This article was downloaded by: [McGill University Library]On: 18 November 2014, At: 08:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Australian Historical StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rahs20

The radical promise: The aboriginal Christiancooperative movementNoel Loos & Robyn KeastPublished online: 30 Sep 2008.

To cite this article: Noel Loos & Robyn Keast (1992) The radical promise: The aboriginal Christian cooperative movement,Australian Historical Studies, 25:99, 286-301, DOI: 10.1080/10314619208595911

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10314619208595911

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

THE RADICAL PROMISE:THE ABORIGINAL CHRISTIAN

COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT

NOEL LOOS AND ROBYN KEAST

After World War II the Anglican Australian Board of Missions (ABM) graduallyrealised that the policy of paternalistic control implemented on their Aboriginalmissions since 1892 was not effectively improving the depressed situation of theAboriginal people. ABM and other missionary agencies were aware that, by 1939,the Commonwealth Government was moving cautiously towards a policy ofassimilation, a development interrupted by the War. In 1951 the Native WelfareConference formally adopted assimilation as the policy of the Commonwealth inthe Northern Territory and the states, the timetable for its implementation outsideof the Northern Territory being the responsibility of the states. Queensland, forexample, did not begin to move away from its policy of segregation until 1957.'While the chief architect of the Commonwealth's assimilaton policy, ProfessorA.P. Elkin, was a member of the Board of ABM and its most respected consultant,mission practice at first continued much the same, depending mainly on thesuperintendent of the day.

Before World War II those Anglicans who stressed that the Church should beinvolved in social issues were a small, ignored minority. After World War II therewas a greater concern among Australians generally for a more just, peaceful worldorder, a concern that was reflected in the Anglican Church to the extent that thosecommitted to social justice and structural change were heard, if rarely heeded.2

There were two events relevant to this study which were, however, indicative ofthis increased awareness. The first was the adoption of cooperatives, associatedwith the empowerment of the working class, as a mission strategy in New Guineaand among Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. The second was the appoint-ment in 1957 of the Reverend Frank Coaldrake, a prominent conscientiousobjector during World War II, as Chairman of the Australian Board of Missions.

This article explores the attempt by the Australian Board of Missions in the1950s to use cooperatives to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people the

1C. Anderson, 'Queensland', in N. Peterson (ed.), Aboriginal Land Rights: A Handbook, Canberra1981, p. 65; H. Wearne, A Clash of Cultures: Queensland Aboriginal Policy 1824-1980, Brisbane 1980,pp. 16, 21; R. Broome, Aboriginal Australians: Black Response to White Dominance 1788-1980,Sydney 1982, pp. 160-71. Wearne and Anderson stressed that the enunciation of this new policy wasprompted by the discovery of vast mineral wealth on the Mapoon-Weipa reserves.2M. Hogan, The Sectarian Strand: Religion in Australian History, Ringwood 1987, pp. 220-1; S.Judd and K. Cable, Sydney Anglicans: A History of the Diocese, Sydney 1987, pp. 243-6; L. C. Rodd,John Hope of Christ Church St Laurence, Sydney 1972, pp. 145-9.

286

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 287

confidence, education, and skills to develop profitable industries on their missions,employing Aboriginal or Islander people from the mission and controlled by anAboriginal or Islander Board elected by the members of each cooperative. As suchit was an attempt to provide an alternative to the existing mission policy whichhad made Aborigines and Islanders subservient and dependent. It attempted toempower the members of each cooperative so that they could participate on moreequal terms, socially and economically, in the broader Australian society. Althoughit was naively believed that the cooperative approach was in accord with thetraditonal cooperativeness of Aboriginal people, it was, in effect, a radical attemptto effect an assimilation based on white working-class idealism.

The interaction of Christian missionaries with Aboriginal people is probablythe most richly documented area of Aboriginal-European history. Indeed the sheervolume of primary and secondary source material is somewhat daunting. Thereare many historical accounts of the development of missions or networks ofmissions produced by missionaries or affiliated Christians.3 Some are based uponthorough research, written within the parameters of mission history but still quitecapable of critical analysis of the involvement of the churches. But surprisingly, inspite of the mounting research into Aboriginal-European relations, there havebeen few detailed studies by historians of the mission experience of Aborigines.Attwood's study of the signficance of Victorian missions, mainly Ramahyuck, inthe development of an Aboriginal identity, is an important exception.4 Thepublication in 1988 of Aboriginal Australians and Christian Missions: Ethno-graphic and Historical Studies has filled a very big gap, bringing together most ofthe academics who have written in this area.5 Significantly, of the 41 contributors,only three are professional historians: Plomley, Woolmington and Loos. Themajority are anthropologists or people with missionary experience working in avariety of academic areas. Indeed the anthropologists have provided most of thehistorical analysis to date. Tonkinson's study of the Jigalong Aborigines, togetherwith his revision of his analysis in Aboriginal Australians and Christian Missions,is perhaps the most notable example.6

This is slowly changing. Melbourne University Press will publish a bio-graphy of Albrecht of Hermannsburg; Christine Halse is preparing a biography ofErnest Gribble of Yarrabah, Forrest River Mission (now Oombulgurri) and PalmIsland; and Neville Green has completed a study of the massacre of Aborigines atForrest River Mission by a party of police. Green has already produced A Pictureof the People of Oombulgurri, a fascinating panorama, from the Aboriginal

3 For example, see K. Cole, From Mission to Church: The CMS Mission to the Aborigines of ArnhcmLand 1908-1985, Bendigo 1985; J. Bayton, Cross Over Carpentaria: Being a History of the Church ofEngland in Northern Australia, Brisbane 1965; D. Thompson, Bora is Like Church: AboriginalInitiation Ceremonies at Lockhart River, Queensland, Sydney 1982; A. E. David, Australia, London1908; K. Tennant, Speak You So Gently, London 1959; M. Morgan, A Drop in a Bucket: The MountMargaret Story, Box Hill 1986; H. J. Pohlner, Gangurru, Milton 1986.4 B. Attwood, The Making of the Aborigines, Sydney 1989.5 T. Swain and D. B. Rose (eds), Aboriginal Australians and Christian Missions: Ethnographic andHistorical Studies, Adelaide 1988.6 R. Tonkinson, The Jigalong Mob: Aboriginal Victors of the Desert Crusade, Menlo Park, California1974; R. Tonkinson, 'Reflections on a Failed Crusade', in Swain and Rose, op. cit., pp. 60-72.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

288 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

people's perspective, of Forrest River Mission and its subsequent resurrection asOombulgurri.' Loos is completing a study of the Anglican Australian Board ofMission's work among Aboriginal people.

Aboriginal people recognise the importance of their mission history. Thoseliving in communities that were formerly missions have much more complexperspectives of 'mission days' than the historical analysis found in many of thegeneral studies of the history of contact.8 Not surprisingly, given the challengingsocial situations found in these communities today, many of the older Aborigineslook back with nostalgia to the paternalistic, poverty stricken mission era asalmost a golden age. 'Families were families then,' I have been told on more thanone occasion. The Aboriginal voices in Reaching Back, Survival in Our OwnLand, Lamilami Speaks and A Picture of the People of Oombulgurri reflect thecomplexity and significance of mission life that most historians are still todiscover.9

The various Christian churches that established missions to the Aborigines,with few exceptions, shared the prevailing lowly opinions of the Aborigines anddeveloped mission structures that reflected the social distance between the coloniserand colonised. The mission strategies and procedures reflected this mind set andresulted in white domination of the Black Australians whose souls they weredetermined to save and whose welfare they were dedicated to improving.10

From its inception in 1850 as the missionary agency of the Anglican church ofAustralia, the Australian Board of Missions was expected to provide spiritual andpractical support to the Aboriginal people of Australia. This commitment wasformalised in the 1872 ABM Determination and in each subsequent amendment tothe ABM constitution. In practice, until 1967, this largely entailed establishingmissions or chaplaincies in a number of Aboriginal communities or institutionsin remote areas of the continent.

An initial lack of effective administrative structure and direction, coupledwith the emphasis on diocesan autonomy within the church, resulted in nosignificant attempt by ABM to evangelise within Australia or overseas until 1891,when an extra-diocesan mission was established in New Guinea, and 1892 when amission to Aborigines was established at Yarrabah in the diocese of NorthQueensland. The early twentieth century saw a resurgence in missionary zeal withthe establishment in 1900 of the missionary Diocese of Carpentaria which incor-porated the Northern Territory and far North Queensland. ABM established threeof its five missions for Aborigines in this diocese. These three missions, MitchellRiver (established in 1905), Lockhart River (1924), Edward River (1938), plus afourth, Forrest River (1913) in the far north of Western Australia, and Yarrabah

7 N. Green, A Picture of the People of Oombulgurri 1884-1988, Perth 1988.8See, for example, Broome, op. cit.; M. Franklin, Black and White Australians, Melbourne 1976; C. D.Rowley, The Destruction of Aboriginal Society, Harmondsworth 1978; C. D. Rowley, A Matter ofJustice, Canberra 1978.9 L. Lamilami, Lamilami Speaks: The Cry Went Up. The Story of Goulburn Islands, NorthernAustralia, Sydney 1974; C. Mattingley and K. Hampton (eds), Survival in Our Own Land: 'Aboriginal'Experiences in 'South Australia' since 1836 told by Nungas and Others, Adelaide 1988; Green, op. cit.10N. Loos, 'Concern and Contempt: Church and Missionary Attitudes towards Aborigines in NorthQueensland in the Nineteenth Century', in Swain and Rose, op. cit., pp. 100-20.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 289

were developed on the current strictly paternalistic lines. On all missions thispolicy remained unchanged until the 1950s.

After World War II, two Anglican priests, James Benson and Alf Clint, wereimplementing cooperative techniques to assist Papua-New Guineans to regaincontrol over their own land and resources and to make them financially in-dependent of white plantation owners. Their apparent success persuaded theAnglican Bishop of New Guinea to support the cooperative movement byappointing Clint as Priest Warden of Christian Co-operatives in New Guinea andby the appointment of a number of Papuan evangelists to teach 'the co-operativeway'.11

While in Sydney in 1950, recuperating from a severe form of dermatitis whichprevented his return to New Guinea, Clint, with Cooperative and Trade Unionbacking, established the Papuan Co-operative Fund. As an undenominationalfund it was open to all missions using cooperative techniques in education andleadership. It provided training on established missions and was later used as afunding source for scholarships. The Papuan Co-operative Fund continued tooperate under this title until 1953 when it was changed to the ABM Co-operativeFund.12

Alf Clint had left school at fifteen and taken his first job at the BalmainCo-operative store, and had contact with working-class cooperatives throughouthis life. The cooperative movement, as a method of redressing social and economicinjustice, sat well with Clint's sophisticated Christian Socialist ideals and hisworking-class, trade union activism. As a priest in the Bush Brotherhood of theGood Shepherd he took a leading role in the shearers' strike of 1930 and alwaysidentified with the poor, especially the Aborigines. His experience in New Guineaconvinced him that cooperatives would also work for Aboriginal people.1S

The success of the Papuan Co-operative Movement in New Guinea played animportant role in attracting ABM to this style of work; however, it was Clint'senthusiasm that persuaded ABM to adopt the cooperative movement as a strategyfor its future work with Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. In 1951 theChairman of ABM, Archdeacon Robertson, wrote of the benefits of the cooperativeway for indigenous people. But, aware of Clint's previous working-class militancy,the conservatism of the Anglican Church, and the danger of offending theconservative parties in Australian parliaments, he warned of the need for politicalneutrality in its implementation.14 Frank Coaldrake, the next Chairman of ABM,gave the Board's rationale for adopting the cooperative way:

Missions as we know them, are on the way out. If only we can swing our missions over toco-operatives, these Aboriginal people will be trained to enter white society on a betterfooting than is possible at the moment.15

11Aboriginal Welfare Bulletin, 1, 1, (1957?), p. 3, Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 14,Australian Board of Missions (hereafter ABM) archives, Mitchell Library, State Library of New SouthWales. This journal was the official organ of the Co-operative Department of ABM.12Ibid.13L. Kelly (ed.), 'Salute to Alf Clint', Goorialla, 2, Summer 1980/81. This offprint is unpaginated.14Robertson to Clint, 1 February 1951, ABM Chairman's Correspondence, Alf Clint Personal File.15Tennant, op. cit., p. 173.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

290 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

This policy of guided assimilation implied, at least in theory, a rejection of thebelief that whites were genetically superior to Aborigines. With tutelage, it wasbelieved, they could participate in the superior white culture.

Having recognised the extent of deprivation of Aborigines, it became im-portant for the Church to find an economic basis for mission communities basedon Christian principles. ABM accepted the simplistic belief of Clint, Robertson,and Coaldrake that the cooperative reflected the Aboriginal pattern of shared clanlifestyle.16 In 1952 the Board formally adopted the cooperative model as the mostappropriate way forward for Aboriginal communities or group enterprises. Sub-sequently, ABM set aside the sum of £1,250 from their Centenary Fund for theimplementation of Christian cooperatives and appointed Clint as Priest-Organiserof Native Christian Co-operatives.17 The following year the ABM Co-operativeDepartment was established. The role of the Director was to foster and developcooperatives under the supervision of the Chairman of the ABM. ABM agreed to atrial period of twelve months' operation and undertook to pay the Director'ssalary. Any additional funding was the responsibility of the Director on theunderstanding that he was not to appeal to traditional ABM sources, that is, theAnglican churches and organisations. Clint sucessfully turned to the trade unionand cooperative movements for support. While the ABM also agreed to theappointment of an assistant and made provision for his salary, no appointmentwas ever made.18 From these beginnings emerged the ABM Christian CommunityCo-operative Ltd as the body responsible for directing all church cooperativeactivity. Indeed its existence eventually overrode the role of the ABM Co-operativeDepartment, apart from the latter's limited financing function.19

Following the advice of Professor Elkin of Sydney University, Clint plannedto commence his cooperative activities with a tour of Aboriginal reserves andcamps in New South Wales, but, on the insistence of Archdeacon Robertson, theABM Chairman at the time, he was directed to the missions directly associatedwith ABM. Consequently in 1953 Clint and Robertson travelled to North Queens-land, visiting Edward River, Mitchell River, Lockhart River, Yarrabah, and MoaIsland in the Torres Strait. Because of an existing infrastructure of co-participationestablished by the Superintendent, John Warby, and the mission chaplain, FatherJim Eley, Clint considered the Lockhart River Mission to be the most promisingbase from which to launch the ABM cooperative movement.20

16Kelly, 'Salute to Alf Clint'. See also J. MacKenzie, 'The First Australians', Peace News, 29 June 1962,p. 7, ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 14. This was a British publication thatCoaldrake subscribed to.17Robertson to Clint, 17 September 1952, ABM Chairman's Correspondence Relating to Aborigines,Series 14.18A. Clint, 'Report to the Standing Committee on Co-operatives', October 1961, ABM Chairman'sCorrespondence re Aborigines, Series 16.19 A. Clint, 'Co-operatives for Aborigines', (n.d.), ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines,Series 16.20 'Co-operatives Annual General Report from the Director of Co-operatives, June 1954-May 1955',ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 16.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 291

Lockhart River Mission: in the beginningIn Cape York Peninsula in the nineteenth century and the early decades of the

twentieth, pearlshell, beche-de-mer, and trochus shell fishermen exploited Abor-iginal men and women as cheap servile labour and the women as sexual partners.21

In the Lockhart River area a sandalwood cutter and fisherman, Hugh Giblett,provided protection in return for a guaranteed labour pool for his operations.Following Giblett's death in 1923, this protective network ceased.22

In 1921 the Queensland government had asked Bishop Newton of Carpentariato establish an Anglican mission to control Aborigines on the east coast of thePeninsula. The government offered a foundation subsidy of £200, with a further£200 annually thereafter as part of their negotiations. However, ABM at that timewas unable to meet its estimated share of the establishment costs of £300 and afurther £300 annually.23 Renewed government pressure and the promise ofadditional financial support, coupled with an increased commitment to meet itsmissionary objectives, saw ABM, in 1924, respond to the request for a mission. Tothe government's establishment funding of £1,000 and £500 per year, ABM agreedto contribute the annual sum of £500.24 In 1924 Bishop Davies established amission at Lloyd Bay near the Lockhart River on a half-million acre (approxi-mately 200,000 hectare) reserve. The following year, because of the prevalence ofmosquitoes and sandflies, the settlement was relocated at a site fourteen kilometresfrom Cape Direction.

Despite its difficult beginnings the people of Lockhart River eventuallysettled into a missionary village lifestyle. However, as a result of disease and thepractice of adult males seeking work in the fisheries and cattle stations, thepopulation of Lockhart River remained small, and for much of the year, depletedof able-bodied men. Without a viable work force, the mission, like many others,existed only at a subsistence level on funds provided by the government and theChurch. After the War there was an increase in mission staff. A new super-intendent, John Warby, arrived in 1951 and quickly took account of the mission'scircumstances. Kylie Tennant described Warby's dilemma:

He had to have labour, men who lived in the village and would make it a fit place to live in.If he brought them back from their indentured labour on the Island luggers, where theyearned a poor wage, but at least a wage, he had to find them a living.25

Because of his prior experience as a pearling skipper, Warby knew the reefsaround the mission were rich in trochus shell, from which buttons were made. Hepersuaded the Bishop of Carpentaria, John Hudson, to purchase the cutter, CapeGrey, to develop a mission-based trochus industry.26

21N. A. Loos , Invasion and Resistance: Aboriginal-European Relations on the North QueenslandFrontier, 1861-1897, Canberra 1982, chap. 5.2 2 A B M Review, 1 October 1954, p. 153.2 3 ABM Board Minu tes , 5 October 1921.24ABM Board Minutes, 2-3 April 1924, 'Organisation Committee Report'.25Tennant, op. cit., p. 29. See also 'John Warby's Report, June 1958', ABM Chairman's Correspondencere Aborigines, Series 19.26Telephone Interview with John Warby, 11 October 1988; J. Warby, 'The Formation of the FirstAboriginal Co-operative', in 'Salute to Alf Clint', Goorialla, 2, Summer 1980/81.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

292 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

In the first year of operation the men were employed by the mission to swimfor trochus shell under the usual terms of that time, food and a small wage. Anoversupply of shell lead to a gradual drop in the price and made it difficult for themission to continue paying wages. Nevertheless, because of the obvious advantagesof the scheme to the mission and its people, Warby was determined to keep theventure alive. Electing to change its operational basis, he introduced a co-partnership system where the crew and the mission could share equally in theboat's earnings after expenses, excluding boat maintenance, were deducted. In1952, half of the net proceeds of the Cape Grey were divided among the crew, withthe remainder going to mission developments.27 Thus Warby's vision for themission catapulted them unawares into a cooperative enterprise, albeit at aninformal level. In 1953, as the share system developed and the people became moreproficient and committed to their work, a larger, more productive boat, Yola, waspurchased. To complement the people's increased ability and interest, an AdultEducation programme was introduced in which the men could learn how tomanage the boats and other related skills.28

In December 1953 Clint, accompanied by Archdeacon Robertson, Chairmanof ABM, and Bishop John Hudson of Carpentaria Diocese, visited the LockhartRiver Mission as part of his initial tour of the Aboriginal missions under ABM'sdirection. In his role as Director of Co-operatives, Clint began teaching about theadvantages of Christian cooperatives. As a result of the message of hope that Clintdisseminated on this and a return visit in 1954, the people met and decided to formthemselves into a cooperative.29 John Warby later reflected on the process:

I well remember how we used to gather at 9 o'clock each morning before starting the day'swork and hear AH expound, illustrate and answer questions, day after day for about threemonths.30

The Lockhart River Aboriginal Christian Co-operative Ltd, set up in 1954,was the first formal cooperative venture to be undertaken by Aboriginal Aus-tralians. Following basic cooperative principles its administration comprisedseven Aboriginal men as directors, Frank O'Brien being elected President of theBoard and Peter Creek, Secretary. Bunty Warby was the treasurer and John Warbythe non-voting supervisor. A set of rules, patterned on the Queensland Co-operative Act, but adapted to suit the circumstances of Aboriginal missiondwellers, was formulated and accepted by cooperative members.31

Although the Lockhart River cooperative venture represented a radical changein Aboriginal policy by the Anglican Church and was unparalleled in any white

27J. Eley, 'Miracles at Lockhart', ABM Review, July 1956, p. 107; Warby, 'The Formation of the FirstAboriginal Co-operative'.28Telephone Interview with John Warby, 11 October 1988; 'John Warby Report, June 1958', ABMChairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 9.29Chairman, ABM, to Lockhart River Mission, 16 July 1954, ABM Chairman's Correspondence, AlfClint Personal File, and Clint to Chairman, ABM, 8 June 1954, ABM Chairman's Correspondence, AlfClint Personal File.30Warby, 'The Formation of the First Aboriginal Co-operative'.31ABM Board Minutes, 26-28 July 1955, 'A New Approach to Mission Work at Lockhart. FirstAboriginal Co-operative'; ABM Review, 1 October 1955, p. 150, 'Field Survey'.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 293

administration, secular or religious, in Australia, it attracted very little mediaattention. Save for one ABC report and comments in Anglican, Labor andCooperative publications, ABM's cooperative programme and its potential impacton Aboriginal people remained largely an interior vision.32 Clint eventually askedthe novelist, Kylie Tennant, a friend and fellow Anglican who supported Clint'sChristian socialist and cooperative ideals, to write about the radical experimentemanating from Lockhart River. Speak Ye So Gently was published in 1959 and isa valuable commentary on the community and the developments of the Warbyyears.

Following Warby's initial plan, with the formation of the cooperative,arrangements were made to buy the Cape Grey and Yola from the Diocese ongenerous terms, and later the Francis Pritt was obtained, making a fleet of threeboats, employing 45 men out of a total mission population of approximately 400and an able-bodied male adult population of approximately 70. As well, bond-wood dinghies and paddles were made for use in the cooperative and for sale. Menwere also employed building a new village, crewing the mission boat, andworking its cattle. In 1955 virtually every able-bodied man was employed inmission or cooperative activities.33 The activities of the cooperative centredpredominantly on the trochus shell industry. Due to the fluctuating nature of thetrochus shell market, in 1955 the crew's share was reduced to forty per cent of grossearnings, with forty per cent going to the cooperative for capital expenditure,maintenance, insurance and overheads and the remaining twenty per cent beingchannelled into mission development.34 Apart from the financial rewards, therewere other positive effects. The people gained in confidence and developedinitiative as they assumed responsibility for the operation of their own business.Warby reported on this metamorphosis:

They have at last arrived at a position where they operate their own boats from their ownmission. . . Family life is improved, and the people are happier; self respect has been raisedto a marked degree. The people are more self reliant and initiative, previously subjugated,is increasing day by day.35

The Lockhart River Aboriginal Board of Directors even overruled a majorrecommendation Warby had made regarding its membership.36

By 1956 the ABM 'pilot programme' at Lockhart was well under way. Thecooperative was operating three boats in the trochus shell industry with furtherplans to diversify into agricultural and pastoral ventures. Discussions were heldwith the Queensland Department of Agriculture to ascertain the suitability of theregion to produce such crops as cotton, palm oil, and coffee. Concurrently,mission staff were undertaking correspondence courses to upgrade their technical

32Coaldrake to Clint, 30 August 1954, ABM Chairman's Correspondence, Alf Clint Personal File.33See 'Native Affairs Report', Queensland Parliamentary Papers (hereafter QPP), 1953-4, vol. 2, pp.959, 1010 and 1955, vol. 2, p. 1113. However, I have used figures supplied, 22 February 1989, personalcommunication. Warby pointed out that the figures in the Parliamentary Papers had not been updatedfor a considerable time.34 J. Eley, 'Miracles at Lockhart', ABM Review, 1 October 1956, p. 108.35 'John Warby's Report, June 1958', ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 19.36'Native Affairs Report, Appendix 11, Lockhart River Mission', QPP, 1956-7, vol. 2, p. 1280.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

294 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

knowledge. Warby continued to act as the catalyst for cooperative development atLockhart River. He not only believed in the cooperative way, but also had anaffection for the people which enabled him to live and work cooperatively andcomfortably with them. Moreover, his practical approach complemented thevisionary, Clint.37 The first audit of the Lockhart River Aboriginal ChristianCo-operative, which was made for the period to 30 June 1956, revealed a profit of£5,369 since its formation in 1954. This allowed a dividend of 7.5 per cent for eachmember, additional to any wages earned, plus a bonus, and stimulated increasedcontributions to the share capital.38

In 1956 a Christian cooperative for Moa Island in the Torres Strait, based onwolfram mining, was created. The fledgling society planned to incorporatecrayfishing and agricultural operations as well as a bakery.39 However, due partlyto a painfully slow government response and partly to some tardiness on Clint'sbehalf,40 two years passed before the Society held its first formal meeting.41

Around this time tentative moves were also made toward the establishment ofcooperatives on the Edward River and Mitchell River Missions.

As cooperative development and community effort at Lockhart River becamemore pronounced, so, too, did the importance and scope of the Adult Educationclasses organised by Jim Eley, the mission chaplain, with assistance from all staffmembers. From this education programme emerged the Lockhart River Co-operative School and Training Centre, which aimed at developing Aboriginalleadership. Cooperative principles and operations, bookkeeping, and generaleducation formed the initial basis of the programme.42 Clint tried to establish aCo-operative Training College for Aborigines and Islanders in Cape York Penin-sula.43 Insufficient financial support, coupled with the immediate need for aqualified baker at the fledgling Moa Island Co-operative, forced him to seek analternative site in Sydney. Clint discussed his need for a cooperative training venuewith Father John Hope of Christ Church St Laurence in Sydney. Hope hadintroduced Clint to Christian Socialism and led him to seek ordination. Hopepromptly gave Clint 'Tranby', a mansion in Glebe, which he had previously usedas a residence for homeless university students. At the beginning of 1958, Tranbycommenced the training of two Aboriginal students, sponsored by the Co-operative Fund. Although the trade union movement's support of Tranby throughits involvement in the Co-operative Fund led to accusations of 'leftist control', theannual summer schools in cooperative training soon established Tranby as the

37 Telephone Interview with John Warby, 11 October 1988; Interviews with Jimmy Doctor and RexMoses, 2 October 1988, at Lockhart River, and John Warby, 11 October 1988, at Rockhampton.38 'Native Affairs Report, Appendix 16, Lockhart River Mission', QPP. 1957-8, vol. 2, p. 1165.39A. Clint, 'ABM Co-operative Department 1958', March 1959, ABM Chairman's Correspondence reAborigines, Series 16.40 Tennant, op. cit., p. 107.41W. J. Hudson, Bishop of Carpentaria, to Coaldrake, 18 March 1959, 'Co-operative Projects atLockhart River and Moa', ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 14.42'Co-operatives—Annual Report from the Director of Co-operatives, June 1954-May 1955', ABMChairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 16.43Clint to Queensland Co-operative Advisory Council, April 1956, ABM Chairman's Correspondence,Series 12.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 295

leader in Aboriginal training for self-management, twenty years before the conceptreceived serious consideration at the Commonwealth and State levels.44

Despite progress, the cooperative movement confronted mounting difficulties.The introduction of plastics caused the collapse of the trochus shell market. Likemost forms of community development the ABM cooperative programme had alimited financial base, much less than realistically required to develop it.45 Ad hocsurvival practices were almost normal procedures.46 ABM, aware of the difficultiescaused by insufficient funding, urged a concentration of cooperative efforts, onthe most promising projects.47 By the late 1950s it was clear that the promise of theLockhart River Aboriginal Christian Co-operative was not being fulfilled. Thetotal collapse of the trochus industry resulted in unemployment for many societymembers. ABM was unable to provide the staff and finances to support thediversification necessary to meet the loss of income. Warby asserts that, despite thediminishing commitment of the Bishop of Carpentaria, the people retained theirenthusiasm for the cooperative.48

For the Mission, the loss of cooperative income was a strain on their alreadylimited financial resources. The future of the Society and the Mission requiredsome form of productive employment. Following the lead of the large miningcompanies prospecting the region, ABM looked to mining. W.H. Williams, aretired geologist, was invited to explore the Mission's mining potential; however,neither the Aboriginal people nor the missions had the legal claim to the land toenable them to attract finance to undertake mining. Warby's attempt to developthe cotton industry was frustrated for the same reason.49 In April 1959 Williamsreported the Lockhart River Aboriginal Christian Co-operative to be in a state ofundeclared bankruptcy: 'On paper, the Society appears to be an organisation thatshould be wound up after an inglorious exhibition of co-operative activitiesextending over a period of five years.'50 Williams failed to observe that for theprevious quarter century of the mission's existence it had been economicallyunproductive and a drain on ABM's resources like other Aboriginal missions.Nevertheless he recommended that the Society be supported as its closure wouldreflect poorly on the cooperative way for Aborigines and Islanders, an approach inwhich the church had already declared its faith to its Christian supporters.

44The 1985 Tranby/NSWIT Link Course (eds), The Meeting Tree, Sydney 1986, pp. 8-11. See alsoReport on Policy of Self-Management for Council for Aboriginal Development. Senator MargaretReynolds obtained this report for me from the Commonwealth Government Archives.45E. Sommerville, 'Lockhart River Mission', ABM Review, July 1959, p. 86; ABM Review, December1958, p. 177.46Tennant, op. cit., p. 43.47 'Lockhart River Mission', [draft report, probably by Coaldrake following his October 1958 visit],ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 19.48Warby, 'The Formation of the First Aboriginal Co-operative'; Interview with John Warby, Rock-hampton, 11 October 1988.49Rev. W. A. Brown, 'Report on Interview with Dr. Noble, Minister for Health and Home Affairs(QLd)', ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 9; Tennant, op. cit., p. 146. Personalcommunication, Warby to Loos, 1 May 1989.50'Lockhart River Co-operative Society, 1 May 1960', ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines,Series 10.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

296 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

Consequently, ABM rescued the enterprise from bankruptcy.51 All that remainedof the Society was the cooperative store. The demise of productive cooperativeactivities meant that the community once again was heavily dependent on churchand government funds. Recognising the negative effect of unemployment on theAborigines and its increased financial burden on the church, ABM recommendeda reversal of Warby's policy of keeping men on the mission and again activelyencouraged them to take outside work.52 The clock had been turned back a decade.

Because of family commitments Warby resigned his position as superintendentin 1960. John Currie.assumed the position in early 1961. Although less than oneyear had elapsed, Currie wrote of poor health, inadequate hygiene and livingconditions, promiscuity and rapidly decreasing mission control of the Aboriginalinhabitants. Moreover, he considered that there was limited enthusiasm by thepeople to improve their situation.53 Warby is philosophical about these differencesin perception. He had seen the before and after of the Lockhart River Missioncooperative movement, while Currie had only one perspective from which togauge its progress, a perspective that was conditioned by the still prevailingmission ethos of paternalistic control.54 Bishop Matthews used Currie's report toheighten ABM's awareness of the mission's plight and attempted to prise greaterfinancial commitment from the closely guarded ABM purse.

Around this time some mission and diocesan staff expressed a rising level ofdissatisfaction with cooperatives and cooperative ideals, a dissatisfaction whichbegan to pervade mission cooperative relations. Currie gave his analysis of theimpact of this tension on the Aboriginal community:

Many of the people are dissatisfied with the Co-ops. Its formation had split the Missioninto two groups, pro and anti Co-ops. Quite frequently the question will be asked whetherthe goods to be unloaded off the boat are Mission or Co-op goods and depending on theirattitude, people will then either help to unload or disappear.55

Currie was obviously uncomfortable with the assertiveness and independence thathad emerged among some 'Mission' Aborigines. He also reflected the cultural biasof white Australians who expect Aborigines to accept white solutions to thechallenges confronting them, a bias that was clearly reflected in mission andgovernment policies. Clint was criticised for not attending to routine tasks, forfinancial mismanagement and unfulfilled promises, and for the lack of progress.56

51Williams to Coaldrake, 18 September 1960; Williams to Coaldrake, 5 January 1961, ABM Chairman'sCorrespondence re Aborigines, Series 10.52Coaldrake to S. J. Matthews, Bishop of Carpentaria, 15 February 1961, 'Production at LockhartRiver Mission', ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 10.55ABM Board Minutes, 11-13 April 1961, 'Report to the Right Reverend S. J. Matthews, Bishop ofCarpentaria, from the Superintendent, Lockhart River Mission, 24 January 1961'.5 4 T e l e p h o n e interview wi th J o h n Warby, R o c k h a m p t o n , 11 October 1988.5 5 A B M Board Minutes , 11-13 Apri l 1961, 'Repor t to the R i g h t Reverend S. J . Mat thews, B i shop ofCarpentaria, from the Superintendent Lockhart River Mission, 24 January 1961'. See also Minutes,Annual General Meeting, Lockhart River Aboriginal Christian Co-operative Society Ltd, 28 January1961, Diocese of Carpentaria Papers, Oxley Library, comment by Deputy Supervisor Currie, who wasalso Superintendent of the Mission.56W. J . H u d s o n , Bishop of Carpentaria, to Coaldrake, 18 March 1959, ABM Cha i rman ' s Correspon-dence re Aborigines , Series 14; D. Hooper Closey, Super in tendent Mitchel l River, to Coaldrake, 15 Ju ly1960, ABM C h a i r m a n ' s Correspondence re Aborigines , Series 15.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 297

His left-wing political associations began to count against him. From the mid-1950s the Bishop of North Queensland, Ian Shevill, increasingly regarded Clint asa Communist and made it clear he was not welcome at Yarrabah.57 In 1957 thenewly elected conservative Nicklin government believed ABM's cooperative experi-ment was a Communist front and that Clint was a Communist Party ally.58 Thenew Bishop of Carpentaria, S.J. Matthews, soon concluded Clint was a de-stabilising influence and in 1961 forbade him entry to Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander missions in Carpentaria, a move supported by the Queenslandgovernment.59 Clint turned his attentions to Aboriginal people in northern NewSouth Wales and was instrumental in forming a rural-based cooperative atCabbage Tree Island, which survived to the 1980s. Another achievement, despitethese bans, was the establishment of a cooperative bakery at Yarrabah in 1974.60

Bishop Matthews and some senior Carpentaria mission staff were now openlycritical of the cooperative approach.61 Underpinning this was Matthews' concernthat cooperative members had gained a false impression that their legal status hadchanged, and that they were free from mission and government control.62 Theconcept of empowerment enshrined in the cooperative model, with its emphasison devolution of power, was causing some disquiet. A further concern for theBishop centred on the lines of authority in cooperative matters, particularly inrelation to finance and staff issues. Although initially supportive of the cooperativemovement, the Bishop of Carpentaria gradually withdrew his patronage. On 29March 1963 the Lockhart River Co-operative was voluntarily wound up by itsmembers. It had failed to supply financial reports to the Registrar of Co-operativeSocieties for the previous eight years and had not paid income tax in 1955 and1956 when it had made a profit. The alternatives were to wind up the existingcooperative and start a new one, or to wind it up and pay a final dividend of17s 1 Id in the pound to all financial shareholders. The Aboriginal members optedto cut their losses and turn their back on the cooperative way which, by now,seemed unprofitable, unsupported by any mission officials, and burdened by thewhite people's bookkeeping and fiscal mysteries. ABM assumed responsibility for

5 7 Te lephone interviews with J o h n Warby, Keppel Sands, 20 November 1990, and Fred T h o m p s o n ,Townsvil le , 17 November 1990.5 8Warby to Bishop of Carpentaria, 7 October 1959, ABM C h a i r m a n ' s Correspondence, Series 14;'Repor t on Interview wi th Dr Noble, Minis ter for Hea l t h a n d H o m e Affairs for the Queens landGovernment , by Rev. W. A. Brown' , ABM Cha i rman ' s Correspondence, Series 9.59S. J. Matthews, Bishop of Carpentaria, to Coaldrake, 28 February 1961, ABM C h a i r m a n ' s Correspon-dence, Series 14; Kelly, 'Salute to Alf Cl int ' ; Mat thews to Clint , 4 March 1961, Cha i rman ' s Correspon-dence, Series 14.6 0MacKenzie, 'The First Austral ians ' ; Discussion wi th J o e McGinness , Tranby, Sydney, 5 J a n u a r y1989; 'Co-operative for Aborigines Ltd. News Sheet ' , J a n u a r y 1974, ABM Cha i rman ' s Correspondence,Series 14.61S. J . Matthews, Bishop of Carpentaria, to Coaldrake, 28 February 1961, ABM C h a i r m a n ' s Correspon-dence re Aborigines, Series 16.62S. J. Matthews, Bishop of Carpentaria, to Clint, 4 March 1961, ABM Chairman's Correspondence reAborigines, Series 14.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

298 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

outstanding debts and the Diocese battled unsuccessfully to avoid paying thetax.63

The new decade brought with it a gradual phasing out by ABM of itsinvolvement with the cooperative movement. Between 1960 and 1962 the ABMBoard, because of what it perceived as mismanagement and failure, made severalattempts to review and restructure its Cooperative Department.64 Finally, in May1962, a resolution was adopted which terminated the ABM Co-operative Depart-ment. From December 1962, the ABM Christian Community Co-operative Ltdmoved towards independence and autonomy. The Society's name was changed toCo-operatives for Aborigines Ltd and subsequently the body assumed full re-sponsibility for the operation of Tranby Co-operative College and other co-operative endeavours. The Anglican Church had distanced itself from the co-operative movement it had endorsed so enthusiastically less than a decade pre-viously. Alf Clint, however, remained as the General Secretary to the Society untilthe 1970s and was involved with Tranby until his death in 1982.

Responsibility for settlement management was transferred to the QueenslandDepartment of Aboriginal and Islander Affairs, commencing in 1960 with Yarrabahand followed in 1967 by Edward River, Mitchell River and Lockhart River. In1968, the Forrest River Mission was closed. With these transfers effected, ABMretained only the responsibility for the provision of a chaplain at each communityit had established as a mission, rather than its previous financial and adminis-trative obligations. At the 1966 General Synod the Board amended its constitutionto make clear its responsibility not only to those on remote communities, but toall Aborigines in Australia.65 Freed of old mission-oriented policy restrictions andtheir associated financial burdens, by 1967 the ABM Board was ready to enter anew stage in it relationship with Aboriginal Australians. Its venture into thecooperative movement was, in retrospect, the first step in its withdrawal frompaternalistic control of Aboriginal communities. These developments all occurredin an atmosphere of decreasing financial resources, spiralling costs, and a concernat ABM's liability for its cooperatives.66 Coaldrake's resignation from the Board ofDirectors of Co-operatives for Aborigines Ltd in 1968 severed the remainingformal tie with ABM. The only link remaining between the two was ABM'sannual grant to the Society for bursaries for Aborigines and Islanders to attendTranby. After the separation, Co-operatives for Aborigines Ltd went on to a life ofits own and supported the development of a number of cooperative endeavours in

63 S. J. Matthews, Bishop of Carpentaria, to Coaldrake, 2 October 1960, ABM Chairman's Correspon-dence re Aborigines, Series 15; Matthews to Clint, 4 March 1961, ABM Chairman's Correspondence reAborigines, Series 14; Minutes, Lockhart River Aboriginal Co-operative Society Ltd, 29 March 1963;Deputy Commissioner of Taxation to Diocesan Registrar, 16 August 1966, Tax Receipt, 12 July 1967,for $1,990; Diocese of Carpentaria Papers, Oxley Library. The letters concerning tax are filed in theback cover of 1960 Minute Book.64'Co-operative Department Reorganisation, Resolution adopted at ABM Meeting, 1-3 May 1962',ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 13.65ABM Board Minutes, 24-26 October 1967, 'Chairman's Report: A New ABM Policy for Aborigines',p. 2.66ABM Board Minutes, 26-28 October 1965, Chairman's Report; B. A. Mottershead, Public Accountant,to Coaldrake, 9 June 1964, ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 17; A. K. Lawton toCoaldrake, 31 October 1961, ABM Chairman's Correspondence re Aborigines, Series 16.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 299

various parts of Australia, largely by providing advice and training for Aboriginesto work in these ventures at Tranby Co-operative College. Coaldrake's reference tothe Numbahging Co-operative at Cabbage Tree Island on his resignation high-lighted his concern at the practice of optimistic reporting of cooperative projectswhich he believed was misleading. He clearly did not want ABM to remainassociated with financially embarrassing projects over which it no longer heldfinancial or philosophical control.67

ABM had little to show for its many years of involvement in the CooperativeMovement. The Tranby Co-operative College alone survives, now controlled andmanaged by Aborigines and Islanders, a witness not only to the idealism and faithof such people as Clint, Warby, Eley and Tennant but also to the Aboriginalpeople who struggled against paternalistic control, much of it well-intentioned.The envisaged network of mission-based cooperatives never eventuated, nor wasthere evidence of any lasting improvement in the structural position of theAboriginal and Islander people in remote communities that the cooperativemovement had touched.

The factors associated with the demise of the 'cooperative way' as ABM'sprimary strategy for Aboriginal advancement are many and complex. They extendwell beyond Clint's belief that it was his being barred from the missions.68

Although there was a general consensus as to ABM's missionary goals and themethodology employed, there was a fundamental difference in the beliefs andvalues of those concerned with the ABM cooperative programme. Indeed this isevidenced by the reluctance of the dioceses and individual parishioners to directadequate financial support to missions in general. A radical strategy associated bymany with the left-wing working-class movement was not even allowed to appealto Anglican supporters of missions lest it drain or frighten off the existing limitedfinancial support. Moreover, despite a concerted effort by Clint to sway ABMtoward the cooperative way, some Board members were not committed to theconcept.69 Clint's trade union background, his vision of a socialist Christiansociety, and his aggressive reaction to the criticisms of the church hierarchy, allserved eventually to isolate him from the church decision-making structure. Therewas a fundamental conflict in ideals between Clint, ABM, and the AnglicanChurch which was apparently never clearly identified, much less resolved.

ABM held unrealistic expectations of the Aboriginal cooperatives, especiallyof the time and finance it would take to have them working effectively. This,coupled with the lack of ideological or practical commitment by the church, helpsto explain many of the administrative problems encountered by the cooperativeprogramme. Added to these financial and administrative problems were endlessstaffing and relationship difficulties.70 ABM could not attract sufficient, suitable

67ABM Board Minutes, 15-17 April 1969, 'Chairman's Report'.68A. Clint, 'Report to Standing Committee re Co-operatives', October 1961, ABM Chairman'sCorrespondence re Aborigines, Series 16.69Coaldrake to Clint, 2 November 1956, ABM Chairman's Correspondence, Alf Clint Personal File.70Coaldrake to Matthews, 13 October I960; Clint to Coaldrake, 9 November 1957, 'Notes for theChairman from the Director of Co-operatives', 8 April 1958, ABM Chairman's Correspondence reAborigines, Series 14.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

300 Noel Loos and Robyn Keast

staff to the cooperatives; nor could it prevent the ideological and administrativeclashes within and between the various church organisational units. These werefuelled by an unclear line of administrative authority and poor communicationchannels. The Bishop of Carpentaria was concerned at what he perceived as theevolution of a new power structure within the missions. Believing it underminedhis authority and was a destabilising influence within the mission community,barriers were set up to contain cooperative development and maintain the statusquo. Thus, while the Anglican Church espoused an equitable redistribution ofpower, in practice it opposed it. In accepting cooperatives as a vehicle forAboriginal advancement, ABM also committed itself to the principles under-pinning this strategy. However, the agreed principles, empowerment througheducation and the political neutrality ABM hoped for, faded into the backgrounddespite the heavy emphasis placed on the former by Clint and the latter by ABM.Education, after an enthusiastic introduction, gradually assumed a secondaryplace to productive activities. This resulted largely from a dearth of availablecooperative teaching staff and the lack of expert guidance caused partly by Clint'sexile from the northern mission sites.

Despite the urgings of the ABM Board, Clint and the cooperatives wereunable to steer a 'neutral' political course. The cooperative movement entailedempowerment of Aboriginal people, a development the white Australian powerstructure was unable to cope with then, and indeed, is still ultimately unable toaccept. Implicit in die development of cooperatives in Aboriginal and Islandercommunities was a need for land rights to allow Aborigines and Islanders todetermine their own future on their own land, as was shown by the inability toattract investment capital to develop mining and cotton, and by the refusal of theBishops to allow Clint to visit the communities. Clint's vision foreshadowed thearousal of political awareness and an Aboriginal autonomy which would in-evitably embrace land rights. The Anglican church was not ready to commit itselfto such a radical approach. The Queensland Government only began to allow alimited autonomy and land tenure in 1985 when it passed its Deeds of Grant inTrust legislation.71 The nature of ABM's cooperative work sought to change theway Aboriginal people interacted with the land, not only in the pre-contact pastbut also in communities dominated for generations by white missionaries. UnlikePapuans, who had established traditions as subsistence farmers which better fittedthe western cooperative model, Aborigines had to make more far reachingadjustments to their way of life. They had to become active participants in acapitalist economy that had oppressed them for generations, for this was the aimof the cooperative movement. These cultural adjustments, combined with the lackof effective monitoring and forward planning on ABM's part, were contributingfactors to the unfulfilled promise of the ABM cooperatives in mission com-munities.

Today, old Lockhart River Aborigines seem to regard the cooperative as aninteresting part of their missionary history: as another white initiative. Their

71Department of Community Services and Ethnic Affairs, Annual Report for the Year Ended 30thJune, 1988, Brisbane 1988, pp. 3-13.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Aboriginal Christian Cooperative Movement 301

affection for Warby is a living reality, as is their attachment to the old mission sitefrom which they were moved when the Queensland government assumed adminis-trative control. The price of trochus shell is once again booming and whiteAustralians fish commercially in the adjacent seas. There is a government-runcattle station on their community land. An enormous tourist project and a spacestation now threaten to engulf them. Until December 1989, when it lost office, thepolicy of the National Party Government of Queensland was to develop'a blackcapitalism in the communities by fostering individual enterprises. A cattle stationwas handed over to an Aboriginal leader at Edward River. Here, and elsewhere,shops, service stations, and supermarkets were allocated to selected Aboriginalpeople, and government support provided in a way that enthusiasts in thestruggling cooperatives at Moa and Lockhart River could not have dreamed of.The government was determined to make its vision of a black, free-enterprise,consumer society work. This seems a much greater distortion of Aboriginalcommunity life than the Aboriginal Christian Co-operative ever could havebeen.'2

Limited as it was by the church's token commitment to its missionary idealsand the emphasis on diocesan authority by the Bishops of North Queensland andCarpentaria, ABM was unable to commit itself fully to what could have been aguiding role in Aboriginal and Islander advancement. An inadequate organ-isational infrastructure, limited financial resourcing, and clouded communicationand authority channels all combined to inhibit the potential of cooperatives forAboriginal people. The light of the beacon in the communities was allowedslowly to die out. Today, it still shines at Tranby Aboriginal Co-operative Collegein Sydney which is involved in empowering Aboriginal and Islander people totake satisfying roles in their communties and in societies, many of which aregovernment-inspired cooperatives. For a generation after ABM introduced thecooperative movement as a Christian approach to revitalising Aboriginal andIslander communities, the Commonwealth government utilises the model toencourage Aborigines to run their own housing cooperatives, legal services, andother group enterprises. Many of the participants in these cooperatives have beento Tranby where Alf Clint is remembered with warm affection and an irreverentreverence. The surprising thing is not that the Anglican cooperative movementfailed but that it was introduced at all in Queensland in the 1950s and that Tranbystill exists as an instrument for the Aboriginal and Islander empowerment that theChristian Co-operative Movement hoped to achieve. It was an acknowledgementby enlightened missionaries of the failure of the previous paternalistic missionpolicy to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Islander people and was the first step inthe Anglican Church's withdrawal from its domination of Aboriginal and Islandercommunities.

72 Ibid., pp. 8-ll.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

08:

34 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014