .had been dealt with by a land board it would have been in the best interests of the public . . It appears to me that something not altogether quite right occurred in the matter of leasing this land. I do not know in whose name the two blocks now are registered, but I understand that the

father, by some means, acquired both of them and handed power of attorney to his son, Constable Werner. I submit that in the circumstances of the Island at present and the requirements for land for cultivation purposes, that it is detrimental to the best interests of the Island that the two blocks should be held by one person. In that part of the Island one of those blocks, about 24 acres, is sufficient for a person to make a livelihood and I do not think such a condition would obtain had a land board been in existence.

5. In May, 1920, application was 1nade by James Werner for a Crown lease of Portion 99 (b) of 24 acres, the lease being approved by the Governor-General in Council on the 13th October, 1920. On the 12th October, 1920, Albert Louis Werner, by his attorney, S. C. Werner, applied for a Crown lease of Portion 98 (a) of 23 acres 3 roods 0 perches, approval being given by the Governor-General in Council on the 11th February, 1921. Both lessees are stated to be brothers of Sidney Charles Werner, a constable of the New South Wales Police Force, at that time performing duty i..n the 'l'erritory. No prior application for the lease of these areas had been received. On the 5th February, 1923, upon application by the lessees and the recon1mendation of the Administrator of Norfolk Island, the leases were transferred to Louis Francis Albert Werner, father of the lessees, after improvements of the value of £600 had been effected. At the present time the leases are sub-let to Major G. L. Down for a period of seven years, approval of the Governor-General in Council having be8n obtained on the 18th March, 1925. These areas adjoined and were fenced by the original lessees as one block. Densely c?vered with lantana and other growth before occupation, sections of the areas have smce been transformed into well-attended and profitable banana plantations. It is clear that the leasing of these two lots was a family arrano·ement, the purpose of the brothers Werner being to provide a home for their parents.



While there is no apparent irregularity in the submission of the

applications and in the subsequent transfer of th_ e leases, it is considered that the Adn1inistration should, in view of the limited area of land available.for strictly enforce the conditions of lease, particularly the provision relating to .residence upon the and prior to giving approval to the sub-letting of any leasehold land for a lengthy

penod, give consideration to residents \vho are not land-holders and who rnay be anxious to secure an area ·and willing to apply it to ctiltivation and residential purposes. Inspection of leasehold properties should not be neglected, as very obviously has been the case in the past.



_ . Strictly speaking, the following rna tters brought before · this Comn1ission have no bearing upon the land laws of the Territory; but as they are in a sense related to land affairs, it is considered not inappropriate to state the relative facts under the above heading. Difficulty has been • experienced in the ad1ninistra tion of estates with the result that, in som_ e instances, fin ality has not been reached. In at least two cases the transfer of portions of the estates was represented as irregular and in contravention of · the tern1s of the will of the original grantee. In his evidence the representative llvldenc• ,, v. se! of the public drew attention to the unsatisfactory position in respect of Lots 31 , 75,

and 13.

2. The witness, Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, an executor of the will of the late Jonathan and to whom probate was granted, stated that specific portions of Lot 31 had

been allotted, as far as possible, to those beneficiaries named in the will. The difficulty Eviueme, p. a1, confronting the executor in the administration of this estate. has been that, assun1ing

the testa tor to have been legally possessed of the land at the tin1e of his death, would the condition governing the holding of land apply to on,e of the beneficiaries who removed


from the Island as a minor and died abroad, probably intestate ? If so, what is to be done with his portion allotted to him under the wilL In reply to the statements of this witness the Administrator and Chief Magistrate said- . . . . The title to the land is good ; the will of Jonathan Adams is quite clear in its directions

to the executor, and there is no reason c>.pparent to me why the beneficiaries should not have had the use and enjoyment of the land willed to the (grand) son who left the Island, and who by doing so plainly forfeited his legacy. ·

3. A copy Qf this will is in exhibit: In respect of the portion of the estate Exhibit 1 81 bequeathed to James Sherm_an Christian, the beneficiary who removed froin the Island, the will of Jonathan Adams reads-. . . . The remaining portion to be equally djvided between William Roswell Marsh, Eliza Sabia, lVIary Isabell, and James Sherman Christian (grandson), sho'uld the said James Sherman Christiauleave Norfolk Island, his portion to be equally divided between the above five named. The said James Sherman Christian not to have power to dispose of any part of his portion.

Observation .- -In the circumstances the executor should effect · distribution of the residue of the estate as directed by testator. Failing action by him, it is competent for the beneficiaries to apply to the Court for the necessary authority, and, in terms of the will, administer that portion of the estate bequeathed conditionally to James Sherman Christian. · ·

4 . . Lot 75., of 50 acres 1 rood 17 perches, was originally granted to the late Isaac Christian, who died intestate on the 30th October, 1877. Under the Succession and ' Vilis Law then in operation, Mirian1 Christian, "\vidow of the grantee, held and exercised her life interest. After her death the property was equally distributed among twelve surviving children. Three of the children, however, were not at Norfolk Island, neither were their heirs, if any. In the distribution of the estate, under Deed of Partition,

dated 5th October, 1916, portions were set aside for the absent children; but, prior to the distribution, the interests of some of the children in the right, title and interest in their father's estate had been disposed of. The difficulty has been how to determine whether or not the three children who left Norfolk Island are alive, and, if so, if they have any interest in the estate. The portions allotted to them under the Deed of Partition are under the control of Ruth Nobbs, administratrix in trust. The right, title and interest of five of the children were purchased by Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs so1ne 30 years ago, and the right, title and interest of two other members were purchased by :Mr. Frederick vV. Pears.on. These transactions were recorded after the three children referred to left Norfolk Island, and did not in any way affect their interests in the estate.

Both Messrs. Nobbs and Pearson were signatories to the Deed of Partition, and were allotted the por-tions purchased by then1 from the seven 1nembers of the familyl who transferred their interests. The whereabouts of the three children- Ackland, Sidney, and Florence-who left Norfolk Island is unknown; they have not been heard of since 1906, 1898, and 1908 respectively.

The difficulty in this case could be overcome by granting letters of

ad1ninistration upon application · of the next of kin-provided that the Court in considering such application acted upon the presumption of death after the prescribed absence of seven years and .the failure of reasonable inquiries to elicit information respecting the · absent children-and the equal division of the three portions between

those children or their descendants by law entitled to possession. 5. Lot 13, of 50 acres 1 rood 16 perches, was originally granted to John Evans, junior, by deed, dated 14th September, 1859. It is . alleged that a will purporting to have been attested by John Valentine Maunsell Evans, which directed disposal of an

estate embracing Lot 13 was a the outco1ne of conspiracy between certain persons to deprive others of their rights and interests in the property. Evidence in support of · this serious allegation is not available. Probate was granted in the year 1892 prior to the present system of administration of estates under the \Vills, Probate,

and Administration Act of New South )Vales, and in common with a number of others registered over a lengthy period prior to 1898, ·the will in question cannot be traced. The circumstances upon which the validity of the will is questioned are- · ·

(a) that the testator left Norfolk Island prior to the date of attestation of the will and never returned; (b) that whereas the will was attested by a mark purporting to be that of the t estator, John lVIaunsell Evans, the testator was

competent to write his name; and ·

(c) the name of a witness is incorrectly written, inasmuch as the final "e ." in the surname, Metcalfe, is not present in the questioned signature.

1 50 5

Evidence , p. 173.

Exhiblt 180.

Evidence, pp. 53, 54.

The will, the o:@.ieer ma4e ?opy in the official

and t};),e atleged have the pnnc1pals m of the

and who received 1mmechate bentJfitsJrom ,the . . There are eight to the Deeds of Partition, dated 23rd December, 1897, and possessiOn in t heir nght, title, and inte:iest o£ the estate has been undisturbed saiice that date. Oeservatio1t:- lt is obvious that the rleterillin::i!tioh of t h l:l Ooutt iii the ililllp €Jsition of this estate could not be set aside, unless proof were adduced t he will \VM thVlllid ahd that the abs€ji1ce of the original will would he fatal to ltny upu1 i the grounds advanced to this CtYinhiissio1i.

. 6. Mr. E. C. submitted the need ior investigation :in the matter of

dispos,al ot of Lot BO act e§ 2 3q of t he cb nditiqns of

the w1ll of Abraham Blatchly QUintal, the origillal grantee, \Vas t hat the la11d s_ hotild not be sold, leased, or mortgaged t o any one £a.mily. Two ot the

H. and Quintal, of the portions by t hem,

the former to Oarlotte the latter. to J MkE!oii, how Sydney.

It is tpl:Lt t he of the will ahbtutl have bel'!h departea _!tom, ahtl

was !Ji er.tor r13gistering the transfers tlf t he pdttions

illsposed of: The Ifivestiglit mn shtnvs that Ca,riotte SMphertson the

lif interest of Walter H. Quintal on 23rd November, 1915, for the stU:ti nf £80 ; that Walter H. Quintal died on 25th November; 1920, and that on fUrther payment of the sum of £50; a full and complete title was acquired by transferee fro m Leslie Quintal who, under power of attorney, acted on behalf of Coleridge h Quintal and Charles G. P ; the sole surviving childrel! of _Waltm1 H . Quintal. This por·tion consists of 8 acres 3 roods 0 perches, shown on Norfolk Ishi nd plan as 87 (b) . Under similar circumstances, the portion allotted tu Oharles Gt artt Quintal \Vas transferred to a person other than a member of testator's family.

Observati6n .......... A1though the will provided, that t he testator's estate s:iieulcl be dividecl between " . . . . . . my six childi'en how liviiig for theit Use du ring

their lifetime and fo r their heirs thereafter, but portions of lahd shall not bl:l stJld, leased, br mortgaged by them t d any ofie dutside iJhe family," t hese t etrtis "\:Vt>ula iippear to be rendered nUll and void by the absence of further prtrvision det erhiinihg the effect of disposal, lease, or mortgage by the b·ene:ficiai'ies·. 'l'here is therefore, any eviden.ce of iii the transfer of the portions of this estate referred t b by the witness.

EXECUTIVE COUNClL-OO:N'S'l'ITl:JTlON AND The and powers of the Council at No rfo llc Island have

formed, su,bjects for local discussion for a considerable . _ _

.2. is to constitution of the Council- P art II., Section 5 (1)

and (2), oi Ordinance No. 2 of 1925, as under :-" 5.- (1) There shall ]?e an Executive Councii consisting of tweive merrtbers, _ . . appoil!t.ed and elected _ as hereihaftei provided. __ (2) The Adn::tinistratO :r; shall also be eg; officio a member of tlie ExMlitive

Qobncil, and when pr¢sent , at nieetings of t he

Council, and, whei1 s9 ptesiding1 he shall Jiave an otdill!lrY vote as a inem.l5er Of .t he Council ; ancl, in a:dilit iQli, when votes o:£ the ineinbers present are equally divided, shall liave a casting vote." At a public me-eting held at Norfolk lsiahtt et11:ly in ]"ebruary, the fo llow­

ing rest>ltition wils uattietl :-" Council- Should be wholly elected, t he Adininisti·ator

should not be ex officio a memher. J; and Councillor C. C. Nobbs was deputed to place the views of the residents before Commissioner. , _ .

4. According to his evidence, discussi<;nis· have tahm pla_ ee on this matter both inside and outside of the Council as t o tlie a-dvant age gf having all the members elected, one of the principal reasons for the proposed change being that j t felt that the six appoin ted members were not r epresentatJve 6! the restaen.ts. It hlld been noticeable on many.occasipns when Mr. N obbs had taken part in t li l3 -ptuceedings that the six appointed member's wet'e up.qer the impressiOn , that they uiitlt\i' ah obligation

to vote for wliat was t ermed "the government.'• It Was by having all the

members elected_ they would represent a ·true the electots, would be no suggestion Of oias in their votes ; tlley also recbg:i1t.ZB- r'esponsibility


better than if some were appointed. Mr. Nohbs added that at a somewhat recent meeting of the EJ}:ecutive Council the present Administrator intimated to the Council that he favoured a wholly elected Counci1. · This witness could not quote any specific instance when the appointees had voted under influence, but there many instances

when he P,ad been prfilsent the voti!lg VV{LS op. party lines. .

5 . . The advanced against the -Administrator being ex a member of

the Executive Co uncil is that the members feel much freer to discuss matters when the Administrator is not present. - - .

6. The vvitness instanced the influence created by the presence of the Admjnis-

1 507

trator upon an Executiye Council meeting. He stated- Evidence, P· 57·

. . . the resolution Of! tlw subject of Licel!sing t;>f :j)oats and was dealt with by the

Administrator in a manner which, in my opinion, is (;lntire)y c;lerog l:l,tory to the position held by Colonel Leane. The Executive Council 4a4 pacssed a resolutiqn in the mc;mth of October last practically rejecting the whole The matter 'VaS referred back to the Executive Council with a request that certain shoJ!ld be t ake!l in t() t]f!;l forwarc;led. Subsequei!tly the matter was

dealt with in the Cou{lcil, Colonel1.eli:J.!t1 being present of the meeting, wheJ! in reference to this proposed he !fiage use qt the expressiqp, " Whether you like it or not, it wiH become law " or words to that effect. had the effect of practically intin:#ating SOJI!e of the members of the Council, who voted contrary to their ideas and wis4es in this mllttter.. '.fhis instance is cited as a further ground why the Admjnist_ rator i?.hould not be an ex-offic io memper of the Council,

7. On his own behalf Mr. Nobbs expressed the · opinion that the powers of Evidence, p . 55 . the Executive Council should be anQ. all proposed Ordinances submitted to it and the decision of the Council whether for or against cwted upon accordingly. 8. Of ten other Exe9utive Co-qncillors examined, the President and others

expressed themselves in favour of a wholly elected Council, three continuance as at present co:qstituted. O:q.e advocated its abolition and the substitution therefor of a Commission of four, an(l two expressed no opinion. .

9. Opinions the Councillors who gave evidence are equally divided on the question of the Administrator being ex qfficio a member of the Executive Council. Reasons expressed by those who do no·t favol.1r it are somewhat similar to those expressed by : M:r. C. C. R. Nobbs, mention being made of the expression" Whether you like it or not, it will become law," said to have been uttered by the Administrator at the Executive

Council meeting whe:q the p:roposed al).d wa§ being considered

by that body. In his evidence the Administrator says:- Evidence, pp. 359-362.

At the election of the 1924-25 Council I announced my sympathetic agreement with the proposition that if there were six nominated members who voted with the Administrator, and he attended the meetings and had two votes, those who were elected by the people had no voice in the meeting, and at that election I nominated five of those who had stood for election, feeling that the men who had sufficient

spirit to seek election were those who should be best to serve the community. I actually nominated only one Councillor, Mr. Seymour Buffett, as a Pitcairner, as the sole living represent ative of the old order of Chief Magistrates , a.nd as a good citizen. At that meeting I announced that because I felt my presence might cause some of them to be diffident in expressil'!g themselves I would not attend any Council meeting unless I was invited to be present for some specific purpose. At the election of the 1925-26 Council I fo llowecl t he S(l,ffie plan. I h fl,ve only been at one meeting of the Council in the last eighteen month1!, and

the n I wa:;, specially requested to be present. I have never discussed Council business with any Councillor with a view to infiuencip.g his vote. I qave never suggested to any Councillor how I would like him to vote, and there could never have been any block vote in the Council due to the fact that I had the slightest influence on t4e voting Of by so-called nominated Councillors. When the Counc!l obtaineq the latest Ordin:}nce which gave t hem increased powers I urged them very strongly not to allow liberty to develop into licence, bl!t to use their new pQwer judiciously, and to their greatest advant11ge , so that they might

gain more power. The fir st practical demonstration of the Council's mentality was given in the case of the Boating Ordinance, on which your Honour has taken consi<;le:r;able evidence, in connexion with which a resolution was passed requesting the Administratol' to deal directly with the Governor-General instead of the for :ij:ome and Territo!ies ao; clef!rly set out in the Ordin.anQe. It was really tQO ab:;ngd .

I tender a copy of the Executive Council Minute referred to, and this was an Ordinance which, in my opinion, did not come within the new Executive Council Ordinance ; it might have been posted without refetence to them. I treated them with the gt'eatest courtesy; I was repaid with discourtesy, and a display Exhibit 83. of iguor&cnoe almost upbelievable in an official body. I pointed out to my Minister in my 41A, of 29th

Octqber, 1925, which has already been t eng.ered to yol!_ Honour, t!lat at a f!pecialrp.eeting of the Executjve Council held on 13th October,-1925, for the purpose of considering a motion of Councillor Nobbs for a wholly Rxhibit s1. elected Counci!, there we!'e t en Councillors the voti-qg was four to _on t4e most v-ital matter which could come before them. 'rhree Councillors did not show sufficient interest in the matter to vote

at all. So that there is reason to doubt that the· E:x:ecutive Council itself is in faveur of bring a wholly elected body. In my 60A of 8th December, 1925, which your Honour also has , I have pointed out that the Exhibit 85 votip.g on a resolqtion h1 corp1ex!on with t4e Boating Orsiinl}nce s4owed two votes tl!at 'Yas t he proposer and the seconder, seven of the Councillors did not ·vote either way, and that up to that date

five regular ;1nd four special meetings of the Council had been held, none of them disclosing an y evidence of any constructive work or indicating anything bi1t a striving on the part of Councillor Nobbs t o obtain ill.Oreased powers for the Council while. simultaneously endeavouring to stultify the power and authority of the In t4ei!' pgl;>lj !,:. worlrs, h11-ving :roegarg to Qltr!:l ap,d of roads,

the utter neglect of the Council to carry on effectively the intentions of the principle for which the personal

Exhibit 86.

Evidence , p. 164.


service tax was instituted, is extraordinary. After my inaugural speech at the first Council meeting in 1924 I fully expected there would be a considerable improvement shown in the work done, as I stated my intention of visiting the men at their work and I said I knew what represented a fair day's work as well as any man, and I would judge them on what I saw. I tender a list of the workers, and the stipulat ed

work of what I believe was the first call under that Council. Fifty-five men, nine carts and eighteen horses, two ploughs and four horses, were ordered for three days " for general repairs and improvements to the road from Rawson H all to the Cross-roads, thence along Ferny-lane as far as possible during the present call." The work done was represented by the very rough metalling and blinding with dirt from the side of the road, of about 120 yards of road of about 8 feet wide. Two self-respecting roadmen in Australia would have made a better showing in the three days.· I never .visited any more public work after that time-I was quite convinced they were hopeless . In his report dated 1885, Mr. H enry Wilkinson states, inter alia, as follows :-

"It is the custom for all males between the ages of eighteen and sixty to give twenty-four days in the year for repairs to roads, bridges, and other public works. The labour is valued at four shillings per day for each man. This system is carried out formally, but not really, for the various gangs of nien do not work one-third of their time, which I am informed is genera.lly passed in more agreeable occupation . I am of opinion that if one reliable man with a horse and cart were regularly employed, with the occasional assistance of another man when required, the whole work would be satisfactorily carried out at a cost of not more than £120 per annum. Under the present system the work pretended tobe performed by this gratuitous labour is simply ludicrous." As it was in 1885 so it is to-day . I am told that the number of men between twenty-one and fifty-five years of age .liable for fifteen days' public work per annum is 151 , which represents in the aggregate the full ,;ervice of seven men for every working day in the year. I would to keep the roads in better order than they .are at present with two men and a horse and cart on permanent work. In my opinion the Executive Council is futile, and I recommend that serious consideration be given to its abolishment, and replacement by some other form of responsibility for the proper utilization of what should be a valuable form of taxation, and to cope with the manifest necessity to prevent t he spread of noxious weed, and to

destroy those now rapidly overrunning the Island .

10. It is safe to say that the Administrator's apprehension of his presence causing some of the Councillors to be diffident in expressing themselves was borne out when, by reason of his attendance, several of the Councillors refrained from voting on the proposed Boating Ordinance. As one witness explained: -

There was one occasion upon which I did not vote at all- when it was sent back to the Council by the Administrator asking that Council make modifications and necessary alterations, I did not vote. I voted against it on all occasions and I was rather disgusted because it came there so often that I refrained from voting at the time I have referred to. I was present at all meetings. I remember comment of intimidation on the part of the present Administrator. At the meeting at which the Administrator took

the chair when the proposition was being put before the m eeting, the Administrator passed the remark­ " I may tell you whether you are in favour of it or not, it is going to be."

Jcvideuce, p. 32 . Another Councillor said :-

Evidence , p. 199. '

In my opinion it influenced the votes, and furthermore, if that is the proceeding, the regulations of the Executive Council are so much waste p aper.

11. While supporting ina large measure the views expressed by the Administrator, your Commissioner is not in accord with the proposal to abolish the Executive Council in favour of " some other form of responsibility for the proper utilization of what should be a valuable form of taxation "as suggested by the Administrator, nor for its replacement by a "Commission of four," as put forward by Councillor Robertson.

12. Although on the Mainland the general policy in connexion with public bodies is against a nominee system, the conditions obtaining at Norfolk Island are obviously quite different from those in Australia, and the interests of both the Commonwealth Government and the Islanders generally will be better served by the continuance of the present constitution; the Administrator should, however, exercise a patient and judicial attitude when attending Council meetings, which has not been evident during the present Administrator's term of office. ·

Observations. - The Administrator's selection of competent persons should be carefully exercised, and while it may have been politic in his nominations for the last two Councils to five persons who had failed to secure election by vote, the practice should not be la1d down as a hard and fast rule. ·

. That the work to the Executive Council has been sadly mismanaged

m the past cannot be gamsa1d, and a means to correct this and ensure more satisfactory results is difficult to find. Members of the Council are either elected or appointed for twelve months, and no penalty can be imposed for shortcomings of the corporate body .

. . However, certain suggestions iu.e ll_lade . under the headings Noxious Weeds, Public Works, Depasturage of Stock, which 1t is felt will be appreciated and given effect to by the Council and thus:the end in view should b(accomplished.


LICJjjNSING OF BOATS AND BOATME N. During the Session at Norfolk Island objection was raised by ·witnesses to a proposed Ordinance pro viding for the Licensing of Boats and Boatmen which ha d been recommended by the Adininistra.tor .

2. Of fifteen witnesses (includino· the Administrator) examined on this matter, ten expressed thein selves as absolutely t o t he promulgation of the Ordinance. One witness, Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, specially appointed at a public meeting to r epresent

1 509

the public, Said:- E videnc·c, p. 57.

The next subject i s a direct negative to a proposed Ordinance for this Territory. The resolution was-" This meeting is of the opinion that no Licensing Ordinance is necessary for Boats and Boatmen. " Tha.t conveys the indisputable majorit y of the public meeting. In expressing his own views he said :-

In my private opinion, there should be some regulation governip.g the qualifications of persons hav ing charge of boats leaving the shores of the Island for any purpose . . . . . •

3. :E. Christian and F . W. Heaps, President and Secretary of the Executive Council respectively, expressed no opinion either way. Mr. F. E. Quintal, a Councillor, first voted against and then for the proposed Ordinance when considered in Council.

:Rviden ce, pp . 57, nR

The Admjnistrator, Colonel Leane, in evidence said :- - E viJonce. p. 3 63. .

I want to make my posit ion in t his matter clear . My duty as an Exe cutive made it necessary that I should bring this Ordinance forward-! have done so- it is a matter of personal indifference t o me whether it becom?s law or not, but after the letter of Councillor C. C. R. Nobbs, which forms part of the last t endered documents, your Honour will no doubt admit that I had no option but to foll ow up this very 75.

necessary addition to the Ordinances of Norfolk Island, as he considers it to be, 4. There ar e three boating co mpanies on Norfolk Island who at one time worked independent ly of each other, but shortly after Colonel Leane's arrival the managers of the three companies were called together and an amalgamation was effected. Under the

new management loading and unloading were vastly improved, and complete harmony among the boatmen continues to exist. ·

5. The only boats on the island suitable for loading and unloading vessels in the offing are the property of the three whaling companies, the members of which are unanimous in their opposition to the proposed Licensing Ordinance, and, from inquiries made by your Commissioner, it is certain that if such Ordinance were promulgated

these boats would be withdrawn from service altogether, and the experienced boatmen would turn their attention solely to other occupations. 6. It is not suggested for one moment that these men would " strike" in the ordinary acceptance of the term, but they fail to see why the conditions should be

changed , as loading and unloading operations have been satisfactorily carried out since the service wa s inaugurated. The only reason apparent to thein is that a letter vvritten to the Minister several years ago, reporting the drowning of four youths, was recently brought to light. The boating companies, however , had no property in or control over the boat used at the time of the fatality.


In view of the evidence that all boating work at Norfolk Island has been and is still satisfactorily carried out, the necessity for a Boatmen's Ordinance is not apparent. The promulgation of the proposed Ordinance, therefore, is not considered necessary.


Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, appointed at a public meeting of residents to represent them, called attention to Ordinance No. 4 of 1925, relating to the Brands for Stock and Evidc nee_, SUbmitted the following resolution which had been Carried at the public meeting :__'_ p. 64


That the rebranding of horses be brought before the Commissioner as unnecessary to' t he conditions here.

He stated that it was generally understood that at every change of hands of any horse there must be a new brand put on it, and it was felt that this was unnecessary. There was also some doubt as to the precise meaning of the section. Mr. Nobbs added that he was a member of the Ex ecutive Council when the Ordinance was submitted to

the Council, and no exception was taken to any of the sections or doubt expressed regarding its interpretation. He did not know ofany instance where a horse had been rebranded by the purchaser a s a result of the interpretation of section 4 of the Ordinance. Mr. Nobbs left the matter at that.


lil vldoncr, p. 79. 2. However, the next witness, Mr. H . C. Chapman, who had purcha,sed a horse

Evidence, pp. 200, 209.

early in August last , stated that the herdsman, Constftble vVickstead, had informed him that, although an animal had already been branded with a registered brand, if purchased or acquired it had to be rebrandecl v;rith the owner's. brand. In consequence of this he kad a brand made and registered, and rebra:Q.ded the horse.

3. It is co:ntended that the rebra!1ding is both cruel and unnecessary, bnt it is conceded that stock should not be left u,nbranded. 4. vVitness G. H. WicksteR.d, herdsman, stresses the necessity for rebranding, the object bei:ng. for the better oversight of stock depasturecl on the commons and public reserves, and holds that if an owner does not want to rebrancl, he should keep his animal enclosed.

5. Although the resolution passed at the public meeting referred to horses only, the evidence submitted by the various witnesses covered cattle as well. The only objection to Ordinance No. 4 of 1925 is the interpretation by the controlling authorities at Norfolk Island of section 4 (aa) which reads:-

Whoever wilfu!Jy or negligently fails to brand-(i) any head of cattle or horse owned by him and not bragded with a registered brand shall be liable, &c.

It is held (and your Commissioner considers rightly so) that a registered brand sh.o-qld be S\lfficient identification, notwithst(.tnding the contention to the contrary that rebranding is necessary to enable the herdsman the :more readily to dete:r:rp.ine ownership. This could be achieved , however, by the adoption of other means of identi­ fication of animals l'egistered for depasturage, viz., the placing of a strap or chain with a metal disc round the neck of each registered animal as is done in some col.llltry districts on the Mainland.

6. The Shire -Cle:r:k, Bellingen (N.S.W.) Shire Council1 has been good enough to supply particulars of the practice followed by that body, which is as follows 1. Local Government Oouncils.-Sect.ion 488 of the Loc;tl Government Act reaqs :-" The Council may permit the agistment of animals OJ:t any lands under its control and charge fees therefor."

Under the authority of this section of the Act, it is usual for in congested areas,

t o pepnit of the of aJ:timals on Roads, Parks, Public Reserves, and Private Lands of the Council, at the discretion of the Oouncil granting the permission. Where the or Lauds are not attended regularly by an Officer of the Council it is t}le usu,al practice to identify animals permitted to depastme on all such lands, including roads, by means of numbered discs, issued by the Council. There are two methods usually adopted in attaching these to

(1) by means of leather straps buckled around the neck and riveting the disc thereon, (2) by lJleap.s of a ch::tiP. locked aro11nd t4e neck, and attaching the disc thereto. A third method, probably the best, is to supply stra,ps with brass countersunk and riveted t herein, which are passed around the animals' necks, close fitting and riveted.

E ach disc or strap with plate, is registered in the Council's agistment register, either for monthly, quarterly, half-yearly, or yearly _ periods. ·

A deposit is required on each disc issued and is refunded on retmn of the disc. The Council supplies the discs, not the owners of the animals, as you have been informed. A proportion of discs are lost, mainly by the rubbing of the animals on wire fences. Where an attendant is in charge of a Park or Rseerve, it is sufficient for the owner to produce the receipt of the Council for the agistment fees , when the anima.Is are admitted thereto. J

The usu;tl conditions to such permissi

(1) Agistment on Roads and nnfeuced gnmted for honrs b (ltween sunrise

and sunset only. .

(2) Agistment on Parks, Reserves, &c., " All care, and no responsibility."

2. Public Oommons.- Usually under the control of Trustees and governed under the provisions of the Commons Regulation Acts, which provide for certain fees, &c., to be paid, for certain free agistments -(For Droves and Travelling Stock, for a limited period)-see section 24 of the Commons Regulation Act. 'rhe ma,ximl!m fee ia fixed by law, but the Trustees may fix any lower fee. A Couneil may be appointed as Trustees of a Common. ·

There is usually no other means of identification of anima,}& adopted th\l :6!-'&n<;ls, wh.ich rp.ust be registered. The Tru,stees are permitted to have a " Round Up " at period, and to impound any animals unlawfully agisted or found on such Common.

3. Reserves.-Usually controlled by Trustees, who must obtain the consent of the Minister for Lands, before per!1litting agistment of animals thereon (see section 7 of Public P&rks Act). The may be appointed Trustees for Public under the Public Parks' Act.

7. Yo\lr 00m:mis.sioner is of the opinion that with greater than is

at present eJCercised by the Executive Council in g:ra:uting permits for the of stock, and by compelling owners to fully describe each beast fQr whicP. permission is required, the herdsma.n should little diffi.Qu.lty ip. the Qve:rsight of

stock on the public reserves.



In the circumstances, it is suggested that the residents of Norfolk Island be noi required _ to rebrand stock already branded with a registered _ brand.

EXPERT INSTRUCTION IN AGRICULTURE AND FRUIT-GROWING, ETC. Under delegation from the public meeting referred to elsewhere in this report, lYir. C. C. R. Nobbs advocated the sending of expert officers to instruct residents in agriculture, fruit-gTowing, picking, grading, packing and handling, dairying, poultry and pig-raising. He considered the Commonwealth Government should defray whatever necessary cost there might be attached to carrying this out. His brother, Councillor F. C. Nobbs, was the only one of eight other persons examined who supported the

resolution passed at the public meeting. The remaining seven were six Councillors (including the President) and the Administrator.

1 51 1

2. The last named pointed out in his annual report 1925, that the amount of land under cultivation bad diminished from 350 acres in 1906 to 214! acres, showing a reduction of 40 per in effort. He stated that the Agricultural Journals he had been Evidence, instrumental in obtaining for months past, although at the disposal of the residents, pp. 351- 353 '

had not been availed of. Furthermore, he had obtained and distributed fertilizer among ten of the residents for experimental purposes, with a request that he might be informed of the results, but eighteen months had elapsed and no word had been received from any of them. He concluded that any money spent in the direction requested by Mr. Nobbs

would be simply wasted. It might here be stated that an impetus has been given to the banana industry recently, resulting in a decided increase in the acreage under cultivation. · -


From the evidence given, and from personal observation, your Commissioner is in agreement with the Administra,tor, and considers the of a visiting

fruit unneces&ary.


Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, complaining of the manner in which Customs matters were being administered, stated that there had ahvays been a certain amount of dissatisfaction in regard to the present law requiring payment of duty on dutiable goods for Norfolk Island at the port of shipment. · He added that it seemed unreasonable that consignees

should be compelled to pay these duties before goods arrived at their destination. With regard to e4po:rts, he complatned of a notice iss11ed rece:p.tly by the

Collector of Customs requiring expoFt entries to be made twelve hours before the sailing of any ship. He considered it a great disadvantage to !shippers to be compelled to comply with this .instruction, as in a great many instances the shippers would not be in a position to state definitely the quantity of goods required to be shipped until the arrival of the steamer, which ge:n,eral}y only six or eight hours. ·

3. With regard to the first portion of the complaint, it was ascertained that in November, 1925, a member of the New South Wales Legislature had addressed the Honorable the M:inister for Customs, Melbourne, advoeating the abolition of the present practice, with a view to arrangements being made for all duties to be collected at Norfolk

Island. This was not complied with, the principal reasons being the abse:p.ce of wharfs and Customs sheds 11t Norfolk Island, and the fact that ships are frequently compelled by weather ,conditions to change their anchorage frorp. one part of the island to another during the process of unloadiil.g. · .

4. In the case of exports, it was st[l,ted by the Acting Collector of Customs that the instru,ction, although posted, had never been enforced,


That the procedure as now being carried out be not departed from.


With two witnesses examined stressed the necessity £01' a Companies Act at Norfolk Island. Observatio?'!,. - Ordinance No. 4 of 1926, promulgated on the 24th March last, makes applicable to Norfolk Island the Compai:!.ies Acts of New South Wales. The requirements of the residents have therefore been met,



: In response to a request made by the Administrator that inquiry he instituted Exhibit Iss. into a deinand made by the Boating Companies for increased payment for landing and

shipping mails, Mr. P. M. Buffett, Acting Secretary of the Boating Cornpanies, was examined on 11th March. 2. After a conference with the boatmen, they agreed to continue the vvcrk at the

Evidence, pp. 357 ' 358.

existing rate of pay, pending ·the result of a recomm.endation to be submitted for an increase of 5s. (instead of lOs. asked) for the landing of mails from Syoney. They waived their.c]aim for an increase for shipping outwar.d n1ails.

Observation.--lVhen passing through .Sydney lately, your Com1nissioner arranged with the Deputy Director of Posts and Telegraphs for the increased payment as frorn 1st April, 1926.



It was resolved by the public meeting on 9th February, 1926, that the need of facilities for . higher education be represented. No con1plaint was received fron1 the public against the primary instruction imparted, but it is contended that there should be opportunity available to those children who desire to continue their studies

beyond the primary course and so fit themselves for positions 'in life which call for qualifications attainable only through a post-primary course. It is not suggested that an intermediate high or fullhigh school with attendant expenses should be established, but that some enlargement of the present curriculum, which would effectively meet the outstanding need of better general education, should be devised. In reply to the public representations, the Administrator said:-

. . . . . In my opinion · there is no need for any higher education than that which could be

afforded at the Public School if the head teacher taught sloyd or manual work, and the teachers who are responsible paid proper attention to sewing and needlework, which is part of the training which I particularly specified for in the appointment of the present headmaster and his wife, and which I have no reason to believe was not provided for when he was selected. I am informed the present has not given any

manual training, that sewing is a farce, and that singing is much neglected. If the boys and girls had an intermediate school or high school education it would necessitate study for several additional years, and when they had that education they would not find any opportunity of using it to advantage on the Island. In my opinion, the difficulty as to schooling or education is in the type of headmaster we get. They may be capable of passing examinations; they lack every other essential qualification to fit them to be precentors of the children, the more important part of whose training should be otherwise than. to merely pass examinations. From my ·own experience no teacher of any standing applies for the position here,

and I can only logically assume that, as in other appointments to which I have already referred, good men will not apply, and so teachers from a small back-country school are sent. I speak from knowledge of the present and past head teachers. The present came from J amberoo, a very -small country place in the south of New South Wales; the last one came from a place called Shepherd's Bush, which is even smaller than Jamberoo, and is now at Prospect, which is a New South Wales school of very low status indeed.

The Norfolk Island School costs over £1,000 per annum to the Commonwealth for practically three teachers, and I believe an absolutely first-class staff could be obtained in Victoria from private schools with greater educational qualifications than any of the staff we now have, with less cost to the Island, and infinitely greater avdantage to the training of our cl1ildren, for we would then get the gentle breeding which we now lack.

The desire of any ambitious scholar to pursue a super-primary course of education should receive every encouragement, and, although in some instan_9es perhaps, occupations followed in after life would not call for the application of knowledge so ·acquired, the right of every citizen to advance beyond the limitations of primary

education is undeniable. The expressed opinion of the Administrator that the difficulty is due to the type of headmaster selected is not supported by evidence. In the selection of the teachers special care is exercised by the Education Board of New South Wales, consideration being given to the conditions obtaining at Norfolk Island. The school is periodically inspected by expert officers of the New South Wales Education Department, who, it is almost needless to state, are fully alive to the necessity of maintaining that high standard for whic_ h the mainland systems have been designed. The Administn3jtor's statements that instruction was inadequate in certain directions, and his reference to "gentle breeding'' may be n1et by the statement contained in the report of Mr. W. H. McLelland, Chief. Inspector of Schools for New South Wales

(18th November; 1925), of which the following are extracts:- .· Exhibit 161. • • • • . Among the pupils think. entirelY: in English is . a good proportion of intelligent

youngsters, who ought to be able to reach mtermed1ate certificate standard, butt hose who use the '' lingo" in their homes are greatly handicapped. ·


. . . . . The feeling for musical expression is almost universal. Part singing comes by nature. In manual work also the pupils show considerable aptitude. The Norfolk Island show was held during - my visit and the school exhibits in writing and handwork were creditable. In writing, the pupils can hold their own with the best of our schools. Some poor writers about whom I inquired were found to be recent

arrivals from New South Wales. Most of the children who speak English in the home as well a.s in the school, speak it beautifully. There is a slight accent but it is pleasing, and the enunciation excellent. . . . . . The pupils have very attractive manners. Courtesy is natural to them. They are

easily controlled, except this-it is difficult to prevent them from answering _ in chorus, and from talking freely at their work. Most of this talking seems to be due to a habit of thinking aloud. They are really delightful children, but they need patient and persevering training in power to work quietly. Physical exercises are well done, and games are played with great spirit and good feeling. School opens and closes

with the singing of a hymn.

2. Your Commissioner, who had -every opportunity of observing the children of Norfolk Island in school, in public and at their homes, concurs in the views expressed by Mr. McLelland and by many others trained in observation·, and competent to judge. The polite demeanour and attractive bearing of the _ children reflect very creditably indeed upon the home and school training to which they are subjected. On the whole, the results, as shown by school examinations, are slightly below those of the State schools on the .Mainland. This is due, however, not to lack of qualifications on the

part of the teachers, but to the peculiar conditions of life, which produce retarding -influences on the development of the powers of concentration and sustained mental effort in many of the pupils. -

3. In compliance with the request of the Right Honorable the Minister for Home and Territories, and reasons advanced by the Administrator, for an1endment of the provisions governing the control of the school, the Public School Law, the Ordinances and the Regulations have been closely examined, and investigations made into the conditions arising from _ their application. The Administrator considers that he should

be vested with disciplinary and administrative control of the teaching staff, and that . the present system of seconding officers from the New South Wales Education Department should be abolished. There is a good deal of force in the contention of the Administrator that the time has arrived when the administration laws of the Island

school should be revised, and this might be conceded without agreeing with the Administrator's reasons for coming to such a conclusion. The real necessity for alteration lies in the fact that the laws and regulations were formulated by the New South Wales Government when Norfolk Island was a dependency of that State, and there has beep_

no alteratioh to suit the conditions which have arisen since authority was assumed by the Commonwealth. Moreover, the administrative system designed by the New South Wales authorities has had imported into it features which do not apply to such a community as Norfolk Island, and it is quite clear that the requirements of the Islanders do not call for elaborate school administrativB arrangements.

_ 4. Section 11 of the School Law 1913 provides for the appointment of a School Board of not less than three persons, the tenn of appointment is at the pleasure of the Governor-General, and the specific duties of the Board are :-(a) To regularly visit, inspect and report to the Governor:-General upon

the public school. (b) To use every endeavour to induce parents and guardians to send their children regularly to school, and to report to the Governor-General, through the Chief l\1agistrate, the names of parents or guardians who

refuse or fail to educate their children. (c) To discharge other duties imposed by these laws.

Am9ng the duties arising out df Clause (c) are the granting of Exemption Certificates enabling children to leave school; the expulsion of pupils in cases where such action is called for ; the granting permission to use the building for special purposes ; the _ ­ granting of applications for leave of absence by the teacher or his staff ; the general supervision of the material arrangements of the school; the receipt of reports relating to the unsatisfactory attendance, and the taking of action thereon. The Boards are

also empowered to deal with any complaints made in regard to the school, to conduct inquiries, and report thereon, through the Chief Magistrate. 5. The delegation of such important administrative functions to the Board was probably due to a desire on the part of the Government of New South Wales to some recognized body for dealing with the many problems arising out of the conduct of the School. ·The system of administration of the Territory has been entirely altered, by reason of the fact that the Administrator now resides on the Island, and although responsible for the oversight of all public matters within the Territory, he has, under the law, no authority in the control of the School. Seeing that local administration

1 513

EvidenC(\ p. 246 (b).


is so completely provided for, there is now no for a:q. School

Board, and it is apparent that, while the assistance of so1ne advisory body is desirable, the duties of the Board should be recast, so that they would be relieved entirely of fui1ctions o£ an administrative character. It is obvious that the administration should n_ ot the power of suspension to any outside or to allow such authority

tu sit in judgment over it:? officers. .

6. An _ association elected by the parents could render valuable &ssistance in a much more sB,tisfactory way than a Bo<:brd so constituted that functions

belonging strictly to the teacher or the Administrator could be usurped. Moreover, the value of such an elected advisory council would quicken interest on the part of in the work of the School, and give a more intelligent comprehension of its

ideals and the best means of working out those ideals. It would also more reflect the feelings of the residents. The functions of such an association would be to report to the Ad1ninistrator upon the n1aterial requirements of the School, to bring under his notice any matters in connexion with the curriculum or otherwise affecting the School which n1ight be considered necessary, and generally to the teachers and promote the welfare of the School upon lines similar to such associations working

on the Mainland. In internal adlninistration it is considered that the headmaster must be supreme ; and it would be unwise to take any action which -vvould lessen his authority, in the exercise of virhich he is entitled to the consideration and protection of the Government. Interference with him in the discharge of hjs £unctions must produce results detrin1.ental to the School.

· 7. rro pupils in attendance a't Rural Schools on the Mainland, who, after satisfactorily completing the primary course, are desirous of carrying their education to a 1nore advanced sta)ge, opportunity is provided for a continuance of studies suited to the needs of the occupations such pupils are likely to follo:vv. A course similar to that leading to the Intennediate Certificate Examination, excluding sciences and languages other than English, or courses such as that of the Intermediate Cmnrnercial or

Rural Schools are available. Without additional expense instruction equivalent t o that of the early yet=u·s of the IIigh School could be provided at Norfolk Island, and \ivould 1neet the present requirements of the community.

8. The opinion -vvas expressed that exarninations of t he teeth of the school children should be n1ade periodically by a qualified dentist. The Government discharges its obligations in regard to the . general health of the pupils by rnedi-cal examinations, but there is no provision for dental treatn1ent. As a necessary health measure such treatment :free of cost to parents, but not without their consent , is provided in most if not all _ of the States. In addition to the advantages outlined herein, the School Dental Officers in1part to the children elementary instruction in the hygiene and care of the teeth. The t reatn1ent is - · ·

(1) Of i1nn1ediate necessity for the removal of oral sepsis ; (2) Conservative, in that, where practicable, defective teeth are preserved and fitted to carry out -'oheir function, and (3) Preventive, in that early decay and other processes destructive to the

teeth, sJnd inirnical to health, are arrested.

Such work as the provision of artificial teeth and the correction of faulty alignn1ent is not -qndertaken. In reporting the results of his recent exan1ination of school children the l\iedical Officer at ·Norfolk Island The most outstanding fe ature was the excellent sta.te of general health. It is marred, however, by t he extremely high incitlence of decayed teeth, due, in my opinion, to the following causes :---:-

1. Here_ dity. 2. Lack of lime in water. 3. hygiene.

4. Excessive commmption of acid fruits. I am taking steps to the excessive use of acid fruits, mid to det ermine the best methods of prophylaxis in this matter. · The major-ity of cases are now bei ng att endod to by their dentist .

. It is not suggested that free treatment should be nrovided for alJ children, but it n1ight be consid-ered necessary in the interests of health to arrange for attention hy the qualified den-tist practising in the Territory in cases where parents have not the rneans to pay for treatment. The need of instruction by t he Medical- Officer in matters to health, and the care of the -teeth, should not be overlooked by the

Admmistrat10n. · - . - .



. After conferring with responsible officers of the New South W_ales Education J}eparfan~nt, and with a c~niplete lrn.owl_ edge of . the · Isla11d requirements, your Continis~_ioner sugge~~s that th,e pres_ ent meth~d. qt ~t3:tl111:g JE\ not depaft~d fr~ft\. . . . 'r~at th~ Public School LB;\Y i913, the Public School Ordinances .. i~15 and 1921,

1 5 1 5

and the S~ho_ ol, R~gulat~ons of 1.906 he_repealed; an~ an Or~in~nce an.~ Regulations for the co~trol 01 t~e Scho?l 0~ the lines of tljo~e ., appended nereto pe. stib~tittited. . . ' Appendix D. That it be noiifi~d for the gener_ al i1iformation of Norfo_ lk Isla11d resitlefits }hat eo~t;~rima1:~ co°:rses. ~f ~~ucat.~on, . e~ui~~lent , (a) , t~ _ ~~~i ~ea~i?~ _ t_ o_ tl.1!· l~~-~rihe~iat_ ~

Certificate E~ammation, exclud~!lg s~ ~1ence ~ncl )a11;guages oiher ,tha_ n ~nghs~ ; (b) to the pommerci~l Intermediate Higli School ii} which instrij~tioh in Business Principle! and Book-keeping is imparted, and ( c) t~ ihe Ihiral Schools, are available to those pupils who hav~ 1·eached ~~e r!}quired, ~iandard . 6t priin~ry education, and . ~hat the

Department of Education, New South Wales; be requested to arrai1ge the subJects for such courses.

NORFOLK ISLAND TRUST FUND. The application of the Norfolk Island Tr11st Fu~d. has been. the subject (?f public disc11ssion for _some time, and culminated in the following resolution, passed at the public nieeting held on 9th :JTeb:ruaty, 1926 :-

' There is _ reason to s,uppose that ~he Norfolk Island 1'rust Fund proper has not been, for some years, dealt with in the terms of the Trust Deed.


The object of piaci:Q.g cert ain evidence before this Commission was stat ed. to be the d~sire to protect the rights oJ beh~~9iaries mentioned. in the _ Deed, and to rectify any violati~n of the terms of the Trust, if its provisio_ ns have been depatted from. , . _ 2. Tl!e i11op.eys of ,t:µis o:riginal Fund comP,rised porti011 of the amount co~tributed by the public in Engtap.d in ~852 and 1853 for_ the benefit of t~e Pitcnirn Islander,s_; and


Norfolk Isla:q.d. Porj:;ion of the arri?~t st~bsctibed wa:s applied for the immediate relief qf the Pitcairner:s, _ t!i,e . balance; £500, being invested as shown in the balance-sheet, Appendix E. dated 2nd, August , 1853. , _ .

3. In 1869 moneys received. fr01p. the sale of Government property, together with the sum already invested, were_ placed, under t4e control of trustee's appointed by the It~n~i~:'1. Secretary of State for the Colonies. Although th~ Island!cl'rS were i:rifor111ed mahy years a_ go that t hey had ho authotity ove:f the Ftit1d~ to which .they had hot conttibutetl..c....,-the desire to be full y acquaint ed. with rnattets relating to the ihanagetne11t of the Fund has been ~Ver present. .

. 4. The total face value of sec\1rities, plus cash, bl1lahc~~ t'ra:hsfotted frcni1 the Government of New South ·waleI; to the Coiiim6nwealth, in 1915, was £6,122 11s. 2d., whil~ the t9tal amount repf-esented by cash invest ed tn securities, pltts cash baiahces, was £6,446 lls. 2d., the difference of £324 representing the prep:1.i.mti paid in the purbhase of certain securities . Although these securities and cash balances ,i.rete accepted in

October, 1915, some of the amounts were not actually received by the Commonwealth until December , 19155 and others not until February and March, 1916. By that time the total value of the cash balances was £960 13s. 1d., which, adcled tl.i the amount of £5,624, represented by cash invested in sectitities; gave a total uf £6,584 13s. ld. paid to the credit of the Norfolk Island Trust ]Jund in the financial year 1915- 16. The transactions since that date, and the position of the investment_ account as at· 21st Appow.Jix G. May, 1926, 1are shown in the accoinpai1ying st atement. The credit balahces received from the various acc01mts controlled by the Government of Ne1'r Sc:ilith '\Vales were

consolidat ed by the Commonwealth, and now only one accou,nt is kept. The investments tra:i::I.Sferred. to the Commonwealth ate still iii.tact , with the exception of those upon whi6h the slim of £2,500 fot the purchase of the Melanesian Mission property wa,s realized. The_ ahiitia~ Corrimo:hwealth s1?,bsidy and teventrn collebtions from the Territory ate paid to the credit of the Norfolk Is_land accou:qt. A stat e11.1ent of t)tese a.rhotints, togethet with expenditure, are shown in the balance-sheet published ammally in the Adniinistrator 's

r eport, It will bB observed from the figures contained i11 Appendix C t hat the credit balances,..)1ave di111ihished each year since 1919- 20, _ thB principal fa ctors to whiuh this decline is attri~uted. being incrnased sala#es, in,cte~secl establishments, lo1,i1d the tetmvatioil of public buildings (appr9_ .ximat ely £1,200 in 1924- 25) . _ _ . _ ._ . .

Observations.- While it is doubtful whether the Trust Deed is binding on the Commonwealth, it is unquestiona ble that the original fonds have been applied for the general be1 1efit of t he Pitcait h Islanders antl their descendants, and that the terms .of t he Trust Deed ih t his t egatd. have in no way b~en departed from. .

pp .

:. () ., f. J.



- . Following a con1plaint made by the Administrator, of the unsatisfactory manner in which the trustees of the building known as the "Rawson Hall" were handling the affairs of the Trust, the question rajsed was fully investigated. R.awson Hall is a stone building about 90 feet long and 30 feet wide, and stai:tds upon portion 76 (a) of 3 roods 27 perches. This portion, with the building, .was granted to the Islanders on the 30th September, conditional upon the terms of the . Trust being complied with. In order to repair the building the sun1 of .£300 was loaned frorn the Norfolk Island Trust Fund at per cent., but this an1ount was written off on 17th May, 1916. The conditions of the Trust require that the pren1ises shall be used only for the purposes of a public hall, and shall be maintained ih good order and condition. Further, that the trustees shall not assign or sub-let the premises without the consent of the Administration. The trustees have the power to make such regulations as they may deern necessary, subject to approval, regulating the use of the hall by the public, and :fixing the charges to be paid as rental No charge is made for public or church 1neetings. For public functions {1nd dances, with the use of a piano, the rate is lOs . . per night, and for private dances

20s . per night, while the charges for periodical public entertainn1ents and special functions are . as detennined by the trustees. ·

2. The com.plaint is directed principally against the action of the trustees in renting the hall and piano to Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, the proprietor of a weekly picture entertain1nent, at a rate which the Adn1inistrator considers 11nreasonably low; and the erection and n1aintenance of an electric lighting plant used in the exhibition of filn1s. The rat e paid by Mr. Nobbs for the hall and the piano on each Saturday night is 7s. 6d. The rental charges and the installation of the plant were matters approved by the trustees, but no written agreement was made. There can be no exceptio1i t aken to the erection and1naintenance of the plant; the electric light is essential to the success

of the weekly picture entertainment, the withdrawal of which would deprive the Islanders of the innocent an1usement they now enjoy. The rental is a 1natter entirely trustees. The P!eJ.nises are in good condition and repair, and on the 29th April,

1926, Mr. E. C. Robinson, Secretary and Treasurer, held a credit balance of £25 on behalf of the trustees. A balance-sheet, exan1ined and certified by the Government Auditor, is submitted to the Adn1inistrator annually. Observations. - No con1plaint having reference to the n1anagement of Ra,vson Hall was received :fr·orn the public, and there is no evidence of betrayal of the trusts irnposed, but certain members of the Trust b.ave displayed an apathy that should debar then1 frmn future appointment. The Administration holds the right in the

adequately safeguarded. The proposed additional banking facilities to be n1ade available by t he Commonwealth Bank will obviat e the necessity of the Trust funds being held by the Treasurer, who should be inforn1ed that it is the desire of the Administration that n1oneys received should be prmnptly deposited to the credit of the Trust

LIQUOR IJA WS AND lVIAT TERS RELATING THERETO. Another resolution passed at the public meeting is as follows:­ ,; Liquor Law- Need for putting on proper basis,"

and Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs was deputed to place the views of the people before the Comrnission. In doing so, he said-The Liquor Law at present obtaining is called " The Liquor Prohibition Act." The operation of this law as is generally experienced is that the ·Administrator controls the importation of liquor. There has bee n an unsatisfactory method for some considerable time in regard to the members of the public getting liquor. Apparently each administrator interprets the law and the regulations his own peculiar

way, thereby naturally giving offence more or less to the residents. It is understood by the ! .slanders that the liquor regulations are intended to be carried on in the same manner and for the same purpose as was originally intended, that is prohibition, excepting for medical purposes only. I n it is known that t his is not so, realizing that the administrator has power under the law to make regulations., The great outstanding objectionable feature of the present conditions is that everybody must obtain a permit from the medical officer as far as I know, and the Administ rator is free to import whatever he likes for his own use. It is generally considered t he liquor prohibition law should apply to the Administrator as well as every other resident. In order that the matter ma:y be placed on what is considered a fair and equitable basis, it is submitted that no arbitrary law regulat.wn should obtain in this Territory giving privileges to any one more than another and that the residents should determine as to what co nditions the liquor law should operate in this Territory, and that eyery one should be on an equal footing. No exception is taken to the present Administrator in regard to · the interpretation of the liquor laws. I t ake it as the duty of the


Administrator to see that the liquor prohibition law is enforced and that the supervision by two under the present law is a better protection as far as the public are concerned, but even then the objection lies against his power to import whatever he requires for his own private UBe. This was expressed and agreed to at the public meeting.

On his own behalf, he added:-In my opinion, it would be for the best advantage of the place if this liquor question should be submitted to the electors in the ::;hape of a referendum as to whether prohibition inits true sense should pp. obtain or tliat there should be no Liquor Prohibition Law. I cannot refer to any provision in the Liquor Act or regulations which confers au advantage upon the Administrator in the removal of liquor from the bond without the medical officer's certificate. I see section 2 of the Liquor Prohibition Law of 1913, no exception is taken to the wording of section 2; Exception is taken to the powers given to the Administrator under the regulations. The only authority governing the issue of liquor is the medical certificate; that is what is understood to be prohibition. The second question that should be submitted to a referendum is the continuance of the existing system, and thirdly, no control of liquor, that is, a removal of a.ll restrictions. These three fe atures were considered by the Exec utive Council and were agr eed to as the necessary sequence to the. alteration of the Law. It is recognized under the present conditions that from an economic point of view this place is suffering in consequence of the present Liquor Law in keeping tourists away from the place. I have heard tourists at various times state that in consequence of the liquor regulations and their inability to obtain liquor, that they wmild not come back here and they would advise their friends not to come. There is great diversity of opinion amongst us I know as to the advantages to be gained by the removal of the restrictions on the issue of liquor and that is a further reason why it should be submitted to a referendum. There has been no suggestion of abuse by Administrators, nor of the authority conferred upon them. A referendum as to prohibition should in my opinion be decided by a 70 per cent. vQte iu favour of any one of the measures:_by this I mean that if prohibition is to be decided upon it should receive a 70 per cent. majority of the votes polled.

2. Of 21 persons examined, five expressed no opinion for or against a change, three fav_oured absolute prohibition, even for medical purposes, one . \VOUld have liquor for 1nedical purposes only, one would leave the issue of liquor to the Medical one favours a bottle bar, and pennission granted to people over 30 years of age to import liquor, one is adverse to prohibition ''straight out," and suggests control by a

Committee; consisting of the Ad1ninistrator, the JYiedical Officer, and a third person to be appointed (witness did not say whether in a voluntary capacity or otherwise). · 3. The majority favour a referendum, the prohibitionists contending that a bare m.ajority should prevail, while one considers a ·70 per cent. majority should be obtained

1 51

before any change is 1nade. The Administrator's views are as follows :- Ji]viuence, pp, 358, 859. In my opini9u, the present Liquor Law should go, and be replaced by absolute prohibition for any reason, medical or otherwise, or there should be a.n ext ension of the traffic so that all those who do not abuse it might obtain it without any difficulty. I recommend, yo ur Honour, that a referendum be taken for inclusion in your report to the Commonwealth Government, and I have no doubt

the Government will alter the Law to meet the wishes of the majority of the people-! mean the majority of the people-as cheerfully as they accepted the present law from the Pitcairn people. The fault I find with the present law is the opportunity which it gives to a medical officer to show special favoritism to some, and the Administrator cannot refuse to accept the certificate without setting, up an opinion as a layman in opposition to tha:t of a professional man. Just here I would like to explain the permit referred

to in the Liquor Law. I tender a P ermit Form and I explain that as I gave t.he officer who was

administering the liquor instructions that I did not intend to question the medical officer's certificate, but he might issue on such certificate, I decided that the permit in addition was quite unnecessary. I do not believe the statement of Mr. Nobbs that this I sland is suffering in tourist traffic, because of liquor restriction, for every boat is booked up several months ahead, but if it is so, in my opinion, the Island is better off

without them. Australia knows the I sland is a prohibition area and the class of tourists that comes here to escape the drink, and when he has been here for about a week, wo uld give his immortal soul to get it, is not a desirable type, for they incite men of the Island to break the law by offering large premiums for bottles of liquor. As a man I do not blame the Islander for making the profit if he can, but as Administrator, it brings me into conflict with the Islanders for it is my duty to detect and punish it if I am able to do

so. We have had a number of such 11ndesirables--their room is better than their company. At the time the deputation waited on me 're prohibition some seventeen or eighteen months ago, when Mr. Nobbs posed a.s such an ardent supporter of prohibition, a certain letter was . brought under my notice which I was informed was written because of the application of C. C. R . Nobbs to be licensed to reta.illiq110r . I t ender

t he letter referred to. · · :Gxhil:Jit, 81.

4. Your Co1n1nissioner considers it his duty to subn1it · his own views on ·all n1a tters brought under his notice, therefore the question of a referendum by him has not been considered. The opinions expressed were so varied that the submi ssion of the n1any issues suggested would not in any case have produced a satisfac tory result .

5. As against the Administrator's opinion (1) "that the present liquor law should go, and be replacedby absolute prohibition for any reason, 111edical or otherwise," the Medical. Officer says :----In my opinion, though not absolutely indispensable, liquor is a great assistant in the t reatment EVidenctJ,

of certain In support of this statement I may mention that liquor is still used in t he big hospitals p . 24.s. of Sydney in the treatment of certain diseases. I ·admit that liquor is less used in the medical profession

gxhlblt 153, D. and F.


nowadays t1ian it used to be, and the indications are well defined. i should be very sorry if 1 had not the power to obta:_in liquor for my patients whether on 1i orfoik !sland or elsewhere. I do n?t it as essential but I regard it as a great desideratum. I do not consider that the amount of hquor 1ssued at !_)resent on Norfolk Island under my certificates is in any way detrimental to t he interests ot the Island economically or socially. I do not know of any social disturbance or unhappiness that occurs in consequence

of any certificates issued by me. America apparently still recognizes the need of liquor since it is obtainable on doctor's permit. During the early period of my service I refuse d many applications and I still have to refuse an occasional application in cases where I am satisfied that t he liquor is not heeded medically, I would recommend the allowance of liquor for social purpos·es as well as for medical purposes, under co11tr ol. 1 believe that if liquor was issued t o tourists under control, a11d this was generally known; a greater number

of totitists w1::mltl. visit t he Island and thus increase the prosperl.ty of the commtmity. I would like to my opinion that liquor should be controlled, I do riot advocate the ftee issue ot free licence .

6. The question raised by Mr. Nobbs, on behalf of the public, that t.he Administrator is favdured under the Act, ih that all liquor n1ust be consigned to hun or to his care, n1ay be met by the necessity for sonie one to control the commodity, and the most suitable person to do so is the prinbipal officer tn1 the IJsland, viz. the ! . . . . . _ . . _

. 7. There appears to be no serwus bar under the ex1:stmg law to g1vmg e:ffect to No; 2 of the Administrator's alternative ptop

may obtain it without any difficulty;

Under tire Regulations perniits niay be granted by the Adm:ihistrator, subject to the production of a certificate sighed by Govet:ti'frieht Medical Officer, and there is iio reason why and tourists should be arbitrarily excluded from the issue of

liquor, as they have been for several months. It cannot reasonably be stated that such issue would be calculated to prejudicially affect the welfare of the Territory or the inhabitants thereof. 8. There should be no difficulty in its contt

does control it-but during his absence for some months the law governing the issue of liquor was loosely applied, and it was fo'und necessary to suitably deal with the officers responsible. . ·

9. It is recognized that Norfolk Island is ah ideal place for a holiday, and has been patronized for years by numerous people of aLl shades of opinion and calling, but since it was made known that liquor could not be obtained by visitors the tourist traffic has decreased materially; inst"ances were cited by witnesses, and one tourist- a retired manager, 70 years of age, who had obtained a certificate from the Government

Medical Officer- recently left the Island by th:e return hoat because the .A:dministratoT declined to grant a trermit, on the .ground that tourists were not supplied. This touhst h!id arranged to several_ months, btit could not d'o so because he was unable to obtain what the Medical Officer considered necessary for him. Your Commissioner

has also . been informed by several reputable persons on the Mainland, who had previously visited Norfolk Island, and wished to do so periodically, that they ha;d abandoned the idea _altogether, becattse they could not obtain the :reasonabi'e aJlow·ah'ce of liqt1ot to w·bich they were accustomed.

10. While it is not intended _to suggest for one moment that Norfo lk Islanders <:tre dependent upon tourists for their livelihood, or that people from .abroad should be enticed there by liquor; it is considered that intending tourists should not be deprived 'I!U_ldue of the opportu.p.ity afforded for absohite change of scene .and rest

1h beautiful Cer-tainly the issue 'Of liquor to tourists wo'uld probably entail a little more attentlon arid oversight than at present, but pre-vious Administrators successfully and satisfactorily handled it, and there is no reason why it should not he done now.


Your Commissioner considers a restricted issue of liquor to residents and tourists on Island wo?-ld. in keeping with ·the gen-eral :policy of ·the Com:tnotl.wealth and not hkely to preJudicially affe-ct the welfare of the Islafid or its inhabitants and suggests that this be continued und,er the existing Laws and Regulatitms.


the. Exemttive Gmt neil Ordima'fltJe 1925, section 15, sub-section l (a), the

Executi_ve Counml shall have the care, construction and management of the pt1blic of Norfolk Island ; (c) shall have care, construction and management of such

pubh? _ works as may be entrusted to. It by the Administrator : (Provided that the may revoke: any authority gra-nted by hirn under this pamgraph) ; and

nndeT sectwn 18, sub-sectwn l (ct) , may make by-laws providing for the carrying out


o{ such work by the labour of all persons over 21 and under 55 years of age, who have been domiciled for at least six months in Norfolk Island, or in cases where such labour is not provided by any such resident, by a rate.,to be paid in lieu of such labour. The Administrator, seven members of the Executive Council, one ex-member of that body, and the ex-Registrar, were examined in connexion with this matter.

2. It will be seen front his evidence, quoted under the heading " Executive and Functions," page 22, that at the first Council meeting

in 1924 the Administrator stat ed his intention ofyisiting the_ men at their work. Later on, having inspect ed the work described in Exhibit 86, and being disappointed with the quality and amount done, he did not afterwards visit any public work. At the latter part of his quoted evidence he says:-

In my opinion the Executive Council is futile, and I recommend that serious consideration be given to its abolishment, and replacement by some other form of responsibility for the proper utilization of what should be a valuable form of t ax ation, and to cope with the manifest necessity to prevent the spread of noxious weed and to destroy those now rapidly overrunning the Island.

The President of the Executive Council explained the procedure adopted in the carrying out of public works, and expresses himself otherwise as follows: -The Administrator, as an ex-officio member, has the same privileges as an ordinary member. As a me mber he would be entit led to ask for any statements that he required to be tabled . . I, as President, am responsible fo r the organization of public working gangs. The Secretary keeps a record of the number of men available for public works and the number of days they work in eac h year. So far. as my knowledge goes, each nian on the Island has given either payment or his full quota of working days, It is the general practice to put a councillor in charge of each gang. When a councillor is not available

a man who is considered capable is placed in charge . After inspection of t he work to be done, I calculated

1 51

the number of men required. I relied on my own judgment as to the nurp.ber of nien required. I generally put on the men whom I consider most suitable for the work that is to be done. The men are pp . - 21 ' · not always supplied with the most suitable tools. They have to use their own, and do not always have them. Ploug)ls, horses and carts are allowed for ; picks and shovels are not taken into account. All the men generally bring their own small t ools. It is left t o the ganger to see that the men arrive on the

work on time and do not cease before t he specified time. It is not left t o the ganger entirely t o see that the men are putting in a fair day's work. Gangs are usually employed for three ,days at a time. I usually visit a gang once during the day . . A verbal report is made to the Council on completion of the work by the councillor who has charge of the gang. E ach ganger has a book in which to record the men and the

hours of work and the equipment used in lieu of labour. Th at is all the record that is made. To my knowledge, no gange r has ever reported that the men have not done a fair day's work. As President of the Council I am satisfied with the present method of attending to public works. I cannot suggest any . method that would bring about an improvement, but better results would be obtained if the workers were. provided with proper . tools. Occasionally the full fifteen days required are not exhausted. :Men start

with a clean sheet next year. If the Council provided picks and .shovels I think better results would follow. Probably men would not be called out on so many occasions. The roads are now in a fairly good condition.

3. Generally speaking, in the evidence given it is claimed, in effect, that the roads are in fairly good condition, and that the work done is satisfactory, but no report or summary of the. results is submitted to the Council, either by the gangers or the President. Metalled roads are not favoured except in the vicinity of the landing places, where the traffic is heaviest. One Councillor, however, condemns the present system altogether, and su ggests the abolition of the conditions under which adults are

required to do fifteen days' work on the roads, and the substitution therefor of a tax of 1s. per acre freehold or leasehold occupied or unoccupied. The following is portion of his evidence :-. . . I have property in two of the other States of Australia-New South Wales and

Tasmania- also on Norfolk Island. I . consider that I am paying a higher road rate on Norfolk Island than I am doing in either of the other tw_ o States and getting a worse service. I am of opinion that the work done on the roads in Norfolk Island is almost wasted. I know that large gangs of men are put to work, but, in my opinion their work is anything but satisfactory. There is a want of skill and knowledge and

the rate of pay, 4s. per day, is not conducive to good work. This 4s . a day is only for seven hours, but I consider it ridiculous for eight hours. There is any amount of employment on the Island and I believe it is not always av ailed of, alt hough it is always available. When visiting the Island as a tourist some few years ago, I observed gangs of men on t he roads were not doing their work, sitting on the roadside and seemed to be doing pretty well as they liked when they ought to have been under supervision. The whole system of road work is bad. It t ends to make the young men into loafers. I would abolish the conditions under Evidence,

which practically every adult man has to do fifteen days' work a year on the roads. I would propose a· pp. 201 • 202· tax of .ls. per acre, freehold and leasehold, occupied or unoccupied. At present absentee land-owners contribute nothing either in money or in kind for the upkeep of the roads, whilst on the other hand persons who do not own land do contribute. The rate of pay for work on the roads would then be 7s. a dav for eight hours. (The revenue from this ls. per acre would be £294 per annum). 1 would supplement" this by a tax on bachelors and any one holding a house with under 1 acre would be taxed at a rate of £1 ls. per

annum. The approximate value of £340 under my new scheme and even at the higher rate of wages would, under proper supervision, keep the roads in better repair than they are at the present time. P ersons would have the privilege of either working on the roads at the rate of 7s. per day or paying in cash. The road inspector's salary would have to be paid in addition to the above.


Evidence, p. 252.

The considers money paid in lieu of labour should be expended on the

roads, and not paid to -revenue. As against this, the ex-Registrar states the amount paid into revenu-e has not at any ti1n e met the an1ount expended by the Government in n1aterial. This latter witness further says :- · . . . . . I agree with the evidence of t he P resident of the Exec utive Council that if proper

tools for roadmaking were provided, I a m of opinion that the work would .not t ake fifteen days per man per year. I have known the work t o .have been done in nine days per man for t he y ear. I'>

4. On the 27th February last the Administrator pointed out the particular. ptece of road referred to in his evidence, and even allo-vving for the period which had elapsed since its c01npletion- sixteen rnonths- your Co1nn1issioner could not but agree that a considerably better result should have been achieved. As the -vvork complained of was considered so uns8J tisfactory by the Administrator, his attitude in holding aloof fron1 the road n1aintenance activities fron1 early Septen1ber, 1924, until 1926 is remarkable. Even though this work is solely a function of the Executive d ouncil, surely it was never intended that tl1 e chief administrative officer on the Island should cease to take a1i interest in such an in1polt.ant work. There were at least two courses open--either to exercise his right as a n1mnber ex-officio 9f the Council, and bring the matter officially under the notice of t he whoJe executive body, or report the -apparent laxity to the Minister. ·

5: is not the slightest doubt that the amount of work done by the labour gangs on the roads is not at all consistent with . the nun1ber of n1en mnployed. These gangs cannot and should not be with the ordinary road gangs on the Mainland, nor indeed with any similar nun1ber of workmen, as the men composing the gang are drawn from all classes of residents, young and old, many of whom do. little or no manual labour except when their turn . comes for public work. The organization is faulty, by reason of the absence o£ provision of suitable tools. Opportunity was afforded your Commissioner to observe the progress of road work in different parts of the Island, both in dry and wet weather. In one place, after ploughs had been used, a grader followed up-, and formed the road in a workmanlike manner; in others it was ludicrous to see men with spades, mattocks and sinall gardening hoes trying to remove the earth loosened by a plough from the sides to the middle of the track. Those who had shovels were in ·a decided . Attention is invited. ·the President's evidence (quoted above), . with regard to tools. Then, again, although nothing personal is intended, not every

successful candidate for Executive Council mmnbership is a competent or mender, but such is the practjce at Norfolk Island that the important post of overseer is invariably allotted to a whether experienced in road work or not. There

are, however, several qualified n).en in the Council who are quite competent to undertake thi$ duty, and it would be in the interests of the work if theirservices could be made available at all tl.mes. Councillor Robertson's staten1ent that "Absentee land-owners contribute nothing, ·either in money or kind, for the upkeep of the roads, whilst, on the other hand, persons who do not o-vvn land do contribute," raises a question worthy of consideration.


Public roads a:re used by everybody, therefore, everybody .should contribute towards their maintenance. Non-landholders should continue to contribute as at present and absentee owners of unoccupied freehold o:r leasehold land should, · it is submitted, be called upon to pay a tax equal to say one half of the amount which they be required to contribute in lieu of labour if they were resident on the Island, but

this amount should not exceed the equivalent of is. per acre. per annum of land owned nor should the whole tax payable 30s. _ per annum, irrespective of acreage.

On the whole, the roads are not in a bad state of repair, but there is no reason why they should not be better with the men and 1naterial at hand. Under the present systtnn, . which should be given further trial, the same men must . be employed, but ·should provided with suitable equipmenf-picks and shovels. It is suggested initial supply be pa!d for by the Government and

thereafter . maintained by Executive Council. · .

. . Administrator and an in1proved organization, your

CcnnmiSstoner IS satisfied that the labour now available, unskilled as much of it is, can be used to· greater advantage, and there is every reason to assume. that, with the proper co-operative spirit which it is believed will be evidenced under the proposed new conditions, the number of days'. service required of each male · adult will be considerably lessened. · ·


Under the Executive Council Ordinance 1925, section 17, sub-section 1 (d) the Exgcutive Council is authorized and directed to clear and keep free from noxious weeds as defined in the laws relating thereto, all public roads and all such comn1ons and public as have been placed under its. care and all other Crown lands

in Norfolk Island. In· every report hitherto furnished on Norfolk Island the prevalence of weeds has been the subject of Jnuch adverse con1ment, . and, notwithstanding the opinion expressed upon the need for continued effort towards their eradication, . it is regretted that it is still necessary to invite attention to the large area of land which

is useless owing to the growth of this pest. · . . . · . . .

. 2. The witnesses examined ,vere, with the exception . of the Administrator, members of the Executive Council. All but two of the councillors clain1 that the eradication of noxious weeds is being fairly well dealt one stated in evidence-. The back portions · of the Crown lands are in a terrible state-we · want someone to take up these lands. , The Council tries to do its best to keep down the weeds on these lands but shortage of labour and money it. This has been so for about fifteen years. Lantana is the curse. I have never

represented to the the need for special attention to the weeds. I do not. know whetb.e.r any other . member of the Council has made it the subject of special discussion. It been brought up,

out I do not remember by whom: Cape ·Tulip. is another. curse, but . not so bad 2.s Lantana. That was taken up a few meetings back and . we determined that the best time to get rid of them

was in May or Jul).e, and we intend to tackle the problem this year. Outside that, no special discussion has taken place in the Council. . . . · . -

Councillor Robertson, who is also a member of the Progress Association, when advocating the abolition of the Executive Council said- ...

1 52

. . . . . . . . they have neglected to carry . out the by-laws entrusted to them in regard to the Evidence. destru?tion_ of noxious weeds which are the .and beyond all control, E8.i199• 200,

rendermg large areas of Crown land useless for selectwn by the r1smg generatiOn . . . . . I estimate the acreage under noxious weeds to be about 4,500 acres, that is about half the Island. The Lantana on Crown land, about 400 acres. Leased Crown land, 140 acres ; reserves, 60 acres ; alienated, 140 acres ; total, 7 40 acres of fairly thick growth, but Lantana is present practically · all over the Island. The Cape Tulip growth cannot be estimated at this time of the year, but what I have seen of it, it would cover about 30 acres o£ fairly thick growth. As far as I can gather, it appeared about twelve years ago and has spread rapidly for the ·four or five years. It has also been seen on the Mission Station and Cable Station.

. . . . Another matter which interested ine was the spread of noxious weeds. I supported · a motion submitted to th_ e Council. A resolution was submitted to the Council and as a result, property owners were notified to take action to destroy the noxious weeds on their properties; The notices had some effect, but the result was very unsatisfactory. No report was made to any Council meeting and I do not know of any inspection being made. I understood it was the duty of the President to inspect these properties. That action was only in connexion with the and the Cape Tulip. I would charge the laxity in the matter of noxious weeds more against the Council than the Administrator.

3. In his evidence the Adnlinistrator eomn1ented upon the prevalence of noxious weeds and invited attentio11 to the fact that at the initial meetings of the newly-formed Councils in 1924 and 1925 he had specially urged drastic action in the direction of combating the spread of the pest, particularly tl1e Cape TuJip, v,-hich had made its Exhibit 77. appearance at Middlegate. He suggested that the school children (the public school is located at Middlegate) be offered a small bonus per hundred bulbs out of the an1ount

received as cash consideration f9F:-the depasturage of cattle and which, under the provisions of the Ordinance, must be expended in the destruction of noxious weeds. Exhibit 7s. He tendered to the Commission a copy of the last call to the eradication of n0xious weeds covering 399 days' labour, and added-

The res'clt is practically I went over it and failed to fi;d any results comparative to the Evidence, labGur involved. The farcical nature of the supervision of this all important work which is the President's p. 354· duty, and for which he is paid, and of the utter futility of tbis Ordinance as administered by the Executive Council, is appartmt in the noxious weeds now in evidence on the land which is provided under this latest

call to be cleared.

4. The area of Norfolk Island is 8,600 acres, and although the acre­

age under noxious weeds, estimated by witness, Councillor Robertson, at about 4,500 is much too high, the proportion of infected area to the whole is not creditable. It is noteworthy that, although certain land; wl 1:en owned by the 1\tielanesian Mission, was quite clear, it has since its re-transfer to the Crown, becon1e overgrown with arid other noxious weeds, indicating neglect on the part of the authorities. The of labour gangs as set out in section 7 of the Ordinance No. 2 of ·1920,

. relating to pasturage B"nd enclosure, if properly carried out, should be entirely _ effective in the speedy eradication of noxious weeds,' but the slipshod way in which the work is approached can result in nothing but failure. . .


5. Although it might be inferred from the Administrator's evidence that 399 days were expended on a certain work, this is not so, for it will be seen from Exhibit 78, referred to by him, the Council had £24 i..YJ. hand, which represents payment in lieu of 120 days' labour. Nevertheless, your Commissioner, having inspected the work, agrees with the Administrator that the result of the labour utilized was woefully unsatisfactory.

Inquiry with regard to the details of this and other classes of work done by _labour gangs, failed to elicit any definite or reliable information. From the meagre information obtained, it is clear that there is room for considerable improvement in the methods employed in the eradication of noxious weeds and in public works.

6. Your Commissioner observed that in dealing with Lantana the labour gangs simply chop it down and leave the roots, which means a fresh and more vigorous growth the following season. The most effective method would be to pull it out by the roots, an easy matter even in dry weather owing to the loose nature of the soil, and easier still just after rain. It is understood this has been adopted with success by one or two settlers.

· 7. The President of the Executive Council intimated that special attention would be given to the eradication of the Cape Tulip in June, in order that its further propagation might be prevented. It is hoped this work will be thoroughly accomplished each year for at least three consecutive years ·which, it is understood, is the period necessary for the extirpation of this plant by the means it is proposed to employ.

8. When it is decided to clear certain areas at different points on the Island the procedure is as follows :- The number of men and time -required for the work are estimated and the gangs formed, each being supervised by a Councillor and the whole work superintended by the President. Upon expiration of the time allotted, the supervising gangers are said to make a verbal report- when or to whom, however, is

doubtful-and the discharge of their responsibility is then regarded as complete. The necessity for a proper record of the actual work done, the number of men employed, the period of the year (this is important, particularly in the case of the Cape Tulip) and other details of the work done by each gang, the name of the Councillor in charge of the men employed in each gang, should be kept. Such information would be

valuable as the basis of discussion or comment in Council when reviewing the work and as a guide to requirements in the direction of man-days necessary for future clearings. It should be the duty of the Administrator to see that a strictly business­ like method is employed by the Council.


As the law stands, ample provision is made for the eradication of noxious weeds over all parts of Norfolk Island, whether on Crown lands or otherwise, therefore the Executive Council should be informed that it is evident that body has failed to fully realize its responsibilities with regard to eradication of noxious weeds, and unless a marked improvement is apparent within the next two years, the question of placing the tesponsibility in another direction wiH be seriously considered.


In the absence of harbours, and the prohibitive cost of otherwise

providing shelter for shipping, it is necessary to convey passengers and cargo by whale-boats to and from ships anchoTed about half-a-mile from the landing places. It frequently happens that vessels which have anchored, and commenced loading or unloading operations, are co mpelled by a change of wind to move to the other side of the Island. This means that the Island working party must also move, and, in the case of an outward vessel, cart their produce an additional 3 miles.

2. It is recognized that these conditions must continue with regard to the usual oversea steamers, but if the suggestion under t he heading " Harbours" is given effect to, the schooner Resolution and any other vessels of similar size and draught (about 70 tons) could be sheltered in Emily Bay from all weather, and loading effected directly from the shore at Kingston.

3. Complaints have been made hom time to time · that the service between Australia and Norfolk Island is unsatisfactory. It is said the steamer Makarnbo, employed by Messrs. Burns, Philp and Co., is considerably lacking in passenger


also that some time ago cargo was not picked up at Norfolk Island on

account of want of space. It was ascertained that some years back this vessel arrived at Norfolk Island from the New Hebrides with such a full cargo of copra that there was not sufficient space for the whole of the Norfolk Island produce. On another occasion, seven or eight years ago, when the lemon peel and juice industry was in full swing, although the Makambo was almost empty on arrival at Norfolk Island the freight offering .. was so great that a portion had to be left behind. The agents, however, immediately despatched another steamer- the Induna-and lifted the remainder. Since then the Makambo has never failed to t ake everything offering, andhas left with cargo space to spare.

· 4. The difficulty with regard to the passenger service has been recognized by the Department of Home and Territories, who entered into negotiations with Messrs. Burns, Philp arrd Co., with a view to the provision of a better vessel, but their reply was, and has been on every occasion upon which the matter has been broached, that if they did put on a bigger boat it would mean a higher subsidy. A subsidy of £15,000 per annum is already paid for the service, which includes the New Hebrides and Lord Howe Island

as well as .. Norfolk Island, and the payment of a larger subsidy is probably not justifiable. 5. Messrs. Burns, Philp and Company's Island manager tendered a statement, which sets forth details of passengers and cargo carried during the last twelve months, and in which the following remarks appear:-'---

. · . . . . . With regard to the a.gitation for the employment of a larger steamer in the service Exhibit than the s.s. Makarnbo, I wish to point out that the quantity of cargo shipped, both to and from the various ports called at, is small, and for quite a while past there has been more than twice the amount of space available than there was cargo offering. For this reason, the losses sustained by the Company maintain-ing the service, are very heavy, and they would be considerably greater were a larger steamer employed, owing to the extra cost of running such a ship.

The subsidy we receive from t he Commonwealth Government for the Lord H owe, Norfolk Island and New H ebrides section of our contract is £15,000 . This is for the combined services, embracing the Hebrides inter-island itinerary conducted by t he s.s . .Malcatea. We recently tendered for a renewal of the Pacific Island Services , offering as an alternative to the s.s. Makambo the s.s. Morinda for i;he New Hebrides through Service, at an additional £10,000 subsidy.

Although this Tender was not accepted, I doubt if we could renew the offer. The Company would probably require double the present subsidy were we to employ the s.s. Morindq, on the run. The whole question is governed by the quantity of cargo offering. Passenger traffic alone does not provide anything like a sufficient return to warrant the employment of the 1vl.orinda, as apart fr om the relatively small return in fares to and from Lord Howe and Norfolk Island, tlie cost of running a comparatively empty steamer

on a three-weeks i_Ound trip to Vila and the New Hebrides does not pay.

6. In order to relieve the passenger congestion Messrs. Burns, Philp and Co. inaugurated a new itinerary last Easter, by arrangement with the Commonwealth Home and Territories Department and the Chief Secretary's Department of the State of New South Wales, and, instead of Lord Howe Island being included in the round trip, a special trip is made there. Under this arrangement practically the whole of the

accommodation isavailable for Norfolk Island (that required for New Hebrides is small) and t4e whole for Lord Howe Island . . A return of two trips, each to Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands, under the new shows in the aggregate no greater quantity of cargo , but advantage was

taken on the April trip for a full booking of tourists (46) to Lord Howe Island ; on the May trip, however, the number of passengers who made the special trip to that island fell to nineteen, this being the normal average number, and Messrs. Burns, Philp and Company's Island manager states "It may be anticipated that when the warmer Evidence,

months comE{ in the passenger traffic will increase again, but not beyond the ordinary p. 597 '

accommodation of the steamer running to each place independently." Traffic between Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands is almost negligible. In cmmexion therewith the Exhibit m. following paragraph appears in Statement No . 1, previously referred to:-. . . . . The advantages of this arrangement (the doubling of the services to Lord Howe

and Norfolk I slands) provide great er benefits to a larger number of passengers who desire direct communication with Sydney, than the disadvant ages complained of by so me of the Island residents through the absence of communication between Lord Howe and Norfolk Island. This traffic was never of much proportion, and until lately was very infrequent, consisting of a little timber-Norfolk Island pine- to Lord Howe Island and a visit of a Lord H owe Island Cricket Team, which we carried at half rates . If a return visit of Norfolk Island Cricketers is contemplated, arrangements no doubt could be made to provide for a special deviation of the steamer en 1·oute, as required, and any small timber shipments from Norfolk

Island to Lord Howe could be landed on the outward voyage from Sydney without extra charge.

It will be seen from the above that, so far as the carrying capacity of the steamer Makambo is concerned, there is no cause for complaint under the new t ime-table, but the Islanders claim that suitable provision should be made for the carriage of their products, which are practically all perishable. Many shipments have been absolutely

152 3


ruined through battened down in the hold without Tourists and

others who have tra veiled by this vessel com.plain of the passenger accommodation, which is insufficient for the comfort -of travellers, when the length of the voyage is taken into consideration-always five days, and frequently longer. The cabins (except those on deck) are ill:-ventilated, and several are badly placed; men's lavatories and bathroom situated directly opposite the space set apart for serving passengers' food, being

separated only by a narrow p2Jssageway into which the doors of the lavatories open, The dining saloon, into which several cabins open, is also ill-yentilated ; probably a few electric fans would, to some extent, ameliorate this disability, but no such provision is made, either here or in the cabins. · ·

Observations.-Although the amount of freight conveyed does not warrant the employment of a larger vessel than the Makambo, the need for a more up-to-date and faster steamer, with suitable space for the Island products, is fully justified, 1 and, if provided, would, iri due course, lead to increased trade. The accommodation for passengers has been adversely commented upon for some years. In his report for the year ended 30th June, 1923, the then Administrator, General Parnell, under the heading

'' Tourists," says :-" Unfortunately, many possible visitors are deterred fro1n coming here owing to the poor travelling facilities "; this is as true to-day as it was in 1923. The s;s . Makambo has been running to and from Norfolk Island for years, and does not provide passenger accommodation con1parable with that on other ocean lines. She should be replaced by a faster vessel; better equipped in both passenger and freight accommodation. · ,


. The cost .of administration at Norfolk Island is approximately £3 ,500 per annun1; this includes the salary of the Administrator, £700 per annu1n, and £100 per annum allowance for entertainment. He is· also provided with furnished quarters. -A detailed list, together with salaries and duties of · the other officers, is shown in Appendix B. Several witnesses were exa1nined in connexion with that portion of the petition for a Royal Commission, wherein the petitioners expressed the opinion that a cheaper and more economical systen1 should be · adopted. 'Vhen questioned on each service separately the witnesses· were, with one exception, unable to suggest any alteration, and expressed thenlSelves satisfied v;rith the service given and the cost thereof . . One resident, however, advocated a re-cast of salaries, reducing that of the Administrator from £800 to £300 per annum, turning Government House into a boarding establishn1ent, and letting it at a rental of £100 per annu1n. In lieu of this he would provide the Administrator with another house of four or :five roo1ns. · l-Ie would not interfere with the salaries of the medical officer or the head school teacher, but otherwise would reduce salaries. This scheme does not appeal to your inasmuch as it is not

consistent with recognized organization to pay a controlling officer les$ than that received by his subordinates, nor isit considered a competent officer could be procured for such a saJ.ary; furthermore it is not at all likely that £100 per am1urn could be obtained as rent for Govern1nent House, either as a · boarding-house . or for any. other purpose.

2. With an Administrator taking an active interest in the doings of the inhabitants the major part of his time sh6uld be out of doors, and most of his clerical work. by his subordinates. Upon assuming control of Norfolk Island the present Adm1n1stra tor reduced the staff by one officer ; no further reduction can now be suggested either in numbers or salaries.

3. Your Commissioner became aware of the disabilities under which depositors in the Commonwealth Savings Bank suffered as against those who deposited their savings in the Norfolk Island Savings Bank, which bank was established in 1881 , and is controlled by six trustees, the managing trustee being Mr. F. vV. Pea:r;son, a :retired officer of the Union Bank of Australasia Ltd. The· rate-of interest allowed to the depositors is 2i per cent., and withdrawals to the full extent of any credit balance there may be standing in a depositor's nan1e are payable on den1and. Several payments of .£100 or thereabouts and one of over £150 have been n1ade. r All books and vouchers

are audited annually by the Government atlditor, and a copy o£ the balance-sheet is posted on the several public notice boards on the Island, a copy always being sent to the Adn1inistrator. l\1r. Pearson was good enough to supply this information to your ·Commissioner. As against the above, while the rate of interest allowed by the Common-

wealth Savings Bank is higher, t;he facilities for withd:r:aw!1ls are In


the first··place, Norfolk Island oiliy an :deposits lodged on the opening

of-an are to Sydney, where abook is issued and sel).t to Norfolk- Island

-usually by return boat . . The depositor is then at liberty to \Vithdntw to the, ' extent of £10 only on one day without reference to the Head Office, but as the Post Office is not open regularly on more than one da.,y a week (it is, however; open ·for business on hoat- days=--twice in· five weeks), financial bt1siness transactions

The Commonwealth Bank authorities were interviewed by your Commissioner in recently:, .. and there is now every prospect of an amelioration of existing conditions to thf} of making Norfolk Island a Bank instead of o,.n Agency (this will enable th.e P()stmaster to issue a passbook on the spot}, and _ tC) permit l6cal ·v;rithdrawals of fairly . large without referenc.e to Sydri_ ey.

- 4. -_A wireless set was installed on the Island a few rnonths ago, and the Adrninis-trator attendeQ. to it. The usual tpoubles inseparable from the facility

ha:ve been encountered, the chief statics and atmospherics, but not,vithstanding · this, several News Bulletins were issued- during your Connnissioner's stay on the Island and were much appreciated. It should be added tli9Jt, o\ving to the difference in time betweeh Sydney a:rid Norfolk Island, the reception of news items and typing means

very late hours. · T'he continuance of this ·work or its delegation to another officer is a matter £Qr the Administrator to determine.


the present numerical strength of the Administrative Staff with the respective

salaries be continued, and that regulations be brought · into operation ·to regulate the appointment of officers and other matters connected with the Service.


In the laws in force at Norfolk Island there is adequate provision for the proper government of the Territory, but a great of benefit would accrue both to the

Administration and to the community from the establishment of a self-contained code of legislation. ·· · ·

,. · ·2 .. It is the practice ·of the Central Administration to forward to the Territory

twenty copies of any new ordinance promulgated ; this number should be increased to, say, 30, in order that sufficient -spare copies might be available for purchase by the public if required;· · · · · ·

3. The Public Trust Funds Control Ordinance of 1926 provides that moneys collected or raised for public or charitable purposes, if not disbursed within seven days after. ;·_they are received, shaH , be deposited in the Norfolk Island Branch of the Commonwealth Bank in a trust account to be opened for that purpose, and that the treasurer or person in of ·the funds shall submit to the Administrator a

certified- to by, approved auditor. There does not appear any

necessity for . these provisiQns. : There is no evidel).ce that funds raised for the purposes specified been misapplied or misappropriated; should occasion arise, there exists in c}vil and criminal law provision for recovery and punishment for

misapplication of such moneys. At the time t);lis _Ordinance was a_ ssented compliance with its provisions was in some cases impracticable owing to the limited . . facilities available. . Iri . erroneously applying the provisions of this law to ExluM

1 1('

moneys :raised prior to the date the Ordinance 'became operative, it was found that the. fp::nds, if banked, could not be available for disbursen1ent on the date arranged b)r the public, and, as -a consequence, it was ·found necessary to deposit the moneys in a . safe · controlled by the Administrator. · Such a procedure is decidedly

ur+satisfitetory. · Your Commissioner is convinced that the general· effect of the · Ordinance will operate against the of; the Territory. ·



(a)- Trust Funds CQnt.rol Ordinance 1926 ..

(b) That the laws· of. Norfolk. Island-be ··consolidated. · : __ :: . J t·o ·- Y •..

152 tJ



· "Need for immediate e·ffective steps for reafforestation" was one of the resolutions . carried at the public meeting referred to elsewhere in this Report, and the matter was accordingly brought forv1ard by the Councillor deputed to do so. I-Ie recognized that action: had been taken with regard to pines but, he added, "There Evidence,p. 45 · is an outstanding need for afforestation in hardwood." The Administrator stated

that he had already taken the matter up with the Home and Territories Department Exhibit 79· and produced copy of his letter to the Secretary on lst August, 1925.

2. Your Commissioner inspected the reserves, and has pleasure in bearing testimony to the result of the Adn1inistra tor's action, particularly at Rocky Point, where upwards of 50 per cent. of the young trees planted last year appeared to be doing well notwithstanding one witness's opinion that only about 4 per cent. would survive. Your Commissioner examined and· counted several rows of the young trees Ev:d ence, p. 46• to the num.ber of 600, and is of the opinion that at least 50 per cent. will reach

maturity. 3. It has been ascertained that a Report on the Forests of Norfolk Island has recently been furnished by Mr. C. E. Lane-Poole, Comn1onwealth Forestry Adviser, who, after a special visit to the Island in November last, recommended the

Administrator to add a number of blocks aggregating 485 acres 1 rood 31 . perches to the Mount Pitt reserve (see page 14 of his report). From information supplied by Exhibit I5s. the Administrator to your Con1missioner, so1ne of the blocks referred to by Mr. Lane­

Poole are not available, as they are occupied under leasehold conditions, but the area proposed to be added to l\1:ount Pitt reserve, although slightly reduced, will still be Appendix1tfap. appreciable. The disposition of land generally is show11 on Map Appendix.

4. On page 15 of his report, M·r. Lane-Poole advocates the introduction ·of a tree from overseas to supply the needs of the Island for hardwood.


It is suggested that early action in the direction indicated by Mr. Lane-Poole be taken.


A return dated 21st April, 1926, compiled by the Constable, shows the following live stock :--:Horses (including foals) Cattle (milch cows only) ..

Cattle, ordinary (including calves) Sheep (including lan1bs) Swine· Poultry-·

575 732 1,342 140


Geese . . . . 1

Turkeys 272

Ducksv 223

Fowls 5,154

2. The infusion of new blood among cattle is an urgent necessity. The Administrator interested himself in this direction, and was instrumental in obtaining a shorthorn bull of first class pedigree from Victoria; he was also negotiating for the importation of two stallions when the bull disappeared, and it was decided no.t to

proceed further in regard to the horses. _ ; 3. Some months .ago a new settler imported a coaching stallion from Australia, and during the season, between 20 and 30 horse-owners took advantage of the service. 4. In ·addition to his efforts with regard to cattle and horses, Colonel Leane

endeavoured to improve the quality of the po1-1ltry (fowls) by the importation of two pens of the very best breeds of heavy poultry which could be obtained from Hawkesbury College. He gave these his personal attention and distributed a large number of settings of eggs .gratis. He also ·reare-d 71 chickens, mostly male birds, and when they were four and a half months old, announced them by public notice as being available to Islanders in exchange for cockerels of nondescript breeds. Only eight persons took advantage of this o:ffer_:_one expressed himself thus:-

. . .- . . . for home purposes no breed is so satisfactory as the ordinary common stock we have on the Island-they are hardy gr:ea_ t _ finding living.

1 527

5. Upon the voyage from Sydney to Norfolk Island your advantage of the few hours' stay to land at 'Lord Howe Island. One thing noticeable was the abundance of feed and the excellent condition of the On arrival at Island the miserable appearance of the cattle and the sca-rcity of grass on the

waste lands stood out in marked contrast. The cattle are undersized and ill-framed, and ·only a very · number of decent animals was seen although the Island was traversed frequently. This condition of affairs has been brought about by several causes; probably the most serious is in-breeding, which is applicable not only to stock running at large but generally. Another cause is the overstocking of the reserves, and again " There is no efiort made generally up to the present of providing Evidence, p. 64 • food for dairy cows at the known shortage periods of the year." -

6. In stating the above, the drought conditions which obtained during the early part of the year have not been overlooked.

7. Your Commissioner a 1neeting of the Executive Council on the

3rd J\1arch, 1926, and in response to the President's invitation to speak, referred to the indifferent class of stock and its condition, and expressed the opinion that the time had arrived for the Council to limit the number of stock running on the open reserves or take . steps to clear the noxious weeds from a 1nilch larger area. The Executive

Council, which controls the reserves, does not restrict the number of animals depastured so long as owners are prepared to pay the animal depasturage fee for each beast, but it is · known that large numbers of stock are deliberately placed or allowed to stray on these reserves without paJyn1ent. Under the Ordinance, owners desirous of depasturing stock are required to make written application in January of each year and, at the same time, to submit statement of the number and description-including brands and n1arks-of ·the stock to be depastured.

8. Fron1 the evidence tendered bv the Police Officer, whose duties include that of Herdsman, it is evident that these are not rigidly enforced by the Council. He says:- - ·

. . . . . In February, 1925, I obtained from the Secretary to the Council a list showing

79 horses and 184 he_ ad of cattle-a total of 263. Applications for depasturage, like dog registrations, pp . .• 6 ;)- .. tio.

are due in January. The Norfolk Islanders have defective memories in these matters. In the course of my duties I discover cattle at large without permission, and I generally go and see the owner or · drop him a note. The usual excuse is that the matter has been overlooked, or application was just about to be made. The increase from 263 to 651 was mainly due to my efforts. Later in

the year---:about September-! made a careful survey of the number of a.nimals at large. I found the number to be about 1,000. 1 think there is somewhere about that number · at large to-day. There is no stock legally at large for this year so far as I know-the Secretary to the Couneil has not yet notified me of the approvals issued. I think he said they were waiting for the ''Brands

Ordinance" to come into op eration. Being dissatis:6.ed with the number legally l:J,t large in September, 1925, and as all applications were then in so far as I knew, it appeared that quite a number, if not all of the owners, were running at large more than they were entitled to. · I .submitted a report Exh ibit 56• to the Administrator. (Tendered to Commission.) This application was discussed in the Council at the

October meeting, and after lengthy discussion, during which I was asked to address the meeting and explain the terms of my memorandum, the Council delegated to the Herdsman the . power to take action as was suggested, that is to summons without reporting to the Council. The . Council also debated the. last paragraph and came to another decision. That to my mind is an important point in view of the present state of pasturage. In my opinion it would be far better to produce a number of well-fed animals than double the number of half-starved stock. : - . · · ·

With reference to horses, he suggests that the rate for right of pasturage be 6s.· instead of 4s. per head per annum, on the -grounds that a horse eats approximately double, and its valu(} is double or treble, that of a cow. The suggestion is timely and should be adopted.

9. \Vith the rigid of the Ordinance relating to Pasturage and

Enclosure, and the closer attentwn by owners, rendered necessary by the a1nendment of section 9 (1) as suggested under the heading " Depasturage of Stock," it is considered that the pasturage 'on the reserves will be sufficient for the lesser number of for the present, but the. Council should, dealing with applications_ to! right of pasturage, carefully consider the carrying capacity of the reserves from tip.1e to tin1e, . and if necessary the nurnber of stock. Th-e better condition of the stock will

thus be ·assur.ed. - - · · · · - ·

10. _With referenre to the infusion of new cbl<;wd, -the . evidence, discloses ·that a pedigree bull, which w3,s obtained on the advice in 1924, disappeared.

The . generally expressed opinion is animal fell over the rocks into the sea-a happening not uncommon ·on the Island. It-is therefore considered that the -loss should --

Evidence, pp. 276-277.

replaced the Oo1nmonwealth Gove:rnnient: · -·Mr. :C. C. R. -- Nobbs the

1iecessity -for an improved breed of cattle. He - -

. . . . . I suggest that under the it should be the duty and privilege of

the Federal Government to provide pedigree bulls, and if necessary, on similar lines to those adopted by the State Governments, to improve the breed of cattle in their respective States. Pecuniary benefits should be a minor consideration as compared to benefits advantages of residents of the Territory, and I would strongly suggest that one breed be sent-Hereford. . ·


It is suggested- . (1) That with a view to utilizing to the best advantage "Right of Pasturage," the attention of the Executive Council be · directed to the need for limiting the number of on ; this can be effected by a

more rigid enforcement of the relating to Pasturage and

Enclosure, particularly sections 4, 5, and 12. Also -to the advisableness of increasing the rate of pastu1·age for horses fro:m 4s. to 6s. annqm, (2) That favorable consideration be given to the purchase of a suitable bull for the use of the Islanders at a nominal



Another matter brought up was " The refusal of the Administrator to permit the depasturing of a limited number of bulls on the island." 2. Mr. C. C. R. Nobbs, representing the public meeting, stressed the necessity for the continuance of a permission which had always been g1.'anted until the present Administrator assumed control, when; " without being acquainted with the conditions Evidence, p.

64 ' and .-cirCUlTIStanceS Of the place, adopted a rigid and attitude i..11 regard

to:thi!S matter." Mr. Nobbs further . . . . . Under the peculiar C?ircumstances of the place, the practice of depasturing a limited number of bulls has been found absolutely and it is generally considered that this actt:l as Evidence J!. 63 • a hardship on the residents, as without this. method the increase of stock, supply of milk, cream,.and b-q.tter

has diminished noticeably, and if continued will have a deplorable effect on ,yhe supply of meat and dairy products. . _ _· .

Exhibit 88. He then went on to refer to a petition signed by 33 residents, which was to

the Administrator, without avail. _ · - -

3. In all ten witnesses were examined, and the majority favoured the depasturage of a limited number of bulls on the public reserves. Robertson and

Police Officer the opposite view, and the lat.ter said:-

. . . . . As a stock-owner I am against the pra.otice of being permitted to run at large,

and would prefer not to breed any of the bullfi I ha ye seen on the lsland excepting from the last Government bull, whose progeny promised very well indeed. I ·consider it economically unsound to breed Evidence, e:xeepting from the very best available. The rate for service is only no:tninal, and if cows are worth PP- 267- 268· keeping they are worth looking after. The amount of butter produced in 1924 from 700 cows was 20,QOO

roughly about 28 lb. per cow per annum. The Island ought to have butter for export instead of having to import it during half the year. At the present time fe ed is a more important proposition than bulls, as cows will not breed unless i:n fairly good condition.

Notwithstanding the pleas put forward for the continuance of a practice which one witness stated had existed without harm for the benefit of the Islanders for the last 70 years, your Commissioner has no hesitation in supporting the Admiriistrator. · 4. When travelling daily across the Island, the presence of numbers of nondescript cattle set one wondering why their owners had not long since curtailed their increase; and made an effort to possess something of better quality. Owp.ers do not appear to

have realized that one well-conditioned cow gives more milk than . two or three poor ones, and at less cost for fodder and attention. 5. Although some inconvenience is being experienced by owners who relied upon the free service under the old c<:n1.ditio:ns, this is far 011tweighed by the - for a oaJ;eful selectioA of at one

on the wh? a fairly· good bull; apimal is not a_ llowed to run at large,

and t;h.E} owner 1s prepared to use him for stud purposes at a very reasonable fee. Doubtless other progressive residents will be glad to follqw his e:trample.


It that section 9 of Ordinance No. 2 of 1920 be so amended that the . of bulls over the age of twelve months be prohibited the authority

of the being applicable to entire hQr$es only, · .


· · In .several blocks of the land vacated by the Mission

and re-sold to the Government in 1923 have been taken up under leasehold conditions, over 28 years, by people from Australia, who appear keen on getting the very

best out of this prolific soil. · .. · _

. 2. Many ·of the_ Islanders have lately recognized more fully the advantage of continued effort, and the result can be seen in the increased areas which have been cleared and planted, mostly with bananas, for which a good market is·found in Australia.

1 529

3. Colonel Leane has been particularly active in his endeavours to demonstrate to the Islanders what can be done in way of . raising products by ordinary effort. · Exhibit 63 (photographs) shQws how the Administrator turned a portion of waste land Exhibit 63. into a productive vegetable garden. He also by an endeavour to E:_hibits 64-66,

.. . b d d . . h h . f h I l d 67 69' 70. ascertain y correspon ence an expenment, w1t t e co-operation o t · e s an . whether artificial n1anures would improve the yield from the soil. His o\vn experience Evidence,_ in this regard would appear to show that .very imprqvement was apparent. He PP· 351


3 a 3 •

expresses disappointment at the lack ·of interest displayed · by those ·to whom he distributed manure for puTposes. There are, vnfortunately, many whQ appear Exniblt 65. c9ntent to lead a '' go-day'' life, but it is that, with the ex_ ample

recently set by some o£ the Islanders, gre{tter numbers will realize advantages to be . gained from a more a:ppreciative use of the land of. which they so beca:q.te possessed, and that, as a result of their they will share in benefits, the absence of whi9h is due not less to lack of appreciation tq -the need for comn1ercial enterprise.

4. As against 214! acres 'Q.nder cultivation mentioned in the Administrator's report for the -year ended 30th June, there were 300 acres at 31st December, 19"25, and from the activities noticeable durmg the first four months of the present year, show a further increase as at· the end of June, 1926. Appended is a return Appeudlx showing the result of cultivation for the year 31st December1 1925.


Lemon Juice and Peel.-Froni inquiries made in Sydney by your Commissioner it is questionable whether the lemon juice and peel industry, which was so extensive and ren1unerative seven or eight years ago, cap. It was ascertained that

eont:racts been entered into with . several · bodies in the citrus fruits areas· of New Sou,th and continued supplies !llore f$atisia.ctory thai}. t}lose obtained: Norfolk Island are assured. It remains for the Islanders to determine whether they can successfully compete both in price and quality with the Australian . product. Several la,nd-holders are givipg further attention ·to the .·raising of Lisbop. lemons by grafting on the common len1on stocks-this may have an effect on the lemon juice and ·pee] industry .

. 2 .. Pas_s,iofb Fruit Pulp.-Passion grows. wi.ld·practically all oye!. ; Evidence, the quahty lS ana With ·the grown· ln A.ustraha. p. 268"

Lf1st yea.r passion fruit pulp to the value of £229 was exported. ·

. · 3. l)qirying.-:-Ip. his · Wickstead remarked upo;n the

low yield of butter during the year 1924, viz., ·20,000 lb. from 700 cows, roughly about 28lb. per cow per In a return- for _the- year · ended 31st December, 1925,

compiled by the sanw prw:Q.. anq the

- '

of milch cows 732, an average of 17 lb. per cow. Casual inquiry among the residents elicited the rejoinder that butter making was not profitable at certain periods of the year, and it was cheaper to import it. This may or may not be so, but, notwithstanding the absence of cooling chambers and other aids to successful manufacture, the yield is absurdly low, and is most likely attributable to the poor quality of the herds, which has been co1nmented upon under the headings " Live Stock " and '' Depasturage of Bulls."

With the better class of stock which must inevitably follow the more rigid supervision suggested under those headings, the butter yield should i1nprove considerably. There is no reason either why the manufacture of che'ese ·should not be undertaken. 4. Whaling.-vVhaling has not been as actively followed during the past year or two as previously. It was ascertained that there was some difficulty in placing a previous yield of oil, and ·in the absence of quick monetary returns, the boatmen eventually slackened off their enthusiasm.. ·Recently, ho-vvever, it was announced by cable that a

motor la"':lnch and harpoon gun had been acquired in Auckland, New . Zealand, and would be brought to the Island on the return trip of the schooner Resolution. It has been observed from the Melbourne press that this motor launch was recently wrecked on the New Zealand coast. The loss is. regrettable, as it means a serious setback to the

Islanders. It was anticipated that, with the aid of an up-to-date plant, the industry would be actively revived, and prove profitable to the whalers and beneficial to the Island.


The co-nfiguration of Norfolk Island is such that there are no inlets sufficiently sheltered to afford safe refuge for any oversea vessel. The question of rendering the landing places more efficient has engaged the attention of the authorities for many and although several schemes have been put forward, the estimated cost was always

·. ·· found to be prohibitive. In the evidence taken recently, two proposals were mentioned,

viz., a breakwater between Point Hunter Nepean Island, and one at Ball Bay; the advocate for the first-mentioned considered that whatever the cost of Commonwealth Government should · carry out tJ1e work. The witness who mep.tioned the Ball Bay schem·e admitted that· the interest on the outlay could never be paid by the Islanders­ he therefore advocated as an alternative, an expenditure of £1,000 on Emily Bay, which . he considered would n1eet requirements for the time being.

2. Emily Bay is on the south side of the Island, and on its shore a 60-ton schooner was built by a nu1nber of residents, and launched on 30th November, 1925, with a view . to opening up trade relatioiis with New Zealand. The schooner was named Resolution. · It was found necessary to deepen the entrance to the Bay to enable the vessel to get out,

for which purpose the ·Administrator made the sum of £100 available. He intimated to the 1nanager of the company that it must pe clearly understood that when the schooner left the Bay there would be no more money' spent on the reef, and advised the employment of as many men as possible to make a good job of the entrance. He further advised the building of beacons on each side of the opening as a guide to the location of the reef at high-.water mark. Only sufficient of the reef was removed to adn1it of the vessel being taken out at high water-'-evidently on account of dissatisfaction by reason of the rate of pay, ls. per hour. Mr. G. E. Nobbs, says:---.

• • • • • At a meeting of the farmers and growers ·when the schooner was nearly complete,

P· 206· they authorized Mr. Chas. Bailey to make arrangements with the Administrator for the deepening of the

channel through Emily Bay. We knew through Mr. Bailey that there was £100 for the job. As soon as we had word from Mr. Bailey we made a start, but after knowing the ridiculously low wages offered to us, ls. per hour working in water, we made ou.t amongst ourselves that we would only do just enough work to get the vessel out. Some days we can only put in three or four hours' work on account of the weather. The workmen never drew a penny of their wages for themselves, gave it all to Mr .. Bailey for ship's expenses in Auckland. · · · · · · · ·· · · · · · .·

In his evidence the Manager, Farmers and (}rowers' .Ass?ciation, states:-Evidence .. · . ; • • · . ·Before the schooner was completed the present. Administrator and I discussed the

· r 210- 211 · question of. blowing the reef. He asked if we had sufficient ·water to get out ·of the I said, "I

don't think we have sufficient w.ater." He agreed to put on twelve ine:n to d.o the .work immediately to help us to get out, and as we were short of funds I suggested to him if he would allow us to do the work so that have some money to work on, to which. he finally agreed . . The ;rate of pay was ls. per hour per man on the understanding that if we did this work we would not have to pay harbour dues, and I also

asked him for the privilege of leasing an acre of groundon the ·water front where we could put up a shed and erect a wharf when we .were far enough advanced to do so. He agreed to this, and said he could not speak for his successor, but as far as he was· concerned it was quite all ·right. ' The m.·en ·worked as they


alw11ys did-when they feel inclined. They lost interest on account of the work extended being over such a lengthy period. Qne or two were inclined to question the rate of pay as being too low, but majority thought that, as it enabled them to get their vessel out, t}:.ey were quite willing to carry on at that rate. I though of the compensations offered, and explained that the ls. was not the only consideration, that freedom of harbour dues had been promised, and also a piece land for a shed and a wharf. On the reef only enough work to get the schooner out was done. We were working at ship so long that at that time we were unable to devote more time to the reef than we did, but later on, when the occasion should warrant it, we were quite willing to do what we could. We are not holding the Administrator responsible for the payment of the ls. an hour in any future we do. He said," Once the ship is through the reef my responsibility ceases." He o:ffered me every assistance that he could in the way of gear and other appliances. We do not propose to make any further application to the Administrator for funds, as I learn from the Administrator there are no funds. I do not think the reef will be tackled for some time to come, owing to the experience we had going out, not unless it is made safe. It is not safe now. I think it is the duty of the q.overnment to attend to the matter ; Governments in other places do so.


The amount actually expended on the reef was £23 13s. 6d., but, as the

· Administrator considered the importance of the work warranted £100, also in view of the enterprise exhibited by the Islanders in building . and equipping their Qwn vessel, it is suggested that the question of further deep.ening and widening the entrance to Emily Bay . be favorably considered, but for. the present only to the extent of making it safe for the schooner '' and vessels of similar size and draught.

Beyond this work your Commissioner does not suggest that anything further he done.


Cascades Landing.-Attentioil is invited to the possibility of a landslip imn1ediately at the rear of the Cascades landing place; the cliffs are cracked and n1ay faH at any tiine; in fact, a few months ago, a landslip did occur, and the road close by was affected, but fortunately there was no· traffic at the time. On boat days numbers of people are engaged at the landing, and a fall of rock during shipping activities would be disast rous. Even on an "off" day the building in which the telephone is installed and the winch would

probably be destroyed.


It is suggested that this matter should receive the eariy attention of the



The Secretary, Farmers and Growers' 'Association, speaking on behalf of the EYicteuce , members. advocated the t ransfer of control of Norfolk Islai1d to New Zealand. I-Ie PP · 92 -

96 .

stated that the schooner Resolulion had been built for the New Zealand trade, and i.t was expected she vv-ould .make seventeen trips a year with an estimated shipn1ent value of £1,000 gross. He believed that if Norfolk .Island were ceded to New Zealand, the Government \vould put on their own steamer. · He pointed out that Australia is

approximately 1,000 1niles fron1. Norfolk Island, while the nearest point of Nmv Zealand

1 53 1

is only 400. rniles-Auckland being 600 n1iles distant. Moreover, l'T ew Zealand offers b 1 r N flkll d 1 t th d A', . .C 'h .h 3r,38,3v,-LO . a etter mar cet ro r .or· Slan proauc s an oes ustrana, 1.0r t _ e reason t. at .. . ,. fruits t1imilar to those of the Island are produced within the Commo1rvvealth. ' · · ·

2. The President of the same Association expressed hin1self as follows :-. . . . . · I have given the question of this Island being ceded t.o New Zealand very careful consideration, and so far as I can see, that is the only course open to us. It will benefit us so far as our produce is concerned ; that is, the Island generally. It would also be a benefit so far as our shipping Evidonce,

enterprise is concerned ; we wo:uld get more loading. · I have considered it from the point of view of all PP· 209--210· the activities of the Island. · I came to my opinion principally on what I have heard regarding New Zealand's

, l \

' '• ' •,

. •' treatment of the other islands she has recently taken over. They are being assisted in every possible way

successfully and profitably. The New Zealand Government is assisting the Islanders in every possible way'-o-lending them money for roads, water works, and also assisting them in providing them with ships and putting a stop to other monopolies that are injurious to the welfare of the islands. I refer to Samoa and Nieue Island. I ''las told in New Zealand that the Governnient there was the only Government that was

complimented by the League of Nations for the successful management of mandated territory. They have been asked to take over the Union Islands, and the New Zealand Government has expressed its willingness to do so. So far as I can see, the whole thing so far as Commonwealth control of Norfolk Island is concerned is a failure. I have nothing particular to detail, only I judge from the general state of things. I do not say that Norfolk Islam). is in need of a special water supply. I do not say that the Commonwealth should supply money for the making of the roads. I do not think the Commonwealth Government should supply money. I think the residents should be given the opportunity of providing their own living and revenue. I always thought one of the first duties of the Government was to find a suitable market for the products of the people. 'l'his has not been satisfactorily attended to by the Commonwealth. I do not think that an

improved service would meet requirements, so far as Australia is concerned, because they grow the same commodities as we do.

3. The Administrator does not agree that transfer to jNew Zealand would be greatly to the advantage of the Island, but he suggests that the Commonwealth would benefit to the extent of £3,500 per annum, which it has contributed ever since the Island was taken over from New South and the many other (housands it spends on the mail contract. He urges serious consideration of the question, and adds that with

Norfolk Island cut out of the run, the New Hebrides could well be provided for direct from Sydney by the Pcu;ifique, and Norfolk Island could' obtain its mail service from Auckland by the Union boats which trade with Fiji, and which could easily take in Norfolk Island en rattle. He, however, points out that there may be strategical reasons and the presence of the Pacific Cable Station which may affect the question,

but as a commercial proposition, he believes the transfer would be sound. Observations. - It is understood that, in 1896, the New Zealand Government asked for Norfolk Island to be transferred to New Zealand, but the British Government decided otherwise. ·

Although your Commissioner considers this matter is beyond the scope of his inqumes, he is of the opinion that the evidence submitted does not warrant any change . .


The population, according to the Census of 1911, was 085 persons; this included 193 persons cmmected 'vith the Melanesian Mission, leaving the other population at 792. The Melanesian Mission Station was removed from the Island_ a few years ago , and about the same time the staff at the Cable Station was somewhat_reduced; the ordinary population has not increased; it is at present bet·ween 750 and 800.

2. The number of births registered during the last twenty yearsis as follows:-Five years, 1906-1910 88


1911-1915 88


191&-1920 88


1921-1925 63

For twenty years 327

This increase is balanced by the number of young people who have left the Island; the deaths have been few.

3. It was stated in evidence that the conditions generally of the population have vastly improved during the last few years, and the opinion was expressed that there is suffieient scope for a population of four or five times the present humber, and the

prospects are that this will be achieved by the development of the agricultural products from the land. ·

4. That the Island is capable of supporting a much population,is undoubted. Its future prosperity rests with the Islanders themselves ; but unless they show a better appreciation of their heritage and make use of the land mote .fully than they have -lone hitherto, they cannot hope to be prosperous from a commercial point of view.


COMPLAINT OF ROBERT McPHAIL. The complaint of Mr. Robert McPhail, an invalid residing at Norfolk Island, has its origin . in criminal proceedings instituted by direction of the Administra.tor against complainant's wife, his foster daughter and his two sons. The proceedings were followed by the convictions of the accused persons. Informations S\Vorn on the 3rd December, 1924, charged Charlotte McPhail (18 years), John and Thomas McPhail

(12 and 10 years of age respectively) with the theft of one clothes basket, the property of His Majesty the King, and Mary Ann McPhail with receiving property well knowing it to have been stolen. Mr. McPhail complains that the proceedings against his wife and children were harsh and unjust; that the convictions recorded against Mary, John, and Thomas McPhail were against the evidence, Charlotte McPhail was not connected by evidence with the removal of the basket, and in her case there had been a gross miscarriage of justice ; that the Administrator's adjudication in the cases was

contrary to the ethics of justice, inasmuch as nominal owner of the property alleged to . have been stolen, he {Erected the prosecution, and as Magistrate, disc1osed a biassed mind in the conduct of the court proceedings. rlhe facts are as follow:-2. On the 26th November, 1924, a Thanksgiving Service was conducted at All

Saints Church, and arriong . the offerings was a quantity of vegetables

contained in a basket fTo'm the Administrator, Colonel E. T. Leane. The evidence of John F. M. \v,ho conveyed the Administrator's offering to the chureh, shows that a label affixed to the basket bore the words " Government House, Norfolk Island." On the evening of the date mentioned, Mr . Jacob Barnes, headmaster at Norfolk Island School ,saw the basket in the midst of vegetables at the rear of the church and examined it closely for marks by which he might identify the owner. He states a label was not attached and there were no marks indicating to whom the article belonged. Further evidence that the basket bore no identification label is found in the testimony of Mary Buffett, George R. Quintal, ahd members of the lVt:cPhail family . Qui11tal, caretaker of

the church, observed on the November, th3ot all the vegetables had not been disposed of, and as he left the church, he called to ChaTlotte McPhail that she might take them if she so desired. The girl informed Quintal that she would send her brother to the and Quintal states h3 then said "Donlt take the basket." Charlotte McPhail

states that she did not hear any reference to the basket, and Quintal in his evidence states he does not think that the girl heard the latter part of his conversation. The house in which the McPhail family reside is situate on an allotment adjoining the church, hut is approximately 75 yards distant from the roadway and, when receiving the message, Charlotte McPhail states she found it necessary to leave the house and walk towards

the roadway along which Quintal was passing. Shortly afterwards her brother, John, returned to his home instructed him to visit the church and remov.e the vegetables. The Iad saw his mother in company with his brother, Thomas, and informed them of . his mission. Both boys then entered the churchyard; John informed his mother that

there was a hasket with the vegetables, and Mrs. McPhail, with the knowledge that one of her relatives had conveyed vegetables to the church in· a basket, and considering it not unlikely that the article was the property of her sister, instructed the boys to bring it to the house, remarking, "It might be Aunt Est.elle's." The basket and the vegetables

were removed in daylight. Mrs. McPhail failed to identiiy the basket as the property . of her relative, and in the presence of her daughter, Charlotte, said " I will put it tmder the boys' bed until I find the owner." That Mrs. McPhail made known the fact that she had the basket in her possession and made inquiries respecting its ownership, is

disclosed in the evidence of Emily Buffett and Emma Bataille. The latter witness was aware that a laundry basket was missing from Goverm11ent House, but did not associate the loss with the basket she knew to be in the possession of Mrs. McPhail, because she states they were described in different terms, and she did not inform Mrs . McPhail that

the Government House basket was missing. It is shown in evidence that similar baskets are to be founJ in at least four different homes on the Island.

3. The Administrator informed Constable Werner of the loss of the basket, and some days later instructed the constable that he was required to locate it a:nd to issue a summons against the persons in whose possession it was found. In evidence, the Administrator says- :Rvidenc• p. 41> 2.

. . . . . My instructions were that he was to issue a summons and he had no discretion in thn matter.

In the course of inquiries, the Constable was informed by Mr. Robert McPhail that a basket was brought from the church by his son, but no member of his family was aware to whom it belonged. The Constable awaited t he return of Mrs. MePhail;

153 3


who was informed by her husband that the Constable had called for the basket. "\Vithout seeing·_ the po lice officer, or holding co1nn1unication vvith hirn, Mrs. J\iicPhail carried the basket to ·vvhere the Constable vv-as standing. Returning later on .the sa1ne day, the Constable served a surn1nons directed to Charlotte lVIcPhail charging her with the theft of the article. J'll:r; :McPhail informed the Constable that he was in error, as Charlotte did not go to ·· the church , and did not touch the basket. A request by the Constable for the return of the sun1mons was· refused by l\·1cPhail. On the following day, sun1rDonses charging theft and receiving stolen property were ·served upon the two boys and McPhail. The cases ·were heard at the No rfolk Island Court on the 5th Dece1nbe:r, 1924, the Adn1inistTator, as Chief Iviagistrate, adjudicating. ·cnder cross-examination by lVIr. :lVIcPhajl, who represented the menibers of his fan1ily , Constable Exhibit. n9 (a). Werner said :-

. . . ; I issued the summons against Charlotte McPhail and then I thought I had made a. and asked you for it back, but you refused to give it to me.

In explanation of his request for the return of the summons, Werner, in a report lJ:xhibit 129. to the Inspector-General of Police, Sydney, states :--

E vid•mcr., p. 12 (a).

E vidence, p. 5\-JO .

E vidence, p. 382.

. . . The reason I askedMcPhail to return me the summons was that, after reading it to him, he reminded me that her name was Ba.taille and not McPhail as stated in the summons. It is not true that I at any time informed the Administrator that there was not sufficient evidence to support a charge against Charlotte Bataille.

In evidence before this Con1mission, vVerner sviore :-. . . . I did see Colonel Leane between the dates the summonses were issued and the

date they were returnable at the Norfolk Island Court, and I then told him that I did not consider the evidence available would sustain the case against Charlotte McPhail and that I intended to withdraw the summons. He said, "\Vhy? Is she not as guilty as the rest of them? "

I concluded from the manner in which he put the question to me that he did not desire the withdrawal of the summons, and I replied, "Yes ! " The summons was not withdrawn. My reply to the

Administrator was given sarcastically, and it must have been' clear to him that I did not believe the evidence justified prosecution. . . . . . As prosecuting officer in the case I was of

opinion that the evidence placed before Colonel Leane as Magistrate did not disclose the offences with which the accused persons were charged; I still hold that opinion. My position on the Island was that I ha.d to obey the Administrator's instructions, and had I refused to institute proceedings in this case I would have been relieved of my duties on the Island. I had certain interests there in addition to the whole of my savings over a period of eleven years, which made it imperative that I should remain.

Recalled before the Commission at Sydney on 8th. May, 1926, the Constable on oath said:-. . . . The information contained in the report furnished to the Inspector-General of Police at the time the question of pardon was under consideration was for local confidential information only. The evidence given by me before the Royal Commission is a true statement of facts.

Attention is invited to the evidence of the Adn1inistrator, wherein he states:­ . . . . . I have read the evidence of Sidney Charles Werner.. It is one mass of false swearing, as I will now show. . . . . .

The Administrator denies th2J t he was informed by the Constable that the latter was of opinion the evidence against Charlotte McPhail would not support the case, and asserts that thereasons advanced bv the Constable for the withdrawal ofthe information was the error in the name under the girl had been charged. The Administrator denies that he, in any way, influenced the Constable against the withdrawal of the sumn1ons. The serious disagreement in the statements submitted by the Constable, considered in conjunction with his moral standards, as clearly indicated by the admission

that he allowed his personal interests to take precedence over his sense of justice, renders it necessary to reject his evidence as unworthy of credence. 4. In delivering his verdict of " guilty " in all cases the Chief lVIagistra te said :-Exhibit 128. This is a case which is perfectly clear to my mind; if it had not been for the evidence

of Mrs. M:ci?hail that she not only told the boys to leave the basket, but that when she saw it in the verandah she told them to take it back, I wo uld have treated them as innocent agents. Her evidence has made that impossible. . . . . I have knowledge of this case which has not come out in evidence, and I

wish to make it elear that a prosecution was absolutely necessary for this reason. ·

Exhihit.S9. The extent of his knowledge was stated by the Administrator in an official report

dated 3rd June, 1925, as follows:-. . . . . The case having come before me in my judicial capacity, and being the first case of this kind, while I was forced from the evidenee brought before me, the demeanour of the witnesses, &c. , to find a verdict of " Guilty," I felt that every necessary purpose would be served if I inflicted no penalty, but took the opportunity publicly, in the Court House, in the presence of a large concourse of people, to make this a _starting point of. a new era, and I therefore summed up as set out in the documents attached;

. .

and because, as Administrator, certain facts had been forced on my knowledge which were not knovvn to the people, that is, the circumstances under which the prosecution was forced to be made, and to make it clear that it was I, myself, who had launched the prosecution, I made use of the words : " I have knowledge of this case which has not come out in evidence," and I proceeded to explain that the prosecution was absolutely necessary for reasons given. I had no other knowledge of the case beyond the facts stated, arid what came before me in evidence.

153 5

In his evidence before this Commission the Adrninistra tor said :- Evidence, p . 495. . . . . . It appears in my summing up that I had knowledge of the case that did not appear in the evidence. I signed the transcript of the shorthand notes of my remarks from the Bench at the time. I cannot now say under what section of the Crimes Act I d·eferred sentence. I dealt with the case as · one of petty larceny. The facts of the evidence given by John Frederick Mills Christian came to my knowledge before the hearing of the case after the basket was found. That evidence was not disclosed at the hearing, but was known to me at the time of the hearing, and it was that which caused me to make that remark from the Bench. That evidence was never disclo"Sed to anybody until yesterday, not to the Governor­ General or to the Minister for Home and Territories in the matter of the appeal of Charlotte McPhail.

In his official report, opposing the granting 0£ pardons to the convicted persons, Exhibit 89. the Administrator expressed himself thus :- .

. . .. . . If an.y alteration is made to my t~ling I fear this element will feel they have won a

victory, and in every future case which occurs on the Island similar petitions will be forwarded; therefore, for the sake of law and order, even though .. there might possibly be an injustice done to any one of the defendants, I feel that it is not wise to give tliein any excuse to repeat this.

5. Following the convictions, the Chief Magistrate deferred sentence without time limitation. The informations do not show the Act or section under which proceedings were taken, and neither the Justice before whom they were exhibited nor the Administrator as Chief Magistrate could state to this Com:tnissio~ the provisions

agaiirst which the offences were alleged to have been committed. The Chief Magistrate state's he dea_ lt ,vith tp.e cases as p'etty larceny under the Crimes Act, No. 40 of 1900, New South Wales. Th-ere is, however, no provision under the Crimes Act for the deferment of sentence for an. indefinite period as was done in these cases. In January, 1925, it was the d·esire of Charlotte McPhail to -accept a position in New South Wales. A _ verbal message from the Administrator was delivered to Mr. McPhail by the police officer to the effect that if Charlotte wisrred oo leave the Island she wotdd be required to ·ob_ tain the Administ~ator's permis-sioii. A,pplfoation was made, and on the 9th January,

1925, the following letter was received by Miss McPhail :-Government of Norfolk Island.

Court House, Norfolk Island, 9th January, 1925.

The Chief Magistrate haB granted permission for Charlotte 1 \lfoPhail toleave Norfolk Island, for Australia, by steamer leaving the 10th day of January, 1925, on the following conditions :-That 'Oll arrival at her destination she reports at the ne.arest police statjon a;nd leaves her address, and notifies any subsequep.t change of reside.nee .

CHARLOTTE McPHAIL, Norfolk Island.

(Sgd.) E. S'i'EP,iIENSON' Registrar of the Court,

On · the 20th August, 1925, the Governor-General was pl€ased to grant a pardon to Charlotte McPhail.

6. Your Oon1inissioner declines to accept the evidence of Katie Mary Leane, submitted for the purpose of . proving the complicity of Charlotte McPhail in the removal of the basket, and the evidence of John F. M. Christian, an employeB at Gover:tmient House, tendered by the Administrator to prove that abortive inquiries were 1 t .1.ade of Mrs. J\foPhail the day following the loss of the basket. The rejection of this

evidenc·e as doubtful is on the following gro1,mds :-J 1. That no reasonable explanation has been advanced for its suppression

at the time the cases were heard. · 2. That, as such mridence was material to the issue, it was not disclo sed in any official report by the Administrator ~ vhen he was dealing wit h the appeal for pardons made to the Go vern:or-Ge:1?,eral by Mr. McPhail. 3. 'fhat the evidence of a certain date -and act ion was refuted in a most

convincing manner, and. . .

4. The demeanour of the witnesses when submitting testimony.

Exhibit 121.

7. Attempts ·were made, both at the Police Court hearing, and in the evidence submitted to t his -Commission, t o damage t he character . of members uf t he McPhai1 . family. Each allegation of dishonesty was investj gated, with the Tesult th::Lt the F .8557-4.


statements made were either disproved by a number of witnesses, including the ex­ Administrator, Lt.-General Parnell, the Registrar of Courts, and the ex-Schoolmaster, Mr . J. Barnes, or rejected on the grounds that their acceptance would be dangerous owing to admitted prejudice. .

8. With a public prosecutor in the person ·Of Constable \Verner, who, in the conduct of these cases, placed personal interests before his public duty as an officer concerned with the administration of justice, and a Magistrate who would extend justice conditional upon the prestige o£ his Court being upheld, can it be wondered that such fervent appeals have, from time to time, been made by Mr. McPhail, and just indignation expressed by the residents of the


After giving careful consideration to the evidence received by the Chief Magistrate and that tendered to this Commission, your Commissioner has decided that the convictions in all cases were against the evidence, inasmuch as intent is not disclosed and the actions of the persons were, throughout, consistent with innocence. It is suggested that a pardon be granted to Mary, John, and Thomas McPhail, and that the convictions be expunged from the Court records of Norfolk Island.

APPEAL OJ? ERNEST STEPHENSON. Mr. Ernest Stephenson, ex-Registrar of Courts at Norfolk Island, complained that his dismissal from the service of the Administration, following suspension on the 31st July, 1925, for alleged improper conduct was unjust, and submitted that if evidence of improper conduct did exist, it was not sufficiently serious in its character to warrant such drastic action as dismissal. Mr. Stephenson presented his case to the Commission, 'vhile the Administrator submitted evidence in support of his recommendation to his Minister that Mr. Stephenson's services be dispensed with,

2. Complainant was appointed to the Associated Offices of Registrar of Courts and Collector of Customs in January, 1913; and served under the direction of three Administrators. Early in 1925, Mr . N. H. Birdsey, ex-Private Secretary to the Administrator, intervie\ved the Right Honorable the Minister for Home and Territories, in Melbourne, and produced to him certain letters he received from Mr. Harry Clapp, of Norfolk Island, in which allegations of neglect oi duty and the use of intoxicating · liquors to excess were made against complainant. At the same interview Mr . Birdsey

himself charged Mr. Stephenson with discourtesy to the public, neglect of duty, and violation of the liquor laws of the Island. Mr . Birdsey also alleged that Mr. Stephenson had··--" most wrongfully advised the Administrator." Under instructions from the :Honorable the Minister for Home and Territories, the Administrator obtained

from .Mr. Harry Clapp a statutory declaration \vhicb, having reference to the extracts Exltil•i t 1w. from the letters written to Mr. Birdsey, in part reads-. . . . . The of misconduct against certain Gov ernment officials of Norfolk Island

mentioned in the abov e referred to letters were, in many instances, wi tnessed by me are correct; in others the statements are what I was informed and at the time of writing them conscientiously believed to be true.

3. The charges made against him were supplied to Mr. Stephenson in writing. He denied that he had on any occasion taken liquor to excess or that its use at any time had interfered with the efficient discharge of · his public ·duties. He admitted indiscretion in the use of liquor and coupled this admission with his promise to:_" observe

a. strict watch " over himself in future. He denied the truth of the other charges made

against him. In his official report of 8th July, 1925, covering statements obtained in writing, the Administrator pointed out that such statements were ex parte and there . had been no opportunity for rebuttal or cross-examination. The Administrator recommended Mr. Stephenson's dismissal, and on the 9th October, 1925, this

recommendation was given effect to.

4. Following .Mr. Stephenson's complaint to this Commission, 31 witnesses were examined, and the history of the case as disclosed in the departmental papers was reviewed. Your Commissioner finds that Mr. Stephenson, upon various dates during the months of February and March, 1925, did partake of liquor during oftJ.cial hours, but not to .excess. Your Commissioner further finds that, on the 18th February, 1925, at an auction sale conducted in the Court House yard, Mr . Stephenson was under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The other charges are not supported by evidence and


appear to have been the outcome of petty vindictiveness. Two Administrators, Mr. Murphy and Lt.-General Parnell, as well as a number of residents, testified to Mr. Stephenson's good character, his ability as an officer, and his marked courtesy to the public. In the course of his address upon completion · of the case, the Administrator expressed himself thUS- Evidence; · Pll. 472-3, .

. . . . . Mr. Stephenson has paid severely for his conduct, very severely indeed, u,nd I say far beyond the merits of the case now disclosed.

Your CommissioneT concurs, and considers that in view of Mr. Stephenson's long and faithful service and the fact that the misconduct disclo sed does not reflect discreditably upon Mr. Stephenson's honesty, the punishment inflicted far exceeds that called for by the gravity of the offence. ·


It is suggested that Mr. Stephenson be reinstated to the position of Registrar of Courts and Associated Offices, and that he be paid salary as from the 1st April, 1926, the date upon which the hearing of his complaint was concluded. It is considered that deprivation of position and salary between the date of removal from office and the date herein stated constitutes punishment sufficiently adequate to meet the requirements of the case.



The evidence in the matter of the complaint of Mrs. Warner, wife of the officer > in charge of the Pacific Cable Station, Norfolk Island, establishes very clear proof that PP· <•' statements defamatory to complainant's character vvere uttered by the Administrator and his wife. As a direct result of the statements, which reflected upon Mrs. 'Vr.rner's honour as a wife, complainant suffered intense pain of mind and her general health was affe cted to such an extent that medical treatment over a lengthy period was necessary.

2. The evidence of Irene Gertrude Duke, Dorothy M. Down, Elizabeth Mary Wilson, and Lockhart Hamilton, shows that in and about the month of November, 1925, MTs. Leane informed them that complainant, Mrs . Warner, was a woman of immoral character ; that she had lived with another man in Melbourne for a period of twelve months, and that the Cable Board had notified MT . Vlarner that he must "put his house in order " or leave the Service. vVith the exception of Mr. Hamilton, the witnesses were submitted to cross-examination by the Administrator, who endeavo ured, without avail, to elicit evidence that he , and not his wife, had made the statements complained of.

3. In her evidence, Mrs. Leane denied having made to the witnesses any of the statements attributed to her. The Administrator's evidence is to the effect that shortly after his arrival at Norfolk Island, he accepted as authentic, statements reflecting upon Mrs. Warner's character, made to him by the Registrar of Courts, and that he did not disclose the information unt il his wife inquired whether he had any knowledge of Mrs.

Warner's alleged immorality. Subsequently, the Administrator states he informed Mrs. Down and Mrs. Wilson in the presence of their husbands of the facts, as he believed them to be true. Apart from these two occasions the Administrator states that, to his knowledge, he never mentioned what he had heard. Referring to the occasion upon which he imparted the information to Major and Mrs. Down, the Administrator said-

. . . . . I learned he had t aken a property right alongside the Cable Station. It was only Evldelll' e,

reasonable to b elieve there would be a certain association between them and the Cable Station, and I wanted p .. ,to. him to understand that it would be impossible for him to remain on the same terms of friendship with me if there were any connexion between the three h ouses. !warned them both seriously against scandal, which is th e bugbear of thi s I sland.

4. Assum_ ing that the statements concerning the complainant were made to the Administrator, as he states they were, it is remarkable that as a representative of the Government, occupying an important and responsible administrative post, he should repeat them without at least satisfying himself of their truth. Had he made inquiry, the falsity of the information conveyed to him would have become apparent. The

Ev1dencc, up. 314, 315.

Evidence, p . 658.


st at emerj.t of the General Superintendent of the Pacific C;:tble Board shows that no advice respecting t he for adjusting dome5tic affairs '\Yas con-ununicated t o Mr . Warner, and that no cause for addressing their officer in such a manner is known t o the Board. In evidence, Mrs . Leane said-

. . . . . In imparting this info rmation to Mr. and Mrs. Down and Mr . and :Mrs. Wilson, the Colonel gave all parties to understand he had received the information from Mr . Stephenson. It appeared to me quite necessary that the information should be conveyed to Mr. and Mrs. Down and Mr. and Mrs. Wilson in the interests of the Administration.

-The complainant's witnesses deny that they were advised of the source from which t he information was received. -


The Administrator . has not claimed privilege, and, in the circumstances, even if advanced, such a plea could not be entertained. The evidence is against the Administrator and his wife, and it fails to disclose any foun dation for the ve1·y serious statements made against comp lainant's honour. While no legal liability rest& with the Commonwealth, it is suggested that the moral obligations of the Government call for suitable acknowledgment to 1\'Irs. Warner as compensation for the pain of mind artd body suffered in consequence of the defamatory statements publicly made against her.


Mr. Patching complained t hat the verdict given against him as defendant in a civil action heard befo re t he Chief Magistrate of the Norfolk Island Court on t he 6th October, 1924, was bad in law and contrary to the evidence submitted to t he Court . Two cases involved-a claim by Mr. Patching against lVIr. C. C. R. Nobbs in the £6 lOs. for labom; done an,d material supplied, and a counter-claim by Mr. Nobbs

against l\1r. Patching for the sum of £50, representing damages done t o an oil engine the property of the complainant. In the case first cited, a verdict for complainant in t he sum. of £3 was entered ; in the claim for damages, judgment against in

the sum of £35, with the cost s, was recorded. - ·

2, The fac ts show that Mr. Patching, who claims to possess inherent ability as an engineer, was co mmissioned by the defendant 's brother to effec t certain alterations to an oil engine employed to drive a generating plant for t he supply of electric current at a local picture show, of which the defendant is t he pro prietor . During the progress of the work it was seen that certain essential parts had been removed, and Mr. George T. a Sydney electrical engineer then on Norfolk Island, was called in; :Mr. Pat ching's

services were then dispe:qse(rwith. An examination by Mr. Stowe disclosed that the engine was practically useless, and had been damaged t o the extent of £35, the cost of re-co nditioning it to its former usefulness. 3. I n stating his case before this Commission, lVIr. Patching complained of the

attitude of the Chief Magistrate at the hearing of the case and in denying him the right to submit certain evidence, both oral and document ary, in support of his defence. The stat ements attribut ed to t he Administrator that he would not take any notice of the witnesses for defendant is denied, the Administrator adding t o such denial :-

. . . . . I did not, at, refuse to hear any witnl,)ss or object to hear any witness. 'l'he

matt ers I J;Uled out were documents which had no application to the case. . . . . I have no

recollection of losing my temper, as stated by Mr . Patching. I do remember lt>eing impatient at the time he was wasting of the Court.


After reviewing the case, and carefuliy considering the evidence submitted by the eOJ11-plainant aBd the testimony from the in your Commissioner

decides that, on the eviden ce. before the Chief Magis-trate, his verdict was correct one, and suggests that it he not disturbed .

·· COMPLAINT OF IVY CHLORINE EVANS. l\1;rs. a sch.Qol recen,1ily h'cm. Norfolk Island, .

f the by heJ; at t he hands of Mrs. Leane, wife of tl1e

a.nd alleged that, as -a result, s-he found it necessary to appeal to the Department o£

Educat ion, New South Wales, to recall her from t he Norfolk Island servic e.

2. In the latter part of 1925, an action in the local Comt, in which a verili.ct for the payment to the Secretary of the Norfolk Island Whaling Co mpany of certain moneys raised at a public function, was the subject of free discussion by the In

this matter the Administrator and his wife figured prominently. During a dif';!cussion, ahd in the presence of Miss Olga Robinson and others, Mrs. Evans referred to the whalers as "crawlers," but shortly afterwards expressed regret to Miss Robin,sou, whose father is a member of the whaling company. Information of the expression used by Mrs . Evan>J was conveyed. to Mrs.' Leane, and on the 17th December she called at the public school during school hours. 'l'he evidence shows that, at that interview, the expressions made use of by the principals were unbecoming the dignity of the position they both held in the social life of the Ialand. The Administrator states that, a§ officer in control of the school, he gave Mrs. Leane instructions to interview Mrs. Evans, and

that his object in doing so was to-" Pin down scandal before it got any further."

Observations.- It is difficult to understand the action of the Administra-tor in instructing his wife to investigate an allegation of impropriety against a public officer, more particularly as the result of such an inquiri may have rendered disciplinary measures necessary. Your Commissioner is convinced that, had the Administrator o:ffi.cally to the complaint, the cause of Mrs. Evans' grievance wou.ld :p.ot have

ansen. ·


1 53

These complaints a.rise from proceedings taken against Mr. Yeaman (a) on 4th Novemb er, 1925, ·when, as secretary and treagurer of the Norfolk Island AgTicultural and Horticultural Society, he was summoned on the plaint of Parkin Carty Christian, Exhib;tlas. secretary to the Norfolk Isl;::tp.d Company, for" unlawful detention of property " in the sum of ancl (b) on the 7th January, 1926, when Mr. Yeaman was charged Exhibit 143 · by criminal surpmons that he did on or about the 4th November 1 1925, fraudulently

appropriate to his own use 1 or that of another, one piece of paper containing questions to witnesses in the small debts case, Parkin Carty Christian as secretary, Norfolk l .$hmd Whaling Company V(}rsy s Francis Alexander Yeaman, the same being the property of Park;in Carty Christian. In neither case was the information exhibited before a

magistrate for the Territory of Norfolk Island, and the summonses commanding appearance at the Court were issued b,Y an officer who was not clothed

with the necessary legal 2, Mr. Yeaman subp:1itted that in the civil action, the Chief Magistrate was prejudiced by reason of the fact that the order for payment of the sum of £20 was given by his wife, Katie Mary Leane, who was a witness for the plaintiff Christian. ; that throt1ghout the hearing of the case he was denied justice ;;tnd offensively t reated by the magistrate, and that the judgment against him. was bad in law in that Katie Mary Leane, the drawer of the order for the paymm1t of the a:mouut involved, had no authority to issue such order, ;::tnd that if plaintiff was entitled to redress, his action was against the drawer of the order, Katie Mary Le;1ne, and not agah1st the plaintiff as drawee. The complaint in the matter of the cri:p1inal proceedings is that the magistrate, Mr. H . S. ]1dgar, was in error in recording a co:nvictiori, inasmuch as the Crown. did not

discharge the onus of proving fraudulent the p,ction of the defendant. The facts are as follow :-3. In 1925 Mr. Yeaman, as secretary of the Norfolk Island · Agricultural and Horticultural Society, and with the assistance of a duly-elected committee, of which Mrs. Leane was not a member, organized functions for the purpose of raising funds to purchase prizes :for t he society's annual show. In · September he exhibited public notices, inviting ladies to attend a meeting for the purpose of raising funds for the Agricultural and Horticultural Society. The proposed application of the funds was

specifically stated. As a result of this invitation a number of ladies was formed into an auxili11ry committee. Several meetings followed, and on the suggestion of Mrs. Leqne a function, known as an '' American tea," was held a"t the R.awson Hall on the evening of the 6th October, 1925. In common with other helpers the Ad1hinistrator and Mrs. Leqne worked enthusiastically. The function was not formally open@d, bu.t

after commencement Mrs. Leane tl.nnounced from. the platform that the ladies had dMided in the event of the proceeds totalling £50 to donate £20 to the whalers, who

Evidence, p. 333.


had lost one of their boats. In order that unpleasantness might not be created, no exception to the announcement made by Mrs. Leane was then taken by the president, the secretary, or con1mittee members of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society present. All moneys taken, including those received from sales at the stall conducted by the Administrator's family, were handed to l\1r. Yeaman. The proceeds amounted to £50 gross, £47lls. nett. On the night of the lOth October two orders signed by Katie Mary Leane, one for the payment of £20 to Mr. Carty Christian, secretary and treasurer of the Norfolk Island Whaling Company, the second for the payment of £27 lis. to the secretary and trea:surer of the Norfolk Island Agricultural and Horticultural Society, were delivered to Mr. Yeaman. Under instructions- fro1n his committee, l\1r. Yeaman declined to act upon the orders. At 5 a.m. , on a later date, Christian made a demand of Mr. Yeaman for the payment of the £20, and following refusal Christian consulted Mrs. Leane and later the Administrator. He denies that he was advised to institute proceedings, but he did cause processes to issue against Mr. Yean1an without

direction from the members of his company. His action was later endorsed by thmn . On the 2nd November ·1\tir. Y ean1an cabled a protest to the Department of Home and Territories against the Administrator adjudicating in the case, pointing out that Mrs. Leane '"ras "seriously involved." The Central Administration made inquiries by cable of the Administrator, whose cabled reply was as follows :-

Your telegram 2nd November No reason why should not adjudicate (stop) Yeaman defendant Whaling Company plaintiff charged unlawful detention of twenty pounds (stop) Reference to lVIrs. Leane deliberately calculated misrepresentation interfere course of . justice (stop) unaware any perturbation amongst residents (stop) C. C. R. Nobbs involved and entirely responsible for p anic cable Leane. Mrs. Leane was involved to the ext ent that she issued the disputed order, and her evidence was material to the issue. The cabled advice to fhe Central Administration that Mr. Yeaman's reference to Mrs. Leane was a " deliberately calculated misrepresentation interfere course of justice " was, therefore, misleading.

4. A further protest in ·writing lodged with the Registrar of Courts at Norfolk Island, and an objection raised by Mr. Yeaman when the case was called for hearing, were overruled by the Administrator acting as Chief Magistrate, vvho proceeded to hear and determine the plaint. During the course of the proceedings, such remarks as " You have been badly advised by your bush lawyers," "You are reading it off like a parrot,"

were made by the Magistrate, who entered a verdict for the full amount, with costs and witnesses' expenses. Persons disinterested in the issue stated in evidence before this Commission that the magistrate's attitude indicated bias, and that he "took the part of counsel for the plaintiff and did all in his power to heckle defendant." The Adn1inistrator said:-

. . . . . . With regard to the conduct of the case in Court I wa,s not biassed against the

defendant nor had I any prejudice which facts would not have overcome. There were no facts, and certainly I showed impatience on more than one occasion when the time of the court was being wasted by a man asking questions that were not relevant of which he h ad clearly no personal knowledge, and was dependent entirely upon the sheaf of notes he held and he could not find his place in the notes. I say that under these conditions ari.y magistrate would h ave shown impatience at the waste of time.

During the proceedings the plaintiff wa s guided by a series of questions and directions which \Vere, beyond doubt, typed by a machine under the . Ad1ninistrator's control and on a sheet of official foolscap paper. This piece of paper formed the basis of the criminal charge of fraudulent appropriation against Mr. Yeaman outlined hereunder:-

5. As Mr. Yeaman left the Court, on completion of the case abovementioned, he found the question paper used by Christian. He showed the document to his-brother, A. R. Yeaman, immediately, to Mrs. Laing and Miss L. C. Nobbs, and it was in the hands of Mr. Nobbs, President of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society, on the same afternoon. After discussing the matter with committee members of the society, Mr. Yeaman, on 5th November, 1925, forwarded the document to the Department of Home and Territories, Melbourne, in support of representations contained in a covering letter. On 16th November, 1925, Christian, after a conversation with a man named Birdsey, reported to the Ad1ninistrator that the piece of paper had been stolen and forwarded to the :Minister in Melbourne. Upon inquiry by cable, the Administrator

earned that Mr. Yeaman had submitted the document, and he directed prosecution on a charge of fraudulent appropriation. Accordingly, an information was sworn by the local police officer, and Mr. Yeaman appeared to answer the charge before the Administrator as Chief Magistrate on 18th November, 1925. After evidence had been received from the police and from Christian, the case was . adjourned for eight days, pending receipt and production of tll_e. question paper alleged to have been fraudulently appropriated. Defendant was admitted to bail in a personal security of £80 and two others of £40 each. An application by the police for a further adjournment until the

7th January, 1926, was granted. In the interim the powers of the Chief :Magistrate were conferred upon Mr. II. S. Edgar, J.P., and arrangen1ents made for him to adjudicate. The defendant was represented by a barrister fron1 Australia, who submitted that the onus of proving fraudulent appropriation had not been discharged by the Crown. The

magistrate stated in effect that he was satisfied fraudulent intent had not been disclosed, but that he relied for the conviction on sub-section (b) of section 527 of the Crin1es Act, No. 40, of 1900. The magistrate thereupon convicted and ordered defendant to pay a fine of £1.

6. It is manifestly clear that in the civil action the plaintiff Christian wa s influenced, if not instructed, throughout by the Administrator. It is equally clear that the Administrator's adjudication in the action was opposed to natural justice, and that his judgment for the plaintiff was bad in law; Mrs. Leane was not a member of the

committee of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society, and had no authority in or control over its funds. In the criminal proceedings · evidence of fraudulent intent is not present. It must be rmnembered that Mr. Edgar, the magistrate who recorded the conviction, is 77 years of age, and that he has no legal knowledge or experience. In giving evidence before this Commission Mr. Edgar said :--

I did not find that he had committed this offence with fraudulent intent, I relied on section 527 (b) of the Crimes Act "belonging to another person although not originally taken with any fraudulent intent." I was satisfLed on the evidence that he had used the document fraudulently but he was not · aware of it. I was satisfied that in the mind of the. defendant there was no intention to act fraudulently.

7. Against the judgment of the Court in its civil jurisdiction, Mr. Yeaman had no legal redress- that he had the right as a citizen to state his case to a higher authority is indisputable, and in the exercise of that right and in support of his complaint that he had been denied justice, he submitted the question paper as evidence of partiality

on the part of the Magistrate. The complaint in the matter of the civil action is not resultant from a desire on the part of Mr. Yeaman or any member of the A; and H . Society to recover the amounts entered in judgment ; it was lodged because Mr. Yeaman and his con1mittee considered justice had miscarried. ·


Your Commissioner is convinced that the proceedings against Mr. Yeaman were actuated by a spirtit of vindictiveness, and suggests, in the light of the evidence, that a pardon be granted and the criminal conviction expung.ed from the records of Norfolk Island. ·


As indicated in paragraph 8 of the introduction to this Report, evidence of a disturbed state of the public mind is apparent in the many complaints made against the actions and attitude of the present Administrator, Colonel E. T. Leane, and it is regrettable to re-cord_ that in the convincing testi1nony of a number of witnesses there . is proof that statements n1ade by the Administrator's wife were the cause of wide­ spread dissatisfaction in the social life of the Island.

2. Trouble appears to have arisen shortly after the Administrator assu1ned office. After being sworn in, and when outlining his policy . he intimated to the residents his intention of visiting them at their homes, and announced that if he and the people were one with the other at the end of six months he would ­

resign. At that time, the Admi...Ustrator states, the only ren1ark he had heard Evidencp , derogatory to any of the people was from his predecessor,. General Parnell, who spoke P· 383· of one family as petty thieves, and urged him not to employ any of them at Government House. Neither promise made publicly at the swearing-in ceremony was honoured

by the Administrator, who states that he ·was influenced against the people by statements of their immorality made to him by an officer of the administrative staff in whom he placed implicit . confidence ; the reversal of his decision to resign from the Administration of Norfolk Island was, he asserts, owing to information comn1unicated

I 54 1

by the same officer to him by letter when acting as Administrator of the Northern Territory. Referring to the production of this letter in evidence, the writer, Exhibit 61. now an ex-officer of the administration, considered his action in advising Colonel Leane of the expressed purpose of certain persons to keep the Administrator

"on the other side " was his duty, and an act of loyalty to his chief, and submitted that the production of the letter tD this Commission was " a breach of official etiquette.'' ·This ex-officer denies vilifying the people as a whole in any statement m:ade by him to the Administrator.

.H1vic1c·Ilce, pp. 3:ll-347.

pp. 624, 63:>.


and 91.

3. In his evidence relating to social unrest the Administrator sought to justify his attitude towards the people by the recapitulation of a good deal of hearsay . That t he Administrator heard in Australia and at Norfolk: Island a great deal of scandal concerning the people is probably true, but as it is shown that he recogni2ied that gossip was very much in evidence at Norfolk Island, it is incomprBhensible that as the responsible representative of the Government he should, without confirmation, have given cognizance to and acted upon such statements which, in their application to the people generally, had no foundation in fact.

Acting upon his suggestion, evidence was sought and received from persons named by him as authors of statements, among them being Admiral Hall- Thompson and General Parnell, both of whom recorded emphatic denials to the assertions of the Administrator. There are, no doubt, persons resident upon the Island whose moral standards are in need of adjustment, but his treatment of the people generally as base and unworthy of respect, was certainly not calculated to improve the general tone of the community. .

4. As the morals of the people have been impugned by the evidence of the Administrator it is considered not inappropriate to state that evidence received from reliable witnesses, considered in conjunction with the statistics showing ex-nuptial births over a period of lears and the populatiou of the Island limited in its area and so fa r removed from the mainland, reveals the existence of a moral code which compares favorably with other parts of the Commonwealth. There is an absence of serious crime, and complaints of petty offences are infrequent.

5. It is not proposed to review at length the evidence submitted by the large number of witnesses in relation to social unrest, or to comment upon the undignified terms employed by the Administrator in his dealings with the public and in his communications with the Reverend A. R. Martin and the Vestry of All Sai:n.ts' Church. The evidence adduced in the matter of the complaint made by Mr$. A. G. Warner is but one instance in which the Administrator was personally responsible fo r a great deal of discontent and indignation among the residents. For obvious reasons your Commissioner refrains from comment upon the measure of responsibility fo r unrest attributed to the ·wife of the Administrator by many reputable witnesses.

6. It is freely admitted in evidence that the islanders look t o the Administrator for the maintenance of a dignity appropriate to his office, but it is contended thg,t an attitude autocratic and superior in its character, associated with elaborate formal arrangements for the attendance of an administrative party at public functions, is alien to the conditions of the Territory and the simple lives of its people. The respect of the residents for constitut ed authority is marked ; their loyalty to the Empire is evidenced in their speech and customs and in the number of men who voluntarily , enlisted for service in the Great War. Of this small community 77 saw active

service; twenty were either killed or wounded-a record of which the residents might well feel proud.

Observations. - While the dignity of the position of Administrator and Chief .Magistrate of Norfolk Island should be upheld it was apparent to y our Commissioner, during his stay on the Island, that the resident:;; r ecognized the :respect due to constituted authority, but their conception of the attributes of an Administrator were J;udely shattered by the extraordinary attitude adopted by Colonel Leane, Administrators evidently more correctly gauged the psychology of the islanders and

were thus able to maintain . official and social dignitJ' without friction.


In the evidence reviewed in the preceding pages of this Report the justi:fic;:ttion for inquiry into the administrative affairs of Norfolk Ish;md and complaints of the residents has been clearly established. As your Commissioner's views are reproduced under each subject, it is not considered necessary to further enlarge upon them.

2. To the record of the present Administrator has been placed his exc6llent work in the rehabilitation of public buildings ; his efforts directed to reafforestati<:m, methods of agriculture, and the erlltablishment of favorable markets for island his commendable zeal inlfmatters relating to improvement of stock ; his pr11ctical encouragement in the ship-building and commercial enterprisas recently undertaken by the Islanders. ·

3. It is, however, most unfortunate that the temperament of the present Administrator is not in harmony the social and genera.l atmo sphere of this isolated community. The evidence reveals that his tendency throughout has been to usurp the powers vested in him for the protection of t he people, and disregard the need of

encouraging sympathetic understanding and co -operation. Although in the earlier period of his regime he recognized the delicate position in which an Administrator is placed in hearing the differences of the Islanders before they are stated in evidence before him by lit igants, it is manifest that in the exercise of his judicial functions his conduct was distinctly combatant and quite inconsistent with the principl\0\s of Apart from the strictly judicial duties o£ his office, it is regrettable that he acted upon uncorrobora,.ted statements derogatory to the inhabitants, statements which simple inquiry would have mad e c]ear to him were without bases in fact.

4. Although officers possessing the qualifications and other requirements specified by the Administrator were appointed as vacancies occurred, the sworn statements indicate t hat his actions disturbed, if not destroyed, that eSJJTit de corps so essential to the satisfactory administration of this remote Territory of the Commonwealth.

5. patent that the views of the Administrator and those of t he residents are so 1\ridely divergent tha t healthy co-operation is not possible, and after f11U consideration of the evidence, your Commissioner is fo rced to the conclusion that the interests of t h e Commonwealth and of Norfolk Island would best be served by t he immedia,.te withdrawal of the present Administrator i:n favour of one possessed of proved

temperamental suitability and a knowledge of community oversight and This conclusion is strengthened by personal observations period of three months' residence on the · I sland. ·


(a) in the interests of the Norfolk Island, the present

Administrat t'U' be recalled without delay.

(b) in the appo.intment of future Ac:lmipistratQrs, where

capacity of those under consideration is prefe rence be given to a man of legal

training or one possessing sound knowledge Qf prQcec:lure c9mbined with pl,'oved ability in the of evidence, without, if possible, departing from th e policy of the

Go vernmen( in its relation to returned soldiers. · - ·

In future selections, due consideration to the psychology of the Norfolk Islanders should be given ; the temperament of a prospective Administrator, if not compatible with, should be capable of ready adaptability to the social co nditions of the Island." Thls applies with equal force to the 's wife, who must l1e cessarily at all time be in

close a ssociation with the inhabitants, and whose moral influen ce upon the lives of the people ts a factor to be seriously considered.


Your Commissio ner desires to express his appreciation of the h elp received from officers of the Norfolk Island Administration, Prhne Minister's Department, a,.nd Department of Education, New South Wales. is particularly appre?i.ative of valuable assistance rendered by Mr. W. J . MeR Mitchell, whose marked abihty and Wide experience as an investigator peculiarly fitted hi:rn for the position of Secretary to t he Commission.

Your E;x:cellency's Commission is returned herewith.

Melbour:ue, 14th July, 1926

F. WHYSALL1 Commissioner.

154 3

Name of Witness.

Adams, Eliza Jemima Adams, Thomas Ephraim Bailey, Charles Bailey, George Bain, R. S. Barnes, Jacob ·Bartley, Leonard Graham

Bataille, Emma . .

Birdsey, Norman Hamilton Booty, Leslie John Buffett, Charlton .. Buffett, Henry. Seymour Buffett, Mary Buffett, Peter Moore Chalker, Ida Chambers, R ex Chapman, Henry Francis

Christian, Charles .. Christian, Charles James ·Christian, Carty Parkin Christian, Eustace

Christian, Fysher Lorenzo .. Christian, John Frederick Mills Clapp, Harry Clarke, Norman

Culey, David Richard Cunningham, Mary Emily Donkin, Cecil Herbert Kirk Down, Dorothy Mather Duke, Leslie Swinnerton Duke; Irene Gertrude Edgar, Henry Stephenson Edwards, Harold William

Evans, Charles Medley Evans, Ivy Chlorine . Evans, William Hodson Evans, Young Gazzard, Albert Stanley Hall-Thompson, Percival Henry Hamilton, Lockhart

Hammer, William James Harkness, Bertie Clarence

Heaps, Frank Wilson Haggitt Heaps, Maria ..

.Jenkins, Joseph Walter Lane-Poole, Charles Edward Leane, Edwin Thomas

Leane, Katie Mary Martin, Anthony R eginald Menges, Henry . . . .

Menges, Nathaniel Satterfield Murphy, James Francis McLaren, John Gilbert McNee, Alice May McPhail, Charlotte McPhail, John McPhail, Mary Annabella McPhail, Robert ..

Newton, John Nobbs, Agnes Nobbs, Charles Chase Ray

Nobbs, Fletcher Christian Nobbs, George Edward Nobbs, Lavina Christine Ogilvie, Edward David .

Parnell, John William Patching, Thomas Henry Frederick Walter

Quintal, Archibald Selwyn Quintal, Byron George Quintal, Estelle ·

Quintal, Fletcher Evelyn Quintal, Cornelius Quintal, George Rawdon

Quintal, John Swain . Quintal, Ralph Henry Quintal, Thomas Edward Biddiecom be

Quintal, William Lamb Rain, Robert James



Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Builder, Norfolk Island Mechanic, Norfolk Island Superintendent, Pacific Cable Board, Sydney · Schoolmaster, Prospect, Ne w Sout.h \Vales Cable Electrician, Norfolk Island ·

Domestic Duties, Norfolk I sland Clerk, Norfolk Island . . Store Assist ant, Norfolk I sland .. Boat man, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk I sland Domestic Duties, Norfolk I sland Farmer, Norfolk I sland School-t each er, Norfolk I sland

Barrist er- a.t -La:.w, Sydney . Cable Opera tor, Norfolk Island Sawyer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Labourer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk I sland Foreman of Works, Norfolk Island Labourer, Norfolk Island

Signalmaster, Norfolk Island Chief Steward, Sydney School-teacher, Norfolk Island Independent Means, Norfolk Island Ship's Purser, Sydney .. Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Medical Officer, Norfolk Island .. Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island

Retired Civil Servant, Norfolk Island Labourer, Norfolk Island Boatman and Farmer, Norfolk Island School-teacher, Norfolk Island ..

Boatman and Farmer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Secretary, Farmers:and Growers Association, Norfolk I sland Member of the Naval Board, Melbourne .. Traveller, Melbourne .. Auctioneer, Norfolk Island Assistant Under-Secretary, Education Department; New

South Wales Postmaster, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties Storekeeper, Norfolk Island Commonwealth Forestry Adviser, Melbourne Administrat or, Norfolk I sland ..

Wife of Administrator .. Retired Clergyman, Norfolk I sland Printer, Norfolk Island

Butcher, Norfolk Island · Accountant, Home and Territories Department, Melbourne .. Secretary, Home and Territories Department, Melbourne School-teacher, Norfolk Island .. Domestic Servant, Norfolk Island Assistant, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island

Invalid, Norfolk Island Storekeeper, Norfolk Island . Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Storekeeper, Norfolk Island

Farmer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Retired Naval Officer, Norfolk Island Retired Military Officer, Melbourne

Farmer, Norfolk Island Insurance Agent, Norfolk Island Proprietor, Guest House, Norfolk I sland .. Farmer, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Retired Farmer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Labourer, Norfolk Island

Butch er, Norfolk Island Labourer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Staff Surveyor, Sydney, New South W alea

'Minutes of Bvid ence , pp.-

503 180, 502, 58G 209 230 325d

1a, 587 525 484 411, 508, 530

141 463 185 483

162, 234, 45!J 581 17a, 79

113 295 i 534, 566 ll1, 21 8

427 487 416, 418 16A

130, 575 5A 466 301, 324 244 306, 323 572 262A

104 215 102 464 80 624 325B 438A 595

106, 454 525 224, 465 634 21, 25, 309, 330,

416, 438, 439,

456, 472, 492,

531,557 312, 389, 489 189, 208, 401, 491 I 28, 326, 461, 505

'464 . 614 598, 639 580 477,507 487 410, 479, 506

498 14, 583 325A 33, 276, 453, 526,

552,568 150,550 205, 458 567 118,408 . 625

17, 97, 535 452 135 293

504 1, 287, 426 107 475 233 294 497 26,247 9A..



Name of Witness. De!JignatJon.

Robertson, James Scott Robinson, Enoch Cobcroft Robinson, Jemima Louisa Robinson, Olga

Sharland, Albert Fullarton .. Snell, Mary ..

Stephenson, Ernest

Stowe, George Thomas Wallin, Frederick .. Warner, Archibald Glenville Warner, Frances Mary

Watt, Gordon Stewart Werner, Sidney Charles Wickstead, George Henry

Wilson, Elizabeth Mary · Wilson, Harold Edward

Wise, Allan George. . .

Yeaman, Archibald Richard Yeaman, Francis Alexander

Retired Farmer, Norfolk Island Farmer, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island School-teacher, Norfolk Island •.

Grazier, Norfolk Island Domestic Duties, Norfolk. Island Ex-Registrar, Norfolk Island

Electrical Engineer, Sydney . Island Manager, Messrs. Burns, Philp and Co;, Sydney Officer in Charge Cable Station, Norfolk Island .. Domestic Duties

Cable Qperator, Norfolk Island .. Police Constable, Sydney ..

Police Constable, Norfolk Island

Domestic Duties, Norfolk Island Registrar of Courts, Norfolk Island


Farmer, Norfolk Island Saw:rniller, Norfolk Island Plumber, Norfolk Island




I Minutes of Evidence, pp.-

198, 455 172, 529 317 214 10, 429 573 249, 403, 440, 468,

500,'546 591 596 303, 320, 449 29(), 322 524

lJA, 590 263, 422, 460, 610, 570 307, 325 235, 430, 457, 511


451 545, 569 512, 544, 564, 571



Subject and 'jY!tness.

of J -

Bailey; G. Baines, J. Booty, L. J. Buffett, S. Chambers, R. . ,

Christian, E. Cunningham, M. E. Leane, Col. T.

McLaren, J. G. . , Martin, ,A.. R. Menges, H. Newton, J.

Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs1 G. E. . , Ogilvie, E. D. Patching, T. H. Qcintal, W. L. . . Robertson, J. S. Robinson, E. C. Sharland, A. F. Stephenson, E. . . Werner, S. C. Wilson, H. E. Administration- Genel·ai­Bailey, C. Booty, L. J. Buffett, P . l\1. Leane, E . T. McLaren, J. G. Menges, H. Murphy, .T. 1?. Nobbs, C. C. R. No?bs, C., Qumtal, J'. l:.. . . Snell, llf. Agriculture and :Fruit-growing-Adams, T. E. . . . . Buffett, P. l\'1. Buffett, S. Christia-n, E. Leane, E. 'l'. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C. Quinta.], F. E. . . Robinson, E. C. Boats and Bofctm en·-· Adams, '.l'. K Buffett, :P. )J. Buffett, H. S. Christian, C. Christian, E . Evans, C. M. Evans, H. Heaps, F. W. Leane, E. T. Menges, H. Nobbs, C. C:. R. Nobbs, F. C. Quintal, F. E. . . Robinson, E. C. Stephenson, E. . . Brands Ordinance­ Adams, T. E. Buffett, P. M. Buffett, H. S. Chapman, H. F. Christian, E. Nobbs, C. C. R Nobbs, F. C. E. C. Wickstead, G. H. CJmpanies­Adams, T. E. Christian, E. Gazzard, A. S. Leane, E. T. Nobbs, C. C. R Nobbs, F. C. Robinson, E. C. Customs Matters­ Jenkins, J. W. . . Leane, E. T. Nobbs, C, C. R, ..

Reference t o Evidence.

231 2A; 3A;4A 145-147; 149 187

17A, 18A, 19A, 20A 220-221 50, 6a-8A

364--365, 376-380, 381-388 601-602, 605- 608 191

29-31, 328 14-16 67-69, 277- 285 205-207

118-120 17 247 203 177 12-13 262 12a- 15A 235

212-213 141-143 163 330-388 598-601

31 614-623 277-278 150- 155, 157

1-9 573-574

181 166 186 218 351-353 38-40

158 289 173- 174

183 163- HJ5 185-186 115 111-112, 219-220 104- 105 102-103 106-110 362-363 31-32 57-58

154 8-9 175-176 249-250

183 168 187 79 111, 220 64A 155 177 266, 269

183 220 84-86 363, 366 59-62

160 176

229 376 75-76

StjpjcQt and Wltne''-

Custgms Matt ers- contin11 ed. Quintal, F. E . ..

E. ..

Wilson, H. "E: Educational Matters---Adams, T. E. l3uffett, H. S,

Chalker, I. Culey, D. :!:t·

Harkness, B. C. Leane, E. T. McNee, A.M. Newton, J.

Npbbs, C. C. R. Parnell, J. W. ..

Quintal, F. E. ..

R obinson, E. C, Evans, Ivy Chlorine- Complaint of-Culey, D. R. Evans, I. C.

Leane, E. T. Leane, K. M. Robinson, 0. E xecutive Council--- Constit-ution and Functions--Adams, T. E. Buffett, P. M. Buffett, H . S. Christian, C. Christian, E. Leane, E. '1'. Nobbs, C. C. R.

Nobbs, F . C. Parnell, J. ·w. . .

Quintal, F. E. ..

Robertson, J. S. Robinson, J

Leane, E. T. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, G. E. Patching, T. H. Stephenson, E. .. Industries-

Bailey, G. Nobbs, C. C. R. Land Matters-Adams, T. E.

Buffett, H . S. Christian, E. Leane, E. T. McLaren, J. G. Menges, H .

Nobbs, F. C. Nobbs, C. C. R.

Parnell, J . W. Quintal, A. S. Quintal, B. G. Quintal, C. Quintal, F. E. Robinson, E. C. Snell, M. Stephenson, E. . . Laws, Ordinances, a.nd Regulations-

Adams, T. E. Buffett, P. 1\>I. Buffett, H. S. Christian, E .

Leane, E. T. McLaren, .J. G. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C. Robinson, B. C. Liquor Laws and ;11atters relating thereto-

Adams, T. E . Bailey, G. Booty, L. J·. Buffett, P. 1\>I. Buffett, H. S. Christian, C. Christian, E.

Refetence to


261 237-240

182, 586 186 581-582 130...131,134

5'75-6'79 595 357, 367-368, 379 580

49-50 62"1--628 7

174, 178-179

132-134 215-217 367-368 389-393 214

180- 182 167- 168 187 177 219 359- 360, 362 53-56, 277

150-152 628-629 8

199 172-175 12

209- 212 82-91 21-24 74

206 17-20 258- 260

231- 232 74- 75

181 186 218- 220 336, 350- 351 603 28-29, 326- 328 153, 160- 161 33-34, 36-38,

44-45,65-66, 78 631-632 135- 136 293 170- 171 8

173, 177- 178 573 252-257

182 166-167 187 219 359 643 52

159 175

182 231 148 165-166 186-187 115-116


1 547


I NDEX 'l'o 8 tJ BJECTS- contiitued.

--- - -------- ------,----- - -- - ---------· -- - -- ---------·-


Referen ce to Subject and Witnesa.

Liquor Law.s and Matters relating thereto-continued. -

Cla.rke, N. Duke, L. B. Leane, E. T. Martip., A. R. Menges, If.

Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C. Ogilvie, E. 'Q, PaJnell, J. W. F. :)D. ·

Robjt1so11, ]). C J. Sharlancl, A. F. Wem er, S.C.

Wicksteacl, G. H . Wilson, H E. ..

Evid ence.




50-52 154-155 12i- 12s 630-031 8

McPhail, Robert-- Complaint against convictions-· Adams, E .. J. _ . . . _ . . .

17 15 10- 12 15A 271-273 24)?

Barnes, J. Bataille, E . Birdsey, N. H. Buffett, M.

Christian, J. F. M. Leane, E. T. Leane, K. IVI. McPhail, C. McPhail, J. McPhail, M. A. McPhail, R.

Martin, A. R. Menges, H . Pamell, J. W. Quintal, E.

Quintal, G. R. Quintal, T. E. B . Stephenson, E . . . W erner, S.C. Wickstead, G. H.

Wilson, H. E. Mails-Transhipment of­ Buffett, P. M. . .

Morality-Public­ Duke, L. S. Leane, E. T. McLa ren, J·. G . . _

P arnell, J . W. . .

Sharland, A. F. Werner, S. C. Wickstead, G. H. New Zealand- Suggcsleu cession to­

Bailey, C. Gazzard, A. S. Leane, E. T. McLaren, J. G. Nobbs, F. C.

Patching, T. H. . . . .

Norfolk I sland- General Welfare-­ Christian, C. Martin, A. R. Robertson, J. S. Noxious Weeds­

Buffett, P.M. Christian, C. Christian, E . Leane, E . T. Nobbs, C. C. H1 . Nobbs, F. C. Robertson, J . S.

503 2A-4A 587 484-4s5 508-509 483 487-'{88


481-482 . 479-480,506 488-489 491

505 633 504 "475-476

497 500-502 12A-14A I 510 1511


234 .

· 246A, 246c 333-336, 372-373 610-611 627

liA 15A, 590 263, 264

20tl-210 92-95 348-349 611-613

159 20

22 1 191- 192, 208 198

162 117 222-223 352- 354 40-42 150, 152- 153, 157

199-200, 203 250-251, 258 Stephenson, E. . . . . . . . .

Patching, T. t aga.i nst Judgment­ Leane, E. T. 557-563

Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C. Patching, T. H. Robertson, J. S. Stephenson, E. Stowe, G. T . Yeamen, A. R . . . Yeamen, F. A . ..

Population and Prosperity-· Nobbs, C. C. R. Public Service­ Adams, T . E.

Duke, L . S. McLaren, J. G. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C.

Robinson, E . C. Wickstead, G. H.

552- 556 550-551 535-543 549

546-548 591-594 545 544


183 244-246 639-643 72-73, 77

157 178 263- 275

S11bject and Witncs>.

I Reference to


- .1 .

Public Se rvice-con.li1w t tif, Wilson, H. E. Robertson, J·. S. P u blic Works­

Adams, T. E. G.

Buffett, p , M. Booty, L. J. e hr!stian, c. Christian; E. Lealie, Ei. T.

Nobbs, F. C. Robertson, J. S. Stephenson, E. . . Re-afforestatioh-'­

Adams, T. E. Christian, E. Lane-Poole, C. E. Lenne, E. 'r,

Nobbs, 0. C. R. Robinson, E. 0. Wickstead, G. H . Shipping-

Adams, '1'. E . Bailey, Q. Bailey, G. H,. S.

gazzarq, A .. S. Leane, E. T . . l\'IcLareh, J: G. Murphy, J. F ,

Nobbs, C. C< R. Parnell, J. W . .. ..

P at ching, T, H. Robinson, E .. Q. StepheJis!)n, E. Wallin, F. Social Unrest-

Bain, R. S. Booty, L. J. Buffett, P. M:. Culey, D. R. Down, D. M. Duke, I. G. Evans, I. C. Hall-Thompson, P. H. Hamilton, L . J enkins, J. W. J"eane, E.

Leane, K. 1\'L Mc Laren, J. G. McPhail, M. A. Martin, A. H..

Nobbs, A. Nobbs, F. C. Ogilvie, E. D. Parnell, J. W. Quintal, S. H.obertson, J. S. Robinson, J. L. Robinson, 0. Stephenson, E. . . Warner, A. G. . .

Warner, F . M: •. . Wickstead, G. H. Wilson, E. li'L Stephenson, Ernest- A ppcal a gains t I >is m issal­ Barnes, J. Birdsey, N. H. Buffett, I. C. Buffett, P. llf. Clapp, H. Clarke, N. Christian, F. L. Donkin, C. H. K. Evans, Y. Heaps, F. W. H. Hammer, W. J. Jenkins, J . W. Leane, E . T .

McLaren, J. G. Menges, H. Menges, N. S. Murphy, M. V. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, G. E. Parnell, J. W. . .

Pearson, F. W. . .

200-201 I


180 {!ill 162; 169 147

ll6'-1l7 22i- 222 36i-362 152, i 54, 156 201-204


181 218 634-638 355-356 45-46

174 268- 269

181"'-182 209-'-210 232 186 80-96 3_ 56-357, 366

603-605 621- 622 47-49, 72 631


2158-260 59S..J)97

325B-325c 143-145 165 132-133 301- 302, 324 306,323 215-217 624 325A 224-225 368, 371 , 375,

309-311 389-400, 312, 316 606 410 192- 197, 401-402 325E 157 124-129 625-627, 633 233

198 317- 319 214 403-407 303- 305, 320- 321 296-300, 322 273-275 :307- 308, 325


I 4ll-415

463 459 416- 42 1 16A 427-428


466 462 454 438A 465 416, 438---439, 456.

472, 474 609 461 464

lOA 453 '158 632 i 4102

Subject and

Stephenson, Fjrnest--'-Appeal against Dismissai-r,ont£nued. Quintal, F. E. . .

Rain, R. J. Robertson, J. S. Sharland, A. F. Stephenson, E. . . Warner, A. G ... -

Werner, S.C. Wickstead, G. H. Wilson, H. E. Wise, A. G. Stock-De pasturage of­

Adams, T. E. Bailey, G. Buffett, P. M. Christian, C. Christian, E. Leane, E. T. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, F. C. Parnell, J. W. . .

Robertson, J. S. Robinson, E. C. • Stephenson, E. . . Wickstead, G. H. Stock-Need for lmprovement-

Leane, E. T. ·

Nobbs, C. C. R. Wickstead, G. H. •Trust Fund­ Buffett, H. S.

Christian, E. Leane, E. T. Murphy, J. F. Nobbs, C. C. R. Robinson, .E .. C.

- - - -------------- ---- -


INDEX TO SuBJECTs-continued.

426 9A 455 429

Reference to Evidi!DI',4',

440- 448, 468- 471 449-450 llA 422-425, 460 430-437,457 451

183 230 168

113-114 220 352-353, 363- 364 63, 63A, 64, 64A

160 629-630 202 176 251 266-268

342-343, 356-357 42-44, 276-277 266-268

186 218 349 617-621 35-36, 77 172-173

Subject and Witness.

Reference to IJividence.

Trust-Rawson Hall­ Nobbs, C. C. R. Robinson, E. C. Stephenson, E. . . -Warner, Frances Mary-Complaint of Defama-

tion-Down, D. M, Duke, I. G. Leane, E. T. Leane, K. M. Robinson, J. L. Warner, A. ..

\Varner, F. M. . . Wilson, E. M. Y eamen, Francis Alexander-Complaint against Judgment­

Bartley, L. G. . .

Birdsey, N. H. . . Christian, C. P ...

Heap, M. Leane, E. T. Nobbs, C. C. R. Robinson, E. C. Watt, G. S. Yeamen, F. A. . ..

Y eamen, Francis Alexander-Complaint against Conviction­ Chiistian, C. P. , . Edgar, H. S. Nobbs, C. C. R. Nobbs, I,. C. Wickstead, G. H. Wilson, H. E. Yeamen, A. R,. . . Yeamen, F . A., -.

·285-,286 286A 260-261

301-302, 324 306-323 309-311 312-316 317-319 303-305, 320-321 296-300,322 307-308,325

525 . 530 534 528 531-533 526-527 529 524 512-523

566 572 568 567 570 565 569 564, 571


Exhibit Nc.









lO 11 12 13 14 15 Hi

17 is

19 20 21 22 23

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3!) 36 37

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

47 48 49 50

51 52 53

54 55 5()

57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 n

74 75 7G 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

84 85

86 87 88 89






I .



Petition for Royal Commission. ·

Progress suggestions for improved system of Administration.

reNew Zealand Government steamer Hinemoa visiting Norfolk Island.

of Norfolk Island products to New Zealand.

Circumstances leading to Hineuwa's visit to Norfolk Island. . Landing apples at Norfolk Island. Copy of cable re certificate to land apples. Re gq.a;rantee for freight Hinemoa.

Proposed inauguration steamer service Norfolk Island-New Zealand. Seeking guarantees for freight by Hinemoa. Reply to contents Exhibit 10. Intimation that guarantees not forthcoming. Administrator's advice re failure to obtain guarantees. · .

Copy of cable 1·e guarantees . . Extracts from correspondence on the subject of removal of inhabitants of Pitcairn Island to Norfolk Isla d. Statement of claim on behalf of Pitcairn Islanders. Motions submitted to public meeting on matters for representation to the Commission.

Proposed Ordinance for licensing of boats and boatmen. ·

Letter from C. C. R. Nobbs 1·e need for licensing boats. Administrator's reply to petition re bulls. Copy _of documents relative to affairs and original funds of Pitcairn Islanders. Relative to adverse criticism of Norfolk Island bv New Zeala,ncl Herald. Necessity for Company's Act applicable to Norfolk Island. Restores required for Norfolk Island schooner. ·

Re Norfolk Island schooner. Supply of motor engine and certain stores for schooner. Protest against importation of banana plants. Application for registration of schooner at Norfolk Island. . •

Re requirements of Navigation Act in the matter of NorfQlk Island schooner. Reef at Emily Bay. ·

Alleged ad verse reports re Norfolk Island bananas.

Oranges from Crown lands picked for export.

. Receipt of payment for oranges picked from Crown lands. ·

Question of ceding Norfolk Island to New Zealand, andre favorable markets in that Dominion for Island products. Re market for Norfolk Island products. Proposed steamer service Niue Islands-Norfolk Island and New Zealand. Geo. H. Scales Ltd., inability to chart-er vessel for Norfolk Island. Matters submitted to public meeting on 9th :February, 1926.

Re withdrawal of permit to depasture bull. ·

Inspector McLelland's observations on inspection Norfollt Island Public School. A. S. Quintal re establishment of private telephone service. Name submitted as one who signed memorial against her conscience. Names of persons alleged to be dissatisfied with Administration. Complaint by Rev. A. R. Martin against conduct of Administrator. Statements against Administrator alleged by Rev. A. R. Martin. Resolution of All Saints Vestry meeting 5th January, 1925. Administrator's letter to Secretary of the Vestry. · Correspondence between Rev. A. R. Martin and Administrator.

Duties and emoluments of Registrar of Courts. Re collection of Norfolk Island 'l'ariff. Appointment of Mr. G. H. Wickstead as Police Constable, Norfolk Island .. Executive Council's delegation of power to herdsman under Pasturage and Enclosu.1·e Ordinance 1920. Press news publishing proposal to hold meeting to assist Mr. Fra.ncis Nobbs. Excerpts from letters and report of Henry vVilkinson. Administrator's letter to ·senator the Right Honorable G. F. Pearce, P.O., on Island morality. Alleged abuse of Liquor Law-:-Deputation from Executive CounciL Letter from Mr. Stephenson, Registrar, to Colonel Leane, Northern Territory. Administrator's reply. . · .

Report of Administra.tor ·re A. and H. Show-Photographs of exhibits. Correspondence between Administrator and Australian Fertilizers Pty. Ltd. Copy of circular letter from Administrator to local growers. Correspondence with Commonwealth Analyst respecting soil and stone analysis, and erection of lime kiln. Copy of Administrator's report on the subject of cotton-growing. Copy of Administrator's report on the subject of stock and necessity for improvement. Copy of Administrator's report-Banana planting. Correspondence from Gubbay Fn3res, Vila, relative to market for Island products. Meeting of ladies re needlecraft industry. Correspondence between M. S. Barnes and Katie M. Leane relative to needlework. Photographs -of Government buildings at Norfolk Island . . Photographs of children's fete. · . . . ·

Letters of complaint from C. C. R. Nobbs, and reply of Secretary, Department of Home and Territ.ories. Administrator's dispatches in connexion with land matters. . . · . ·

Administrator's remarks to Executive Council on noxious weeds and system of Public vY orks. The application of depasturage fees. . · ·

Administrator's dispatch on the subject of reafforestation, Norfolk Island. Form of permit to keep beer, wine, or spirituous liquor. Mr. J. E. S. Caverswall's letter re liquor matters. Copies of Ordinances-,-Returned to Administrator. . . .

. R-esolutions of Executive Council relating to brands Ordinances and proposed Ordinance for the hcensmg of boats and boatmen. Executive Council's resolutions for the amendment and alteration of certain Ordinances. Administ:rator;s dispatch covermg Exec11tive Council's recommendations, and for amendment of

Administration Law No. 2 of 1913. . ·

List of persoW! selected for public work during September, 1924. Administrator's communication to Executive Council re boatmen's Ordinance. Deputation to Administrator in the matter of depasturage of bulls. Extract from Administrator's letter to Secretary, Department of Ho111e and Territories, rela.tive to

anomalous position of Administrator acting a& Chief Magistrate.

Exhibit No.

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101

102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110


112 113 ll4 ll5 116 117 118 ll9

ll9A 119B 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131

132 133


135 136 137 138 139 140

141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150

]51 152 153

154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161

162 168'-164 165 166 167 168 169 170

171 172


I'NbF3x ''i'o Exi:I IBITS-continued.


Administrator's dispatch dealing with difficulties of farmers a'ri'd grbw'Eirs 1 Norfblk Proposed Ordinance for the operation Df Company's Act 0t New Sbtith Wales in Norfolk Island. Re b . J. Bt»tJty. Correspondence between Rev. A. R. Martin and A

Correspondence between the Administrator and Mt. Bai'nes, SchtmlniastEir. Administrator's notes in relation to School function. Invitation to Administra.tbr and party to B·chool function. Administrator's reply. .

Administrator's notes re Constable Werner and Mr. Barnes; 18elioblmastet. Administrator's communication to Secretary; Home ai1a Depattnient, regarding Schoolmaster and conduct of Islanders generally. The reasons for non-attendance of Administrator at School's Xn1as fuhction. 'Cbpy o£ comrl.ninication Hom Inspector-General bf Police relative tb Police Service; NoHolk Island.

Administrator's dispatch re policing the Territory of Norfolk Islantl.. Copy of cablegram relative to visit of Judge de Vere. Testimonial to Rev. A. R. Martin; B.A., and coinm\micatimi fl'oiil Bishop of Gi'afton. Letter tendered by Mr. E. D. Ogilvie in reference to translations and wa.r medal. Testimonial from W. G. Hughes submitted by Mi\ E. D. Ogilvie. Allegations of discourtesy and misconduct s.gainst Mr. :El. Stephenson. Extracts from letters of Mr. Harry Clapp chatging misconduct against Governmeht officials, Norfolk

Island, and directions of Department of Home and Territories to Administrator. L. J. Booty's allegations of e,xcessive use of liquor by Mr. E. Stephenson. Minute by JVIr. E. Stephenson to Acting Administrator. .

Statement of liquor issued, Norfolk Island, for half years ended 30th June, l9Q5, an'd 31 st 'December, 1!:!25. Report from Mr. H. E. Wilson regarding issue of liquoi' ana gehefal offi'ce matters. Mr. Stephenson's explanation ih reply to charges of .

Certificate from ·Di'. A. S. Patton respecting issue of li'1_uor during his term of Acting Administrator. Statement from Mary Edwards in the case of Mr. E. Stephenson. Statement from Burns, Philp, and Co. Ltd. re case of Mr. Stephenson. Statement from Burns, Philp, and Co. Ltd. relative to cheque for£30 l6s. 8'<:1.: pay able to E. Stephen son.

Depositions of Sidney Charles Werner in the McPhail case. Depositions of George Rawdon Quintal. Depositions of Charlotte McPhail. , . .

Chief Magistrate's permission to Charlotte McPhail-to leave Norfolk Island. Depositions df Mary McPhail. Depositions of Mary Buffett. Deposition of Emma Bataille. Deposition of Jacob Barnes. Rebuttal deposition of Sidney Charles ·wei·ner. Deposition of J <;>hn Frederick M:ills Christian. Chief Magistrate's and decision iii McPhail case.

Report of Oohstable Werner in reply to allegations of iirtpropei' Mndtict in McPhail case. Information charging theft against Charlotte McPhaiL .

Information and suinlil0nses charging ;Jbhn and Thomas McPhail with theft and Mary McPhail with receiving stolen property. Statement from Mr. Peter M. Buffett on the question o£ character t>f the McPhail fabJ.ily. Extract from Administrator's dispatch relative to loss of basket and notice exliibitea respecting pardon

granted to Charlotte McPhail. .

Order issued by Katie Mary Lealie on F. A. Yeamen directing payment of £20 to Norfolk Whaling Company. Order issued by Katie Mary Leane on F. A. Yeamen directing payment of £27 lls. to A. and H. Societ y. Statement of receipts s,nd expenditure America1i tea held on 6th Octbl:iet, 1925. Administrator's invitation to attend picture show. Summons issuetl. against Fhtncis Alexa.nder Yeamen charging uhla\vful dete1ition of property. Subpooha to Francis Alexander Yeamen directing prodi.mtion of order issued by Katie Mary Leane. Copy of cable from Yeame1i to Home ::'.li d Teti::itoi'ies, Melb6ti.tne, protesthig against Administi·ator

adjudicating in

Original Police Report year ended 30th June, 1923. Norfolk Island $chool admirtistratibn a,nd regulations matters ui1det Pitblic Instr uction Acl 1880. N orfolk Island per' primary instruction. .

J{egistiatioh and rules of parents and citizens' associations, New South W ales. Method and nature of work of School Dental Clhiics. .List of head masters Noi'folk Island School, 1906- 1922. Burns, Philp, and Company's Steamship Service Ltd., Lord IIowe Island; Norfolk Island, and New

H ebrides. neceipts and Expenditure, Norfolk island Trust Fund, 1914-'-1925. Statement of investments Norfolk Island funds. Statement of investment transactions since transfer of funds to C&mn10n:wealtli. Sta.tement of Receipts and Expenditure; Norfolk Island Acetmht, 1920-=-1925.

Commonwealth F0restry Advisl'lr's Report on the Forests of NoHblk Island. :Pitcairners' petition. Statement of eiilist:inents tltii·ing the Gi'eat Wat. R eport on Public School by Chief ljls'pector, Education Depattiheht, Ne"7 S olith Wales. (Linked with

Exhibit 146.) Statement of land case, George Nobbs,.

Statement, lMids open for seleeticJh. Officers, duties and emoluments. Statei:!J.ent of work perfernied by easuallabour. Norfolk Island medical list. · Statement of Public Work a_ nd Expenditure, 1924-1926. Statement of wor;k proposed during uhexphed period -bf finaJicill!l year.

Wireless installation and news serVice. of births registered,

Statement of inee:inplet ed land deeds. Return of registered.

lh hlbit No.

173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180

181 182 183


lNDR:X 1:0

Subiect. ·

Return of deaths, Norfolk Island, 1920-1926. (Linked wit h R Khiblt 170.) Extracts from police occurrence book, year 1925. ·

Estimate of and Expenditure, Norfolk Island, 1925-1926. Ordinances passed hi respect of the Territory. Complaints re Public .Trust Funds Control Ordinance. Expressions of apprehension for liberty of certain residents. Complaints re Race Club's Totalizator.

Copy .of will ·Jf Abraham Blachley Quintal. Copy of will of Jonathan Adams. . .

Copy of will of John Valentine Maunsell Evans. Re Transhipment of Mails:


A Laws of the Territory of Norfolk

B c



Staff of Norfolk Island-Salaries ap.d Emoluments. Receipts a:nd Expenditure, Trusts Funds, 1914-25. Proposed Public School Law and Regulations. Balance-sheet-:-Original Pitcairns Fund.

Delaration of Trusts-Norfolk Island Funds. Norfolk Island Investments. Cultivation Return, year ended 31st December, 1925. Map, showing disposition of lands.

. \


.. . ' \ '

' .

. · ... :



LAWS OF THE TERRITORY OF NORFOLK'. ISLAND. . . . .... _ ,..- -:-- . "" "-{ "· , . .,.... ' LAw s CoNTINUED IN FoRcE BY SEe•rroN 4 oF THE NOJ:tll'Q!-K lsJ;,AN_q Aer. No 1& oF 1913 • Interpretation Administration

Birds Protection Brands and Marks Commons and Public Reserves Constables (Special) Constabulary Conveyancing Copyright Crown Lands Customs Dogs Fencing Health Infants' Maintenance and Protection Liquor Prohibition Marriage .. Pigs (Trespass) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Public Roads and Public Notices The Public School .. Registration of Births, Marriages and Deaths Royal Commissions Slaughtering Successions and Wills Surveys ..

Timber Licences Titles to Land Vagrancy Note.-Numbers 13, 16 and 20 since repealed .

Constabulary Regulations 1904. Public· School Regulations 1906.


School Regulations 1909 (N.S.W. Gaz. 37 of 1909.)



.. ) .

• 0

Law No.1 Law No.2 Law No.3

Law No.4 Law No.5 Law No. 6 Law No.7 Law No.8 Law No.9 Law No.10

Law No. 11 ' Law No.12 LawNo.l4 Law No.15 LawNo.17 LawNo.18 Law No.19 Law No. 21

Law No. 22 Law No. 23 Law No. 24 Law No. 25 Law No. 26 Law No. 27 Law No. 28 Law No. 29 Law No:30 Law No. 31 Law No. 32

5 Wm., IV., No. 8, relating to by Courts of Equity for Contempt; Disposal ofUndisposed Residues of Effects of Testators; Illusory tJf llaws !o-r of Debts out of Real Estate; Laws

for Conveyances and Transfers of Estates and Funds, &c. · '

54 Vic. No. 25, Probate Act 1890, 8.98. . Wills, Probate and !31

7 Wm., IV., No. Act for of Law relati11g to .pQwer.· .. _ ··

Act for Amendment of L tJ.w relating te> Inheritance.' ' Inheritance Act, No. 19, "1901 . 10 Vic., No. 10, Small Dehtli! R@c.\wtiry A!!t', Segmgns 15, :U. . . .

45 Vic., No. 27, Small !J-$ applies to Court_ s of Pej;ty Sessions is repealed)

Small Debts Recovery Act 1899. . • . ·.· . • ·r

Sny,all Debts Recov_ e1·y 4c.t 1905, Sectio!ls 7 to_18 !tru:!, Section 20. 32 Vic., No. 6, Summary Convictions and Ore].ers Amendment Act. · · 46 Vic., No. 17, Criminal Law AtJt gf.'t8§ij; pa:rt 359, 442, part 295.

52 Vic., No. 6, Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1888, Section 2. Crimes Act 1900. 50, 1899. 55 Vic., No.5, Criminal Law and Evidence Amendment Act of 1891, Sections 17, 24, 26, 34 and 35. Evidence Act (No. 11) 1898-Unrepealed enactment thereof. Police Offences Act 1901, Part IV. · '

Customs Handbook of 1896 . Marriage Act 1899. Registration of Births, Deaths and Ma1-riag es Act 1899, Sections 16, 19 to 24, 28, 30, 37 to 39, and Schedule11, except Schedules 1 and 2.

Companies Act 1899 (No. 40, 1899), Parts 1, 3, 5 and 6. Companies Act Amendment Act 1900 (No. 47, 1900). Companies (Death Duties) Act 1901 .(No. 30, 1901), except Sections 10 and 11. Companies (Amendment) Act 1907 (No. 9, 1907.) Companies (Registration of Act 1918 (No. 37, 1918) .

1 5 .5 ..


All laws and statutes in force in the realm of England. ?'n the tV,enty-fift h day of July, 1828, the date of the passing of the Act 9, , Q-e9 , IV., 0 .83, applicable in the administration of justice 'iri Norfolk Island, so far as the same can be applied within t4€l said l s!an<;l . · '· ·


The Austmlian Waste L ands Act 1855 . 11 and 12 Vic., C.42 1 As amended by N.S.W. Acts 32 Vic., Ne. 6 and 50, 1899. 11 and 12 Vic. C.43 I . • ·

Copyright Act 1911 (Acts 1 and 2, George V. Ch . 46). 18 and 19 Vic., Cap. 56. ·


:; (

• , 'ir

\ \o

• f

! ,·

' ' ( .

ORDIN-ANCES. I- •·. . • 1915..

1. Importation of .Qrdj,nq,nce

2. Interpretation Ordinance 1915. 3. Public School Ordinance 1915. 6. lnl'\.


I. Importation of Flants 1915. --

2. Export of Cattle and Beef Ordinance 1916. 3, Foreign Marriage Ordinance 1916. 4. Noxious Weeds Ordinance 1916. 1917.

1. Importation of Plants Ordinance 1917, 1918. 1. Export of Timber Ordinance 1918. 1919. 1. Appeal Ordinance 1919. 2. Affidavits Ordinance 1919.


1. Preserved Fish Bounties Ordinance 1920. 2. Pasturage and Enclosure Ordinance 1920. 3. Census Ordinance 1920. 1921. 3. Interpretation Ordinance 1921 .

4. Public School Ordinance 1921. 5. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance 1921.


I. Importation of Opium, Morphine, Cocaine and H eroine Ordinance 1922. 2. Administration Ordinance 1922. ·

3. Sale of Ordinance 1922,

4. The Immigration Restriction Ordinance 1922. 5. Preserved Fish Bounties Ordirtance


1. Preserved Fish Bounties 1923..

2. Fugitive Offenders ('fl-) {)rdi,na'fi,Ct; 1923. 3. Melanesian Mission Lands Ordinance 1923. 4, .Deserted, Wives and Childri#n Or4inq,rtee . . ··

5, Ordf3rS for Enforcement) Ordinr:-nce

6. Melanesian Mission Lands Ordinance 1923 (No. 2). 7; .

8, Or.dinance 1923.


1: Crown Lands Ordinance 1924. 2. M elanesian Mission Lands ·Ordinance 1924. ·

· 1925.

1; :Reciprocal Enfort;:ement of :rudgments 1925 . . 2. Executive Council 01·dinance 1925. . •

3: ojj_udgmen!s (No. 1925 .

4_. .Brands .Qrdinance)925. . . . . . ·


t' f . •

l 4'fWti!J.neers 1926. · ·

21 Waters Ordinance 1926. · 3. P ublic Trust Funds Control Ordinance 1926 .



4. Companies Ordinance 1926. ')·--;; ;.·-;::-::,-·,: 5. Weights Ordinance 1926 . 4 and 5 of 1915; 2 and 3 of 1918; 1 and 2 of 1921, have been repealed.



Importation of Animals Regulations 1915. Liquor Permits Regulations. 1926. Preserved Fish Bounties Regulations 1920 and 1923 .(Gazette No.3 of 1923). Census Regulations (Gazette No. 11 of 3rd February, 1921, pp. 162-3). Foreign Marriages Regulations 1922. Executive Council Regulations 1925. Executive Council By-Laws 1915 (C.1421). Pasturage and Enclosure Ordinance By-Laws)921.



Acts Interpretation Act 1901-1904.· Statuto'ry Declarations Act 1911-1922. Wireless Telegraphy Act 1905-1919. . Service and Execution of Process Act 1901-1924.


Service and Execution of Process s:R. 105 of 1925.

Wireless Telegraphy Regulations, S.R. 101 of 1924. Wireless Telegraphy Regulations, S.R. 123 of 1925.



Administrator (salary, £700 per annum; allowance, £100 per annum) Clerk to Administrator (vacant) . . . . . . · ..

Collector of Customs and Registrar (vacant) Medical Officer · .. Auditor Police Constable (uniform supplied)

Head School Teacher (approx.) Assistant Teachers (4) (approx.) Postmaster (including allowance for mails) Temporary Clerk, Post Office (approx.) President, Executive.Council Secretary, Executive Council Signal Master Foreman of Works Caretaker, Road Grader Cleaners-

School Government Offices Surgery

£10 0 0

18 0 0

15 . 0 0

£ s. d.

800 0 0

250 0 0

370 0 0

600 0 0

12 12 0

150 0 0

403 0 0

626 0 0

65 0 0

25 0 0

30 0 0

50 0 0

12 0 0

130 0 0

2 0 0

43 0 0





Year. I Balance Grant.

I R.evenue . Expenditure . Balance at end of r brought forward. each Financial Year.

£ s. d. £ £ s. d. £ 8. d. £ s. d.

1914-15 .. . . . . . . 3,000 912 15 8 2,675 12 3 1,237 3 5

1915-16 .. .. . . 1,237 . 3 '5 4,000 7;933 14 5* 2,730 14: 4 10,440 3 6

1916-17 .. .. . . 10,440 3 6 3,000 I 1,724 1 11 4,747 19 9 10,416 5 8

1917-18 .. .. . . 10,416 5 8 3,000 1,673 13 1 4,712 0 5 10,377 18 4

1918-19 .. ... .. 10,377 18 4 3,000 1,461 14 2 4,702 3 10 10,137 8 8

1919-20 .. .. . . 10,137 8 8 3,000 1,968 1 . 3 6,327 7 7 8,778 2 4

1920-21 .. . . .. 8,778 2 4 3,000 2,221 16 4 7,097 11 7 6,902 7 1

1921-22 .. .. . . 6,902 7 1 3,000 1,986 5 6 6,217 5 5 5,671 7 2

1922-23 .. .. . . 5,671 7 2 3,500 1,888 12 8 5,296 17 7 5,763 2 3

1923-24 .. .. . . 5,763 2 3 3,500


2,136 10 8 7,606 13 0 3,792 19 11

1924-25 .. . . .. 3,792 19 11 3,500 2,528 5 9 6,055 1 11 3,766 3 9

• Includes Norfolk Island fund <; ta ken over in October, 1915, £6,584 13s. ld.

Credit Balance at 21st Nlay, 1926 £3,545 12 6.

Credit of £15 on account of interest received in financial year not notified by Treasury, and not included in Home and Tenitories books until financial year 1924-25. Balance-sheets for _1922-23 and 1923-24 do not, therefore, agree with balances shown herein.




No. of 192 .



BE it ordained by the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, in pursuance of the powers conferred by the Norfolk Island Act 1913 as follows:-1. This Ordinance may be cited as the Public School Ordinance 19 . 2. The Laws, Ordinances and Regulations specified in the Schedule to this Ordinance are repealed.

Establishment of School.

3. A public school is established at Middlegate Reserve, Norfolk Island, and shall be maintained under this Ordinance. The main object of such school shall be to afford the best primary education to all children without sectarian or class distinction, but higher instruction may be given to pupils desiring it, on approved lines. 4. There shall be a principal teacher of the public school. The assistant and pupil teachers shall, subject to

regulations, act under the directions of the principal teacher. 5. (1) In such school the teaehing shall be strictly non-sectarian, but secular instruction shall include general religious teaching as distinguished from dogmatical or polemical theology. Lessons in the history of England and in the history of Australia shall form part of the course of secular instruction. ·

(2) No fees shall be charged for education in ·such school. · 6. (1) In such school four hours during each schoolday shall be devoted to secular instruction exclusively, and a portion of each day, not more than one hour, shall be set apart when the children of any one religious persuasion may be instructed by the clergymen or other religious teacher of such persuasion, but in all cases the pupils receiving such religious instruction shall be separated from the other pupils of the school. The hour during which such religious

instruction may be given shall be fixed by mutual agreement between the principal teacher of such school and the clergyman-, or such other person as may be duly authorized to act in his stead, and any classroom of the school may be used for such religious instruction by like agreement.


i I

(2) Provided that-(a) If two or more clergymen of different persuasions desire to give religious at the school, the children of each such different persuasion shall be SO instructed Ori different days. (b) The give;n shall in every authorized by

the' cliurc h to wliich tlie clerir- lnaii or ot her reli- ious teacher ma-O . . -·· --- -- -- .. -- ·- . - . . . (dy . . - - g - . - . .. - .---Y ------·- g .......... -----·- . -- - . (c) In case of the non-attendance of any clergyman or religious dudng any portion of the period . to be set apart for religious insttuctwn, such period shall be d €lvoted to the ·fflidinary secular instruction in .the s6hool. . -. . _ .. _. _ ___ ; ....... .. ·---- -- -- ·-·-·-'

' . . I

(d) No :Pupil in the schodl be required to receive a:riy general religious instruction if the

parents or guardia*s of such pupil object to religt ou:s insttuctiorl being given. , ,. • • - • 1 •• !· ,. .. r . I . . • , ( , .. · · · - · Attenda nce at School.

· _· ·Ii upon the patents ap of six ·and fourtee'Ii:

to such children :td schdol ;bn day on :Which school is i : · · · · - -_ .. . _

8. ,If any parent or guardian in contravention of the J>receding i,iegJ.ects to send his child or-ehi_ldren

to school cause of exemption, lie may before tlie Court, and shall on coljvictlon

be .liable for a first offence to not exceeding twb shillings and ' h;nd for every succeeding oiience to

a pena:Itr _ not exceeding ten' s}iillings. ' ( ; . . .· .· . . . ' . ' . ' ;

(2) _ it shall be -a gqod to any such ptosecution ·t-hat at the date· in information- - . .

(aJ- the chiia waS a£ the age thirteen -years or and hati qualified Ior admission to· a higher {}Uutse;

(b) that an exemption under this Ordinance in respect of the child had been granted an.d that at the. time aforesaid such exemption was in force ; (c) the child Waf? attending school by temporary or permanent

·infirmity, or other sufficient cause, and withiri seven days after the date on which suqh sickness, danger, inP,rmity .or oc_ Cllrted or arose the defericl.a;nt or )?_a-p.$ e-Q. 'tf>s Pe.. _thereof

ii1 writing to thl3 of the schooi; , 1r , " ... ' '· n._.: ' .:-: n t

(d) the child had not been absent for more than six during .the: .. J riotit.h gc-·d:t:tting:-whieh

the school ha.d been open immediat ely preceding such h a.If-day.

9. If any child bet ween the ages aforesaid .and not exempt ed by the Administrator fails on any school day to attend the school, the parentor guardian of the child shall inform t he-principal teacher of the school, or cause him t o be informed of the grounds fo r such non-attendance. Such grounds shall be reduced t o writing by the said teacher, and such writing shall be fi led by him for ' ifisiJe:Cti on by tlie Attel:1dance 0fficer appoint ed by the Administrator. If no such information is given, or if the grounds allege d for the non-att endance of the child are false or unreasonable, the parent or guardian shall p1·ima Ja.:.·ie be deemed t o have neglected to send his child to school without just cause of exempt ion.

. Exemptio ns .

10. The Administrator may grant an exemption after inquiry for any of the following reasons:­ (a) that the child is being regularly in some other manner ;

(b) that the child has been unable to attend school from sickness or infirmity or for fear of infection or other unavoidable cause; - · .. -. _ .

tb;estandard ote€hlcation. bt.the'!'i•:egulatioits;, a_na:_;l§ oftfte

age of .. 1 _,. _ } · · •

ll.feuiMti·Exam:inatibn 'bf Sclio&l· Ghita:refi;:'

11. The Administrator may make arrangemep_ts:J q_r :the per iodical medical examination of the school children. A

Thi Sd ho. o-i Cainmitlee.

12. The parents and other adult residents tlf the Is1mid tb meet together anm1ally for the purpose of. a Cominittee- o-£. fi;'\ r.e-who shall c!Jnstitutg· a Ootnmittee: of advice : · --.: ; · ' ,

(2) The. duties of such Comin:lttee shalr ·c • ... , •• • · · · - , .. • ·

(a) To regularly visit, inspect and repo-r t td' the· Adtnirlisttator upon the pubiio)!cbaol } ·: : . (b) . To report upon the m a:terialrequiie-nieiits bfthe school; and to the subji ot of'repairsj iilMrations a.nd additions to the school . . . . ·

(c) To assist in providing a_ nd selecting a schooi library arid other desir!1ble to. !?Upplement the ortlinary sclibol· equipment, · · ·: · .

(d) To aM when request ed by· the Administrator in respett. of any m EI.tters in wh!ch their may be-sotight. Geriei:ally:-td 'wdrk in harmony with the school staff £or tlfe wel£a:i:'e &f t}1& ;sc4bo( ! .

.· .. , - . . . ...

(3) The method of be in accordance with Regulations to be -framed tb,is law.


13. The Governor-General may make, amend, and repeal such regulations as may be necessary fer the carrying out of this law. · · - · · · ·. ·· · ·

The :PliB1ic Sc]i ool.L-a-vv, 1913:. The Public Sehooi 0 1rdinance 19i5_' . . Th'e· Public School Ordi? u1Jnee 1921. Trle P'itBnc School Reguiation:s, 1966



Sc:aooL RouTINE. AND DrnclP1.INE,

I. _ Daily .ll()itt~ne._ - :-Jl'he daiiy routifie; o.b~ery~d in the sellotil that specified hereunder:--'­ ~Qi'mng,-:_ at ~i4fl . . :.AJl t {;!Mliers t6 be :present~ All §e~ool inaterial to be prepat.ed fo'r less611s. At 8-.55._ J;)tipils M-t5~ atrangetl in Ntii~s, i-nsp@enien of cleahlih Ms, 11hd matclied into sch6Gl. -At 9. Lessons for special religious instruction to commence as noted in the time~table desc'rihetl oy Regu~

lation 2. · - : · - ·

At l~, ... ~ecess td be spetit in tM f}l!:iJygrotiM by tlie pupils ~i1d teachers. -At ll 115. L~s_ sofis to· be f~_ su-ni.~a aocerct-i-ng to time-'li1ole. . · . . -· :A[t l.2 il5, /l'~e. s~h~ol to be clismi sed id_r mid4lay recess. _ .

From 12:15 :td · 12,55. The te~ess for fl-inner fl;hd rMrMtltirt under the suueriritehdence of tlle t ea:ch~ts . At 1.2.5~. TJrn _ptipil~ ts b e afrahged, i~speeted; and marched int6 schoti L,. At l · liess@ns .t0 re~@ommetice as rlotea in tM tirrie~tabl~; · At 2.30. '.. The s()h00l oo be dis1i1issJd :

~- Time-table.:~ ~he)i~e~table t0 b€} QOserve-d in the ~eh0ol is _ as follows-;-Froin 9 ~ 10. Speeial religious ihstructioh, or, whijfe no telig-i ~ nls teacner is in atterttlance, ordiriary ihsttuc '-tion:, · ., . ..

From iO-to 12,15 .: · O'rdi:ti!itty instru~tion . . F:110~ .12.W to-1: "· Rimes~ for dihfier atttl re-a.sseru.bling of. pupils. ·From r tu 2,30i >Ordihary insthtoti@ii. · . · ·

, J>rovide.d that the time devoted to daily instruction is not reduced, the above distribution of tihie IS shl'.ljef1t to sMli hiodificiiHon af~ the Print1pal T~achi:ir maf deem Mcessary in tlie ir1terests of the school. · . _

· INncTrnus Dfs:ElAsiJJs.

3. ~n~. piipil-~1.1ffering _ from_ a confagiou~,· ofl'i~~1 ve,, or infectious 4i~_ e· will b~ -~x~lu1~dgy the Pr1nGipa! ~~acher fforil attendance at the school~ and will not be re-admitted until it is certified by the Medical Officer that suoh Ghild may attend_ soJioQ,l ~ith?ut. d~ui.ger to other pupils or to such child.

, , , ,,, , .. , _ _ _ _ : 1/AdATibNs A.Np HotiDAYs.

_ f ·Th~ " school ~acations ·~h~ll ~x·t~~d o;er ~ight scho~i weeks in each year; and shall be distrib11tea as niay be determined by the Administrator after consultation with the Principal Tea9~er; . . The school will be @losed on Good Friday, King's Birthday, and such 9th~r.days a.s .may pe determin~cl by tlie Acfrri.~nistrator. . · I•- . .; •.: .._\.· , .• 1 ! 1 ... : _.,, . •• , . • FJN'FtJiisfaN dF Pupft;s;

," : . , 5;'. A r,~pil 111ayz for grossj~s:olence, persi~t,ent disob~dience, pro,fanity, or im1~ciiaJ .c6~duct, be. by th~ Principal

Tea61for!Mtliwith reff16vetl ft6':m ' the scnool ; ·proviaea that in every such ca_ se the matter slia 1I Be rep

Generail. , · . · -

ORDER AND Goimuo1r. .

. 6. :Pupils wili be required. to be otde~ly ~nd. n1odest in their behaviour, anci to be 9bedient to t11efir teachers and to _ th.e rules

Cbuttsl!i uF lr1s'l':ttticT 10N.

, - 7. The course of seeular instruction, as the -term is defined in the Public; School Law; shall be presctib~d _ in the 'I Coutse ·oflnstruction for Primary Schools ·;; in New South Waies. . . . .

- - · 8. · Sp~cial Religious Instruction.-No P\ilpil is requi!ed to reGeive 'Special Religious lnstrlictiort if the parents or . gua:tdiahs of such 1ntpils p\)ject to·_such SpeciaLReligious Instruction being given. . - · '9,. G~nefafR~liyiout ln~tr.uotiML '-"-· Wh~re any pat~nt or grtardian objetlts to a pupil receiving GMeral Religiotts Instruction, prescribed in the Course of Instruction, notification to this effect should be made to the teacher, in writitlg,

whidrhidl there\rp~ ~-~ei:npt subli-pttpil. · · · · · . · - · . - - - · - ·


I_ O. Visitors may, with the consent of the Principal Tehchet; have access to the Public School during the hours of Secular Instr-p.ction ; not to ta~e part in the business or to interrupt it, but simply to observe how it is conducted. 11. V'iisiiors' .Boolc1 ~ Visitors shall enter tlieir na,mes in the Visitors' BeokJ and may enter therein t1:ny remarks they may deem proper.


· 1-2-. No· us~ sMll b~ i:fiatle o£ the sehdol bW.lding ~hich tends to cause contention, such as the hol1ing o{political . meetings; &t bfingihg iiitd ip politi~al dacti.hients ; or p~titioris for signature, neitMr ~ Hall it be used for private plifpbses ; iind -ho ~tlch :lhiilili4g sha-u ·M tig~d g;s :Lplace of public worship, or for other secMrian purpos~s, 11ot shall th~ school b~ use<:l .for a;ny ~p~6i!il putpcls~ withotH 'blre:eonMht df the .Adrnfoistratot.

•:-- • • • ' •' - • : ~ • '. ~ ~• • - • • V •'• "• • • • : : ~ • - - • •• •• ; ~ ~ •• ' • • - • • •


· - · · · ·.· 'is. 'Fiiif>tincipal 1iiaciier ii re.spon~ibie for t.h~. rtianaJeµient of ine sQ.hqol ·apd {qr thA dir~cbion, and s,1ipervi~i9n of the work of the subordinate teachers, the organization -01 the schM1~- and tlie classificatiorl. of pupils. He will be required to devote at least one hour daily to the instructio.n. of Pupil Teachers, and will prescribe subjects for study by them. · · ·

__ _ _ l4i 4\:s~i_ 'l)~ehers ;and __ P_ upil_ T_ e01.Gh~rs } ijjibj~c~ W th~ direotion and authoriW of the Principitl.T~acher.

Th~y ate . J,"eq_,tiir~ t.Q . o~i:ty; :1:>ut. hi~ i,nstru.Gti.on.s .rel_ Mive to thejr sch@ol work, and to loyally and faithfully M~operat~ with the Principal Teacher in all that he deems n~Q~s~~ty i_h .the .iiJ.t~t~sM oi .the schooL


15. The Principal Teacher will keep a time book, and all members of the staff will enter therein the time of their arrival and departure from t he school. 16. The Principal Teacher will rep ort to the Administrator the absence of any tea,cher witho'\1-t leave, or habitual unpunctuality upon the part of any tea Jher . . The Administrator, if satisfied that any member of the School Staff is unable to perform his duties owing to ill healt h, may grant suc4 officer leave of absence for .a period riot exceeding one month in any one year on full pay, and in t.he event of continued illness for a second month on half-pay. Any further lea:ve sh l;tll be gra:ht ed wit hout pay.

17. The Principal Teacher may sanction the absence of a subordinate teacher for. one or two days on sufficient cause being shown. Applications for such absence and for absence for more than two days are to be fprwarded to the Administrator with a recommendation of the Principal 'Teacher against or in favour of the application. Leave of absence for emergency purposes may be granted t o all members of the Teaching Staff provided it does not exceed three days in any one A record of all leave of absence (whether for illness or other caus.e) shall be kept, and a schedule of same forwarded t o the Ne w South Wales Education Department at the end of each quarter. .

18. All communications from subordinate t eachers intended for the consideration of the Administrator shall be forwarded through the Principal Teacher, who will report thereon, and furnish such recommendatio.n as he may think advisable. · ,

19. An Assistant or Pupil Teacher is required t.o give hot less than one month's notice of his intended resignation, which shall take effect on the last day of the month indicated. The Principal Teacher, before relinquishing the charge of the school, shall hand over to the Administrator all school property and·make out in duplicate an inventory of the same, one copy to be forwarded to t he Administrator, the other copy to be left with the school records ..

20. The Principal Teacher will make the necessary arrangements for the supervision of the playground during recesses. He will also t ake such action. as may be necessary to secure the orderly conduct of the pupils in going to and returning home from school. .

21. Corporal punishment must not be inflicted except by the Principal Teacher, or, with his permission and under his responsibilit y, by an Assist ant Teacher. Corporal punishment is to be restricted to extreme cases, and is on no account to be regarded or employed as a mere to teaching. 22. The Principal Teacher will examine each class in his school at least once a quarter, and will record the results, note the defe cts, and enter suggestions for their remedy in a book kept for the purpose ;he should sign such entries, as

also should the t eacher of the class. 23. The Principal Teacher will keep school records as used in the Public Schools of New South 'Vales. A Class Roll shall be kept by each teacher, and such roll shall be marked in ink twice a day, i.e., in the morning and afternoon at such times as will allow a full t wo hours' instruction to· be given prior to the roll call. He shall also furnish to the Administrator-

(a) A quarterly return of pupils. (b) An Annual Report on the progress and general condition of the school. One copy of this return and report shall be filed in the school records, and one forwarded to the Education Department of New South Wales.

24. The standard required to exempt a pupil from further attendance at school, as provided for in Section 10 of the Public School Ordinance , is as follows :-Reading-To read the fourt h book of any series AUTHORIZED for use in Public· Schools of New South Wales or at tlJe option of the Principal Teacher any other book of equal difficulty.

Writing- To write in a neat and legible hand, and without serious errors in spelling, a passage of twelve lines to be dict ated slowly from such book. ·

A rithmet1 :c- -To work correctly questions of ordinary difficulty in simple and compound . rules, reduction, proportion, and practice . 25. An annual examination shall be held in November of each year for the purpose of the :fitness of the pupils to proceed to a higher course of instruction, and a certificate issued to such pupils as are successful at such examination. ·

26. The Principal Teacher will receive and investigate complaints and others. It is also expected t hat he will at tentively consider such complaints, and that he will endeavour to ascertain whether they are well founded, and that he will afford the redress which their n.ature may require or suggest. 27. In order that gates and doors might be unlocked and suitable preparations made for the work of the day, t eachers of all ranks .must be at t he ·school in the morning at least fifteen minutes before the specified time for beginning lessons. ·

28. No sectarian or denominational publications of any kind shall be used in school, nor shall any denominational or sectarian doctrine be inculcated.


29. At the end of each month each teacher shall prepare a schedule, in the form of Schedule 1, of all in his class who have been absent from school at any time during the preceding month. Each such case . shall be considered by the Principal and noted as " satisfactory" or " unsatisfactory." In" unsatisfactory" cases, the Principal shall forward to the Administrator a certificate in the form of Schedule 2. The Administrator shall cause inquiry to

be made in . such case by an officer duly appointed for the purpose, and shall determine on such report whether or not action shall be taken against the or guardian of such child. In any proceedings a certificate· purporting to be under the hand of the Principal Teacher st ating that a child is or is not attending such school, or stating the particulars of attendance of the child at school, shall be prima facie evidence of the £acts stated in such certificate.

Every proceeding shall be t aken in t he name of the Administrator by such person as he may authorize in writing in each case in that behalf. ·

Every complaint or information under the Public School Ordinance or Regulations shall be heard and determined, and all penalties imposed, by the Magistrate's Court at Norfolk Island.


30. (l) P arents and guardians of children attending the Public School together with any residen.ts, not parents of · school who are interest ed in the welfare of such school shall meet annually to elect a School Committee for the purposes specified in Section 12 of the Public School Ordinance.


(2) The objects of the parents' meetings and Schoof Committee shall be to promote the interests of the school in co-operation with the teaching staff, and to assist the teaching staff in all its relations to the community. The Principal Teacher shall be ex qf!icio a member of such Committee, but shall have no vote in the proceedings. · (3) The Committee shall not exercise any over the teaching staff, nor shall it interfere in any way

with the control or management of the school. . ·

_ (4) At the annual meeting of parents and residents the teacher or his deputy shall act as returning officer, and shall conduct the election of the School Committee and declare the result. The election shall be by ballot. Scrutineers shall be appointed by the-meeting preliminary to the ballot.- . .

(5) The Committee at its -first meeting shall elect a Chairman,. whose duty it will be to correspond with the Administrator on behalf of the Committee; a Vice-Chairman, and a Secretary. (6) General meetings of parents and residents may be at other times during the year for the purpose of apprising them of educational matters or for purposes incidental to the discharge of the School Committee's duties. Such shall be arranged for in accordance with rules which may be adopted by the parents themselves.

31. These regulations shall -have effect when published by affi.ring a copy of the .same·at 'or ·near to· the Court

House, Norfolk Island. . . . . . . . . . _ · · -- - ·. · -


RETURN FOR THE FOUR SCHOOL WEEKS ENDED .. : ................ ; ............. , ......................... .

NAMES of all Scholars, between the ages of six and fourteen, who have been absent over four daysoreighthalf-daysduring·this period, and of such other Scholars for whose absence no satisfactory reasoi;t has -been assigned. - -·-···-----

.I Child. Name in Full. Age . Days Parent or Guardian (state if Present Address. Remarks. Ab.sent. a Widow) .. Name in Full. (1) I (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

I . - -

Class Teacher.

Class .......... ..

Norfolk Island Public School.

Date ................................... .



fuJI ·Namc . .Jt ............ ................. ; ............................................. the Principal Teacher at the School situate at Norfolkislitnd

hereby certify that the child named .......................................... (a pupil of ... ............. ...... Class) between the

ages of six and fourteen namely .................. years .................. months who resides ................................... .

(t Give exact address.)

and whose parent (or guardian) is ......... ... ................................ _. ............................................... .

• If (a) applies «trike *(a) Is attending such school. out line (b). If (b) (b) I t tt di h h 1 applies strike .out s no a; en ng sue sc oo · lines (a) and (c). (c) . The particulars of the attendance of such child at such school are as follows .:-

Period for which School was open.



Number of Half-days present. Dates of Half·days absent.

Morning. _Afternoon.

(Signature) ...... ...................................... · ... · .... · .. ·

Dated ....................................... ..... . Principal Teacher.

Any written excuse or medical certificate received by the Teacher from the Pa-rent or Guardian in regard to the child concerning · whom action is recommended, sh9uld be attached to tlus Form.


. .. ........... ············· .... ; ..........•..



Date of vjsit .. . .......... : ........................ : ..... .


; • ,' ·:. I • 1 t

· .. :.·:




(JOJ11l'ltll1UTIONS TOW 'l'IJ.t:l O:tw.AN .

. I

By a former made amongst some friends of Mqresby ·.'

<;Henry JohnsQV., Esq;, H!IJ3 · . , ..

. . /""

. ;:_ ._ ··. r;

·· Subi!Qtiptions ., . . · , • . , .

' .

Contributions towards the Organ

Total amount paid into Messrs. Haare·


rl852'-"$ . . ' ..

;, ; ...,_

. ' • i _.


. . . • ·

' .

Subscriptions received

£ s. d:

925 ' i6 3 TnmilAing expenses and outfit for Rev.

d-. H. Nobbs Organ . , , . .

Purchases for the Islanders , .

Shipping experlses and Insurance Printing Copying and iiicidental expenses' Invested, in the names of the Treasurers,

in the 3! per cent. £500-for the benefit

£; s. d,

80 0 ()

1o 10 0

90 10 0

835 _6 3

90 lO 0

925 16 3

£ $. d.

124 0 6

136 0 0

111 15 5

12 1 6

9 5 0

9 0 0

of the Islanders 508 15 0

£925 16 _ a _ j _

Balance in Messrs. Hoare's hands,c_.., ·,,, ··: . • !_iii

.................. 925 ·16 3

We have examined the above accounts, with the Vouchers, and find them correct . .. ' '1" '

'.'· .... :

(Sgd} J. D. GLENNIE, M.A. . (Sgd.) · . THOMAS:;AINGER, M.A . . ·. :.

. .·,

. .. ·· - . . ..




a Member of Het Majesty's Most Honorable Privy Council in Ireland Governor and Commander in Chief of the Colony of New South Wales and Vice Admiral of the atiill tlf Nui'folk Island, THE REVEREND RoBERT ALLwoon, of the City of Sydney in the said Colony Clerk and CHRISTOPHER RoLLESTON, of the City of Sydney aforesaid Esquire, The Auditor-General of the said Colony SEVERALLY SEND GREETING. WHEREAS Her Most Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria was lately possessed of Sheep and Cattle depasturing ·at Norfolk Island and of certain other public properlY tl;lef!Lw} 1Dstruiiti6hs from Her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for the Colonies were sold by the Right Honorable Sir John Young during the time he was Governor in Chief of the. Colony of New .St>U·tli Wales

1 5 .... " b

df'Nift,folli! ISiilhd: WB:Eltr!!j!Ltlfe: Sif Jbln} ¥oung.:d'lll'iiig thtJ hlr

!ihllet tlle ih§truati6ri!l S61d te Disliop M Melahesia cettain IJar.d -in. .the s1tid Islanc! foi

A'#ii wifFJitEiAs the Mid SOrt:tMset Rich&rd Earl M Belmore -Mil Elold Mrtain !tirititurll in House1

Notf<11Jf.Ji11An8 suni of Ffift)r·three pounds ANiHvifiilkii:as- ettt of tM moi1t(Y ftAJitl ' the Mi'd S&les thll'· sl1msof £1,760 and £94314:s. together the sum of £2,103 14s, were in1ested in tlie pUtohase of _ Sout]l Wales Gt!yetfutuillt Debenthres amminting _te the sutn of £3,000 by the stiid Sit John Young

AND WHEREAS _ the Sums of Three thousand pounds and Two thousand afld twenty pounQ.s . :were,1;nvested

m 'the purchase ef ,the ·said 1Hid the said Sum of Five hundred p6.unds has_ been at Interest to the mtent that the sa1d Debentures should be held and the mterest wh1ch should, from t1tne to time payable thereon and from the said Deposit be expended for the benefit (If certain resided

at P1tcaun Island but now residing a.t Norfolk Island and who are hereinafter style

the s:hd Secretary of State AND WII]m:EA§ 'it is deemed expedient that the said i:ttimejs so im'ested .a!;; aiore!aid ·and the securities for the same shall be held by three Trustees one of whom is to be The Governor for thii tifue being of Norfolk Island and the said Robert Allwood and Christopher Rolleston have consented to act as two of such Trustees AND WHE.REAS it is expedient that the 11aid licc0 unt !\t the be identified as the account to the

cred1t of which money received from such sales or of the intere§t or a.n:qual procee(].s of tP.e f!aid are.placed AND WHEREAS other moneys have been and it is other, vviU be receiVed ftorh the' sa1e ofpublic

property at Norfolk Island to be held and invested on the trli§t!> '1\eieina,ltet deeli:i,red as to the nJ,bney 111fead.y secured NOW. THESE PRESENTS WITNESS THAT The Eari of Belmore and the said Robert Allwoocl and Chrls£ophef Rolleston heremafter styled or referred to as The Trustees1 DO hereby acknowledge and declare that they hold the said Debentures (which are described by number date and amount in the Schedule hereinafter written) and the said Sum of Five hundred pounds so placed at fixed Deposit as aforesaid and any moneys which may be received as lastly hereinbefore recited upon the trusts following that is to say UPON TRUST that they The Trustees do and shall receive the interest dividends annual produce thereof and pay expend or otherwise dispose of the same or so much thereof as they may think

fit m suc.h manner as they in their discretion _shall from time to time. deem expedient for the benefit of The Pitcairn Islanders unless and until Her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for the Colonies shall otherwise direct and that any moneys which may be hereafter received to be invested as aforesaid and so much if any of the said Dividends interest or annual produce as shall not be so applied shall be invested at interest and accumulated and the accumulation thereof shall be added to THE said principal sum with power for The Trustees nevertheless to apply such accumulated fund or any part thereof as The Trustees may from time to time think fit for the benefit of the Pitcairn Islanders and shall yearly and every year render to the said Secretary of State an account in writing of the way

m whwh the sa1d Interest dividends and annual produce have· been-applied arid appropriated by them in the preceding year AND THAT when and as the said Debentures and the said Sum of Five hundred pounds so placed at Deposit shall become due and payable and that as and when any of the said moneys so expected to be rec.eived as aforesaid shall be paid or become payable· to the said Trustees the said Trustees shall receive the amounts thereof and as soon as may be expedient invest or reinvest the same in the purchase of Government Debentures Treasury Bills or other Government Securities of any of the Australasian Colonies it being understood and hereby declared that The Trustees from time to time and at all times have full power and authority at any time before the said Debentures shall become to sell and dispose of the saine if they shall think it expedient so to do and to reinvest the money arising from such sales in the purchase of other Government Debentures Treasury Bills or other Government Securities of any of the Australasian Colonies AND IT IS HEREBY DECLARED that the said Capital Sum of Five thousand five hundred pounds so invested as aforesaid and all accumulations thereof and any other Sums which may come to their hands as aforesaid and any other sum or sums which shall be invested upon t)le trust!! hereby declared and the accumulation thereof and all Securities on which any of the moneys aforesatd sliaU-irorrdime to time b.e invested shall be held by The Trustees UPON TRUST to dispose of the same according to the orde:.::s instructions and directions in all respects of the said Secretary of State it being intended that the whole of the said moneys shall continue to be the property of Her Majesty to be disposed of as I;Ier Majesty may think fit and that )lothing in these contained shall be held or considered as giving the Pitcairn Islanders any claim wliatsoever to or upon the sal.d moneys or any part thereof or as rendering The Trustees liab.le in aiiy way to account to or with them The Trustees being appointed with the intent and for the purpose of carrying Ob.t Her Maj·esty's ·will and pleasure with respect to the said moneys and of the interest or annual :f;r&leeds a;rising thetefrom dhd not for any other purpose PROVIDED At WAYS -A-N:b it iS lt:l!jft:flln'Y Dl!iGLAdb · that if either of them the said Robert Allwood and Christopher Rolleston or _any Trustee or Trustees to be appointed in their or his stead by virtue of this present power slialf e'f become incapable to act or be desirous or being _ from the execution of the trusts ltf6tesaJd or shall be aboliil t€1 lMvEl thf! said Qol,ony bt Naw

it shall be lawful for The Governor for the time being of Norfolk Island to IJ:ppoint a new TrUstee {jf TftistMs ill! the stead of such Trustee or respectively so tlyirig or i'ef\iBii.ig et becomi_rtg iftdl!.IJable to aot br bElifijt desirl:ius of being discharged or beifij! about to leave the said Colony o! New South as Md theNiliiJoti the said Trust moneys seg-qrittes and sliMl at the expeiiSe df tile l:l!iid fuM aEl as!iigrl!ld and trafisfetN:\Cl to slioh new Trustee or rttistiies j9ii!tly With the surviving or continUing Trustee QJ,' tit !!olely M the 6118!! tfiay fe€J.ilire, nevertheless tliat tM GoVernor for the time being of Norfolk Island. sMll tllWayii Mrlsitlittite ilM of eii6h Trtis£ees ·

1\i}B.iitne trusts declared concerning the same PROVIDED ALSO AND IT IS HEREBY EXPRESSLY DECLARED tliiit the receipt or iii writing of the Trustee or Trustees for the time being acting in the execution of the trusts of tlieiie for any sum . or sums of money payable to them or him under or by virtue of these presents shall be sufticient and effectual dis!}harge or sufficient !ltilnl1edlflil for tille e!hne rtispi!Ctively or for so much thereof in such receipt_ or respectively shall be expressed or acknowledged to be received AND THAr ,none of

appointM or to as ·aforesaid· shall be.lllnswerable or acceuritable RJf tM or -6thefs oHMtti

dr for the acts deeds ahti defaults of the others or otbei: of them nor for involunatry loss nor for MOFIEY tifiUef-' in which tlie)f sliall ioin only for conformity and that the present and future Trustees shaH and may reimburse

tlieiit§elves and eitch-otlier B;l1 the costs and expenses to be incurred in the execution of the trusts hereby reposed in tliem respectively AND THESE PRESENTS FURTHER WITNESS that The Earl of Belmore DOTH HEREBY DECLARE that the


moneys standing to the Of the Aecount at the OriE?ntal -Bank in Sydney aforesaid in the name of" The Government of·Norfolk Island" it,re moneys.a_rising from the sale of the said Sheep or Cattle lands or other public property or interest received :& the investment of such moneys and that the said Account is the current account of moneys paid into the said Bank and withdrawn therefrom upon account of Expenditure made for the benefit of The Pitcairn Islanders.

IN WITNESS 'whereof The Earl of Belmore and the said Robert All wood and Christopher Rolleston hav..e .hereunto set their hands and seals at Sydney aforesaid the fourteenth day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-nine. · ·

SIGNED : SEALED AND . DELIVERED by}· THE EARL OF BELMORE in the . · · presence of, . · . . . _ ·


the said RoBERT ALI;WOOD in lr the presence of, I


John Williams. j


the said CHRISTOPHER RoL- LESTON in the presence of 1


John Williams. j


2 Debenture& of £1,000 each Nos. 404 and 405. Series R.2. 2 Debentures of £500 each Nos. 6735 and 6736·. Series Q.2. 4 Debentui'es. of £500 each Nos .. 8490, 8491, 8492 and 8493. Series Z .2



T.a.ken over from New South Wales, October, 1915


New South Wales Government Stock realized, to provide funds for purchase of Land from Melanesian Mission ·

New South Wales Government Stock realized and invested in Commonwealth securities Loss on realization of New South Wales Stock A.mount transferred to Cash Balance _of Trust Fund, ·owing to Commonwealth Stock having been purchased at a discount

New South Wales Government Stock still held


Investment. £ s. d.

5,624 0 0

2,500 0 0

1,179 4 2

324 0 0

20 15 10 1,6oo ·o o




Face Value.



2,500 1,200


5,624 0 0 . 5,300


New ·South Wales Government Stock Commonwealth Stock


1,600 1,179


s. 0 0

4 2

4 2


1,600 1,200





Maize­ Grain

-""· Green Food Potatoes-Irish ..



Onions ..

Grape-vines­ Table use-1,823 Not bearing-527 Orangeries and Lisbon Lemons­

Productive-1,379 trees Not bearing-8,249 trees Coffee ..

Bananas-:.. Productive Not bearing Pineapples-3, 102 Arrowroot

Kitchen Garden Crops

Other Crops-Beans for seed* Yams* Wheat*

Oats ...

Total Area under Crop (approx-


A. R. P.

29 3 0

13 0 0

28 0 0

74 2 0

4 - 2 0

50 1 0

114 3 0

50 1 0

1 0 0

39 1 0

18 2 0

2 0 0

3 3 0

1 2 0

imate) 300 0 0


1,078 bushels

36 tons 543 tons 5! tons

1,360 bushels

3,657 cases

3,310 lb.

3,779 cases

250 dozen £5 {Estimated value of

£567 crops during the year

4 72 . bushels 5! tons 77 bushels About 5 tons chaff

• A second crop is obtafned on much of the cultivated land.

If Crops have Failed, State Cause, Kind of Disease, &c.

Partial failure-early blight

Many vmes passion fly destroyed by

Crop poor and some not

. picked. Many trees cut out for bananas

Half acre destroyed by pigs

Pyartiall destroyed by parrots

Printed and Published for the GoVERNMENT of the CoMMONWEALTH of Aus'fRALIA by H. J. GliiJEN, Government Printer for the State of Victoria.

~-. SCALE OF ~H~INS.~ G 3 0 18 30 42 54

NOTES l117lutlt hn Pier) 29" 345·

/.qhJtle tla /6r!i3'6' Art?.i 8528 acres.

Tl'ig. S1i1l7ims 6f'e sl!ewn !/Jus 6.Ansan ,wi!h /Jel'gtl!s 1/Jus fl. W~ llesernbound3ril!s do __ ____________ _

MSSJon do do .. ---·----------·­

/H/ere fl{)/ othetw1se s/iJred, !lie C3/ N" of l/3n ,s N 1 GSS.

#OME & TEl?l?ITOl?IES iJE.PT. N. T. 8-R-11/IK'H



Crown Lands Leased


--KEY.~ 1111 J I I I! Lanrl Open for Selection ... I I

111111 111 for Public poses

l'roposed Reserve for perimental ]?arm

p~~~ 11111111111