Scandals in Australian History Quiz

Answer: Lyons had formerly been a convict.

Samuel Lyons was indeed a former convict. He had been given a life sentence and was transported to the colonies, arriving in Sydney in 1815. As punishment for two escape attempts he received both floggings and re-transportation to harsher penal settlements, but his fortunes began to change in 1822 when he was granted permission to marry. Lyons began to flourish as a businessman and became a free subject of New South Wales in 1832. Lyons was defending his honour against two separate public scrutinies: firstly, auctioneers were coming under intense criticism from the general public who believed that 'back-room deals' were helping the colony's power players to extend their monopolies; secondly, the colony was divided over the issue of what kinds of distinctions ought to be drawn between emancipated convicts and free settlers. Lyons was eventually awarded ?200. Source: Kirsten McKenzie, "Scandal in the Colonies", Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, 2006.

Answer: That he had not properly restricted immorality amongst the convicts

Although a married man, there is good evidence that Eardley-Wilmot was in the habit of keeping concubines in his house; but he was not the only colonial official guilty of infidelity. The scandal that could not be ignored was the persistent public outcry against the immoral behaviour of convicts.

In 1846 one colonist wrote: "it is impossible to describe in language sufficiently plain not to be revolting, the degradation that exists at penal stations" adding that "their guilty connection is not confined to their own species and sex, but extends even to domestic animals". Though Eardley-Wilmot was clearly not a brilliant administrator, it also seems that, at least to some extent, he was a scapegoat in the colonial bureaucracy's attempt to fix a penal system plagued by overcrowding and underfunding. Source: Catie Gilchrist, "The victim of his own temerity?: Silence, scandal and the recall of Sir John Eardley-Wilmot", in Journal of Australian Studies 84, 2005.

Answer: Chinese people

The Chinese population in the Australian colonies had been substantial since the gold rushes which began in the 1850s. There had always been racial tensions between the white and Chinese communities, but anti-Chinese discrimination reached the point of being formalised in legislation during the 1890s as Australia entered a period of defining itself as a white society and placed restrictions on immigration.

In the popular imagination, Chinese men were seen as lecherous, and as tricking innocent young women into lives of prostitution by bringing them under the overpowering influence of opium. Source: Desmond Manderson, "Symbolism and Racism in Drug History and Policy", in Drug and Alcohol Review 18, 1999.

Answer: All of these

You may well wonder how all of these could be true, so here's the story: There is no doubt that Mrs Dean was seen to be suffering from having consumed poison and of having done so on several occasions in a short space of time. What has never been satisfactorily resolved is who was responsible for this. Certainly, Dean did not receive a fair trial: the judge put extreme pressure on the jury to return a verdict of guilty. Of course, this does not mean Dean was innocent. Could Mrs Dean have framed her husband? There were striking inconsistencies in her story, and there was a letter which confessed that she and her mother had tried to set him up, but the authorship of that letter could not be verified. Dean was an immensely popular figure in the community, whereas Mrs Dean suffered the stigma of being an illegitimate child of a woman known to work in brothels. Public sentiment was in favour of Dean, and a Royal Commission pardoned him. Just when everyone was beginning to forget about the case, it hit the headlines again when it was revealed that Dean had confessed his guilt to his lawyer and this led, ultimately, to Dean serving fourteen years for perjury.

In 1983 the ABC broadcast a dramatisation of events in "Verdict: The Dean Case". Source: Cyril Pearl, "Wild Men of Sydney Town", Angus & Robertson Publishers, Sydney, 1958. There are more recent sources but this book has the most extensive exploration of the case I have found and its conclusions are not out-dated.

Answer: A nun and Sister Ligouri's brother

Born in Ireland, Sister Ligouri had decided to undertake her religious work in Australia. For seven years Ligouri taught in a convent school, but in 1918 her work was changed to performing the role of a lay sister, which was essentially the work of a domestic servant. Two years later she still had not been relieved of this duty and following an altercation she ran away from the convent and tried to make contact with the bishop Dwyer.

She ultimately returned to the convent, and was examined by a doctor who determined that she was run-down. Later that night one of her fellow nuns gave her a dose of castor oil laced with poison. Ligouri detected the poison, induced vomiting and sought refuge in the house of a local protestant woman.

The local Catholic community launched a full-scale search for her, and bishop Dwyer even tried to have her forcibly committed as insane. Poor Sister Ligouri became a pawn in the broader public antagonism between Catholics and Protestants, but this public airing of her own misfortunes was not the end of the story.

She had decided to continue living with the Reverend and Mrs Touchell who had offered her sanctuary away from Wagga Wagga, but several months later her brother organised a group of men to kidnap her and bring her back to Ireland. Ligouri was in her captors' custody only one day before she was identified and returned to the Touchells with whom she lived for most of the rest of her life. Source: Andrew Lee, "The Nun in the Nightgown: The Public Airing of Private Prejudice and the Sister Ligouri Scandal", 1920-21?, in Journal of Australian Studies 52, 1997.

Answer: Evdokia Petrov helped ASIO secure the defection of her husband Vladimir

For then Prime Minister Robert Menzies, the Petrov Affair could not have come at a better time. As the 1954 election approached, Menzies' persistent claims about a Soviet 'fifth column' were becoming less believable since not a single spy had been produced. ASIO agent Michael Bialoguski met Vladimir Petrov at a Russian social club in Sydney and identified him as a spy and a possible target for defection. Vladimir enjoyed several years of wining and dining before he decided to defect, and he made this decision alone. His wife, Evdokia, was on her way home to Russia before she heard about her husband?s actions and defected too. The public defection of the Petrovs, and their revelations about the extent of Soviet spy activity in Australia, was a great boost to Menzies and also caused great turmoil amongst the Australian Labor Party (ALP), then in opposition.
The Petrov Affair has been extensively studied.
For a brief summary see:
Ed Wright, "History's Greatest Scandals", Pier 9, Millers Point, 2006.
For more extensive discussion see:
Robert Manne, "The Petrov Affair: Politics and Espionage", Australian University Press, Canberra, 1987.

Answer: CIA

Although the policies of the Whitlam government were seen by some leftists as falling short of the promise of reform that had been offered, conservative observers were notably nervous about the directions Whitlam was heading in. Some people consider that the involvement of the CIA in the dismissal is a claim which deserves little credence, but it is not an entirely lunatic conspiracy theory: former CIA agents have claimed it to be true; journalist John Pilger also presents some persuasive evidence.
See:
John Pilger, "A Secret Country", 2nd edition, Vintage Books, London, 1992.

Answer: Police and Racing

This always makes me laugh! From 1980 to 1987 Hinze was Minister for Racing and from 1980 to 1982 he was Minister for Police as well. He was also Minister for Local Government and Main Roads from 1974 to 1987 and was sometimes jokingly referred to as the 'Minister for Everything'. In 1987 the Bjelke-Petersen government was brought to its knees when the Fitzgerald Inquiry found that senior members were involved with corruption in the Queensland Police Force. The nation marvelled as it heard about ministers claiming to have had no knowledge about who was responsible for sending them brown paper packages filled with large sums of cash. Hinze retired from parliament in 1988 as a result of having been mentioned during the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
Record of Hinze's Ministerial service available at:
http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/view/historical/documents/ministers/ministries_1968to1989.pdf

Answer: Aboriginal people

For most of the twentieth century, Aboriginal people living in the state of Queensland did not have the same rights as other Australians, and were not allowed access to their own wages. These funds were supposed to be held in trust for them, but in reality the government used the money to fund schemes which were often of little or no benefit to Aboriginal people. Furthermore, numerous Aboriginal people are claiming compensation for under-payment since, from 1975, Australian law made it illegal to pay someone at a lower rate based on their race. In 2002 the Queensland government created a $55.6 million fund designed to repay Aboriginal workers.
Source:
Rosalind Kidd, "Trustees on Trial: Recovering the Stolen Wages", Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra, 2006.

Answer: Asylum seekers

Since the 1970s John Howard (Prime Minister 1996-2007) had been a vocal opponent of 'boat people' - people who entered Australian waters illegally in order to seek asylum in Australia. In 2001 the government released photographs which supposedly showed sea-faring asylum seekers throwing their children into the water in order to force Australian authorities to help them rather than turning them back. Howard characterised the asylum seekers as self-serving and callous, having put their children's lives at risk in order to secure their own passage to Australia. This event never happened, and the government knew it. The images were actually of the vessel sinking and none of the witnesses working on the boat which helped rescue the asylum seekers from their sinking vessel claimed to have seen children being thrown into the water. Although it is difficult to prove the exact point at which the government was informed of the truth, it was possibly before the story was even released to the public, and was certainly before the election, yet the government did not reveal this.
Source:
Andrew Herd, "Amplifying Outrage Over Children Overboard", in Social Alternative 25, no. 2, 2006.

This was just a taste of the scandals that have rocked Australia over the last two centuries - I hope you enjoyed it!