Dr Jonathan Richards, 2024

Warning: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are warned that this blog contains graphic content and may cause distress.

It includes descriptions of violence, racist and offensive language, sexual assault and references to people who have died.

When researching Queensland frontier violence at Queensland State Archives (QSA), there is documented evidence of government perpetrated or sanctioned violence towards First Nations people, particularly by the Native Police. However, this was not the only violence during Queensland’s early expansion, with many instances of physical violence occurring between non-indigenous civilians and First Nations people which often resulted in serious injuries and death. 

Although this civilian violence wasn’t always reported or documented, some records have survived which graphically illustrate frontier life in Queensland.  Many of these can be found in the documents of criminal court files held at the Queensland State Archives. In the period 1859-1900 reports of violence perpetrated by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples towards non-indigenous civilians, was highly publicised. However, it is generally unknown if there were many cases of non-indigenous civilians being tried for violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and if so, what was the outcome?

The cases

My research focused on exploring the surviving archival records of the Supreme and Circuit Court records of Queensland from 1859 to 1900. This included the records from mainly Ipswich, Rockhampton, Roma, Toowoomba, Brisbane, Cooktown, Townsville, and Maryborough courts. The cases located were found in the various series Briefs, Depositions and Papers in criminal cases heard with supporting documentation located in Crown Law, Colonial Secretary’s correspondence, Police Commissioners correspondence, Magisterial Enquiries into Cause of Death (Inquests) and Queensland Police Gazettes.

From the thousands of court records viewed, 37 cases of non-Indigenous civilians being charged with violence against First Nations people were identified, and of these, only 7 resulted in a conviction and sentencing. The interactive map below displays, by location, the instances of violent crimes against First Nations people by non-indigenous civilians. Each pin provides details of the case and links to digital copies of the records held at Queensland State Archives.

We ask that readers take care when reading the information contained in this interactive map as it may cause distress. The information includes descriptions of violence, racist and offensive language, sexual assault and references to people who have died. The names of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander victims have been de-identified in the map descriptions.   

Court cases of violent crimes against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples by non-indigenous civilians 1859-1900

When viewing the cases identified on the map, it may appear that some towns or areas in Queensland suffered more violence than others. However, the spread of cases more likely reflects the fact that records documenting violence in these areas have survived, while records for other areas have not. There were also instances where crimes were not reported, and some crimes that were reported may not have been investigated by police or judicial systems. In some instances, some that were investigated may have never made it to court (see map, Carline and Cameron, Vergemont Creek, 1888).

Understanding the judicial process and the attitudes of the time provides some insight into the complexities of prosecuting cases of non-indigenous defendants. It also helps to illustrate why there may have been so few convictions.

The judicial process

When police were informed that a violent crime had occurred, the usual first step was to issue an arrest warrant for the apprehension of the person, or persons, accused of breaking the law. Mostly, this was done by the nearest Police Magistrate who was a senior judicial officer, and not a member of the police force. If the Police Magistrate wasn’t available in that area, the local Bench of Magistrates could issue an arrest warrant.

The Bench of Magistrates or ‘Magistrates of the Territory’, consisted of leading businessmen, public servants, or pastoralists (men only). Two or more men could convene a committal hearing, which then could dismiss the charges or commit an individual for trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court. If the accused was committed for trial, the briefs, and depositions of witnesses collected in the case were then forwarded to the Justice Department and the Attorney General for prosecution. Many cases in the court records were abandoned when the senior legal authorities decided that a successful prosecution could not be assured. These files were usually marked as ‘Nolle Prosequi’ (Latin for ‘unwilling to pursue’), ‘No True Bill’ or ‘Case not proceeded with’ or ‘Discharged’. In all these cases it meant the Crown either voluntarily dropped a case, or there was not sufficient evidence to continue to prosecute a criminal trial. A case marked as ‘True Bill’ means the evidence presented at the committal hearing was seen as being sufficient to proceed to trial.

The character of the witnesses, the strength of the police investigation and the statements by the accused were all important factors in this legal process. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, providing evidence in a criminal trial was often complicated by a range of factors, such as a lack of reliable and competent interpreters; aspects of Indigenous customary law; colonial reluctance to accept testimony from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as valid and trustworthy or accepting their testimony at all. All these issues meant there were many cases of interpersonal violence that never went to court or were even recorded.

In 1875 Governor Cairns suggested that evidence could be taken from Aboriginal witnesses, and asked the Attorney General, Samuel Griffith, to consider legislation allowing ‘the admission of the evidence of Aboriginal witnesses, in the cases of Aboriginal offenders’ (QSA ITM846952, pp.165). A Bill to accept Aboriginal testimony was introduced and was passed by the Legislative Assembly (members were elected by voters) but then rejected in the Legislative Council (members were appointed by the Governor). Griffith told the Governor that ‘many persons familiar with the character of the Aboriginal population’ believed that Indigenous witnesses could not be trusted to ‘speak the truth’. Later an amendment to the Oaths Act, in 1884, made a new requirement that witnesses were expected to understand they might be punished if they provided untruthful evidence (Oaths Act Amendment Act, 48 Vic, No. 19) and this created another barrier to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples testifying.

Regardless of the law, different judges would or wouldn’t admit Indigenous testimony. Sometimes witnesses were just not allowed to testify, or judges refused to allow interpreters in the court, or did not wait for them to arrive or to be found. Of all the cases that have been found thus far in the archival collection, only seven ended in the jailing of Europeans with one a suspended sentence. The number of acquittals probably reflects the attitude of many European colonists towards First Nations people rather than the quality of the evidence in the trials. This sentiment is reflected when a Police Magistrate in 1892 wrote about the prosecution of a European charged with killing an Aboriginal man that it is ‘useless to try a case here as no Cooktown jury will convict’ (QSA ITM847448, Part 1, pp.34).

As colonial expansion continued to extend across Queensland, we begin to see a change in the nature of violence from the 1890s onwards. This takes the form of forced removals of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples from traditional lands across Queensland, enacted and supported by the introduction of The Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897. With the introduction of this new legislation, coupled with the earlier Industrial and Reformatory Schools Act 1865, the administration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Queensland changed significantly from overt violence to paternalistic “protection” which would continue well into the 20th century.

More information

• Read more about frontier violence in the QSA collection.
• Learn how to research frontier violence at QSA.

About Dr Jonathan Richards

Jonathan Richards is a professional historian who lives in Brisbane, researching Queensland history through letters and documents held at the Queensland State Archives. He has devoted many years to intensive historical research for Native Title claimants, community organisations and government bodies, and published numerous articles on colonial law and policing. He holds degrees in Australian Studies and History, and was awarded a doctorate in 2005 for his dissertation on Queensland’s Native Police.