BosMUN XX Background Guide Ad Hoc Chair: Noah Riley Crisis Director: Timothy Obiso Committee Topic: The Emu War, 1932

Letter from the Chair

Dear Delegates,

Welcome to BosMUN XX! My name is Noah Riley, and I am beyond excited to be serving as your Chair for Ad Hoc: The Emu War, 1932! This is, believe it or not, my eighth and final BosMUN. My first four I attended as a high school delegate; my freshman year at Boston

University I served as Chair of the 1953 Iran Coup d'état committee; sophomore year I was fortunate enough to serve as the conference’s Under-Secretary General of Crisis Committees

(now the fabulous Mary Thomas); and last year, as a junior, I was the Chair for The Boston

Molasses Crisis: Molassacre! I understand this conference inside and out and hope to provide the best experience for all of you in our committee!

I do promise, though, that my whole life is not Model UN (I swear). At BU, I study

International Relations and Economics, as well as Mandarin Chinese. Last year, prior to COVID-

19, I studied in China for seven months, the fortunate recipient of a Boren Scholarship. On campus, I am the Editor in Chief of the International Relations Review and play on the Club baseball and basketball teams, among other activities.

I originally hail from Boston’s Brighton neighborhood, and grew up in the Greater

Boston Area. An absolute Boston sports fanatic, when not watching the Celtics, I can be found bingeing TV shows, reading history books, or playing pranks on my friends. Also, be warned, I cannot get enough cheesy icebreakers…so be prepared. I’m very easy-going, so please don’t hesitate to reach out as I am happy to answer questions about the committee, college, and share my (limited) life wisdom. Can’t wait to see you all this weekend!

Your Chair,

Noah Riley [email protected] Letter from Crisis Director

Dear Delegates,

My name is Timothy Obiso and I am so excited to serve as your CD for the Ad Hoc at BosMUN

XX! I am originally from New Jersey, but currently live in Boston. I am a junior at Boston

University double majoring in Linguistics and Chinese Language and Culture and minoring in

International Relations. At BU, was a crisis staffer for the Ad Hoc at BosMUN XVIII and a

Chair for the Taiwanese Independence committee at BosMUN XIX. I am so excited to return to the Ad Hoc again! I am also the current Head Delegate of MUN@BU, the Boston University

Model UN team. As a delegate I have competed in lots of committees, most recently an Ad Hoc and have found my niche in crisis.

The topic of this committee is the Emu War! I find the Emu War a very fascinating and niche topic; I also think that it serves well as a backdrop for a crisis committee. The Emu War cannot be fully understood without knowing the history of Western and the pariah state status it had. With a growing secessionist movement, the federal government launched the Emu

War. This committee can be a wargame or more quirky through collaboration between the delegates and the crisis room through notes. I am so excited to see what you all do with this committee and look forward to meeting you all on Friday!

Sincerely,

Timothy Obiso Overview of Crisis

Considering this is an ad hoc committee, we are operating under the assumption that many of you are experienced crisis delegates. But if you are not, no worries! A crisis committee, for those of you who have not previously participated, is a fast-paced, rapidly changing delegate experience. Delegates are tasked with dealing two equally important components in this type of committee:

1) The in-room (literally inside the committee) which is more conventionally based Model

UN. Delegates are tasked with making speeches, cooperating and negotiating with other

delegates, and writing directives to address problems the committee will face.

2) The Crisis room (not literally inside the committee), which will be delivering updates to

the committee based on a combination of historical events, responses to delegates

directives, the actions of delegates when personally communicating and interacting with

the crisis room, and other factors.

Delegates will have to work together to react quickly and decisively to updates given to them by the crisis room. At the same time, delegates should also personally interact with the crisis room via their own personal directives in whichever manner they see fit. Debate will generally revolve around the two main topics outlined later in the background guide; however, the committee will primarily be driven by crises that delegates are expected to deal with. This, by no means, requires delegates to do any research outside of the subjects mentioned in the guide (but please do research on the subjects mentioned here!), but just that delegates should be adaptable and quick-thinking to address anything that might be throw their way in committee! Further details on the “in-room”

Delegates are expected to work with one another to address the issues put forward in the committee. In crisis, there is no “Opening Speech”, nor is there a “Speaker’s List”, as in more conventional, General Assembly-type committees. Rather, debate is driven forward by various

“Moderated Caucuses”, “Unmoderated Caucuses”, and other forms of debate that are generally considered “Suspensions of the Rules” (such as a Round Robin, a Question & Answer period, or other creative motions delegates may have to propose should circumstances dictate as such).

To address the topics of debate and crises, delegates will author “Directives”. Delegates may be familiar with “Resolutions” – documents that are written in long-form, formalized and structured writing, and often the subject of final debate in large committees to address a given topic.

Directives, on the other hand, are much shorter, informal (do not require perambulatory or operative clauses) and should be consistently produced by delegates throughout the duration of the conference, in an attempt to solve the crises that are given to the committee. While the dais appreciates the constant churning out directives and understands that, due to the fast-paced nature of a crisis committee, such directives may not be a delegate’s magnum opus, the expectation that directives will retain detail and creativity remains; there is no expectation, however, that they resemble formal resolutions in anyway. The more detailed and creative (if only in a few lines) directives are, the more likely that these documents will effectively deal with a crisis at hand.

Further details on the Crisis Room (“out-room”) For those who have never participated in a crisis committee before, what differentiates this committee type from all others is the crisis room. While this would traditionally be an actual, physical “room”, delegates would never actually journey to this place – it is where the committee’s Crisis Director and Crisis staffers will be pulling the strings of the committee. Of course, given the nature of the conference this year, the crisis room, updates, and more will all be virtual. It is the crisis room that dictates what crises the committee is confronted with; these crises are decided based on the plans of the Crisis Director, but also how delegates interact with the crisis room, and the ways in which the committee acts as a whole.

Delegates will be communicating with the crisis room by means provided by BosMUN’s virtual conference platform. (See the BosMUN website for greater detail.) Delegates should write to some sort of character (or characters), of their own creation and imagination. For example, notes should not be addressed “To the Crisis Room”, but instead, “Dear Secretary Johnson.” Such notes should then go into detail about what delegates want to accomplish, why they want to accomplish it, and (most importantly) how to accomplish it. The last part is key – the crisis room is likely to grant delegates’ requests/actions should the delegate be thorough, creative, and mostly realistic (related to delegates’ portfolio powers) to do so. These notes can be used to accomplish personal (as the delegate is representing a character) as well as committee-wide objectives. That which delegates accomplish outside the committee room, will often directly and indirectly impact what happens inside the committee room. Ad Hoc

The best part of this whole weekend will be that you are participating in the BosMUN XX’s ad hoc committee. This designation means more than simply receiving this background guide on a relatively short timeline before committee begins. More importantly, it means each of you as delegates will have the opportunity and responsibility to engage with crises in dynamic ways that propel committee forward – more so than in any other committee at BosMUN. In ad hoc, we highly encourage creativity and the construction of out-of-the-box problem-solving, as well as unique crisis arcs that might steer the committee in unexplored, potentially unconventional directions.

While this all may sound complicated and overwhelming…there is no need to worry. Both the

Crisis Director and Chair are very understanding and more than willing to answer any questions.

Both will go over further expectations and questions regarding crisis at the beginning of the committee, but delegates should familiarize themselves with expectations prior to the conference. BUT ALSO, if a delegate has never participated in Crisis before…not a problem!!

To be put simply, the best way to learn a crisis committee is to do a crisis committee. The first one is always the most fun (probably ☺).

Structure of Committee

The structure of the committee will diverge from a conventional singular governing body committee. Rather than functioning as an official government department or regional Australian government, the committee will be made up of a diverse collection of stakeholders who are impacted by the Emu Crisis of 1932. The committee will include military veterans, farmers, federal and state government representatives, conservationists, and more. In order to make this committee as dynamic as possible, and to foster healthy discourse and the potential for innovative solutions, we attempted to select characters that will inevitably disagree or might present different perspectives on the issues. While the committee is of course predicated on cooperation for passage of productive measures, we wanted to make sure that there is enough diversity of opinion that not every solution is agreed upon immediately and with consensus.

Regardless of roles, each committee member will have equal power and authority in the committee room, though, as in any crisis committee, their different roles will dictate their relationship with the crisis room and the actions they might individually perform in responding to a crisis.

Just because two delegates have similar positions does not necessarily imply that they should or should not work together. Two military veterans could just as easily work together as one could work with a member of the federal government or a conservationist. It is truly up to the delegates how best to pursue their goals and create solutions in the committee.

Note from the Chair: I have personally participated in Crisis committees throughout high school and college and have by far been my favorite types of committee in both settings…we hope that we will recreate that same feeling for all of you! Introduction

On August 4, 1914, Wilhelm II, the last Kaiser (German Emperor) and King of Prussia, ordered

German forces to attack France by way of Belgium. Unable to stay on the sidelines any longer,

Great Britain entered the ‘The War to End All Wars’. Almost immediately, Prime Minister

Joseph Cook and Opposition Leader Andrew Fisher of Australia pledged their full support to

Britain, offering brave Australian men to join the fight. Many volunteered, eager to join the

Australian Imperial Force (AIF) and take the fight to the Central Powers – Germany, Austria-

Hungary, Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. The men of Australia fought and gave their lives in the

Pacific, in Europe, and in the Middle East. By war’s end, from a population of just under five million, 416,809 men enlisted, of whom more than 60,000 were killed and 156,000 wounded, gassed, or taken prisoner.

Upon conclusion of the Great War’s in 1919, soldiers from all walks of life, old and young returned to Australia’s shores, becoming veterans as they breathed the air of the Continent. In their heroic performance in victory, many Australian men and their families sacrificed a great deal and returned with scars – physical and otherwise – that would not heal, even if time were to be infinite. More despairingly, many did not have much to come back to. A great number of soldiers simply had nothing to do – no job prospects or education opportunities were particularly plentiful at the time.

“Soldier Settlement Schemes” – the Origin of the Issue Even the Australian government struggled to find them work. Eventually the Australian federal government and respective state government came to the realization that providing income for returning soldiers, in part as recognition for the sacrifices made by the soldiers and their families.

In the latter half of 1915 the state and federal governments began to work together to create and implement a “soldier settlement scheme”. Modeled on prior efforts to populate the tough

Australian inland, governments purchased significant plots of land, split them into smaller farms, and awarded them to soldiers returning from war.

In 1916, the government introduced the “Returned Soldiers Settlement Act”; soldiers were eligible to apply if they had served overseas in the Australian Imperial Forces or the British Defense Service. Under this legislation, British soldiers, too, were able to participate in the government program. The land was available to soldiers at pre-negotiated, reasonable prices. Further, soldiers could receive advanced transfers of payment to make improvements to the land – for purchase of farming equipment, tools, stock and seeds – which was often not prime for farming. The initial act was amended in 1917 to allow soldiers who did not serve overseas to apply for these lands. Nurses and female relatives of deceased soldiers were also eligible to apply for Crown lands.

In February 1916, a conference of representatives from the Australian government and all state governments was held in to consider a report prepared by the Federal Parliamentary

War Committee regarding a federalized “soldier settlement scheme”. The representatives ultimately agreed that it was the role of the federal government to select and acquire land while the state governments would be responsible for processing land grant applications and allocating the land accordingly. This was a contentiously agreed to arrangement.

The plan was rolled out across all states, and by 1920, 90,000 hectares of land had been purchased. By 1924, nearly 100,000 hectares had been allocated to ex-soldiers and other eligible land grantees under the program. Approximately 5,030 ex-soldiers were granted land and had converted them into working farms, primarily for the cultivation of wheat and sheep.

In the early 1920s, the federal government determined that the purchase of more land was necessary to satisfy the aims of the soldier settlement programs. Accordingly, they began to acquire land in marginal areas of Perth in . The issue, however, is that much of this land was the opposite of arable. Significant portions were infertile or located in arid climates. These conditions were not conducive to farming, even for the most practices of farmers. For soldiers with little to no prior experience, the task was nearly impossible.

Exacerbating the difficulties faced by these ex-soldiers throughout the 1920s was the beginning of the Great Depression. By 1929, of the more than 5,000 ex-soldiers granted land under the soldier settlement scheme, only 3,500 remained on the land – many of whom were in Western

Australia. In 1929, with the onset of the Great Depression, farmers in Western Australia – already tenants of borderline unfarmable land – were encouraged to increase the production of wheat crops, with the promise that the federal government would provide assistance in the form of subsidies. Those subsidies never came. Main Topic: The Emu Crisis…the Emu War?

By October 1932, the ex-soldiers faced circumstances that seemed impossible to overcome. Then the emus came. In Australia, emus had been a protected native species until 1922. However, they were considered by many farmers to be nothing more than a nuisance – flattening and eating crops, damaging farming land infrastructure – and were reclassified as “vermin”. Tens of thousands of emus had been displaced in the purchase and allocation of land by the government, particularly in Western Australia. In the fall of 1932 – breeding season for the emus – they began their seasonal migration from the coast of Australia to the inland regions.

20,000 emus have begun wreaking havoc on the farms of the ex-soldiers, many of which are already in great despair. Ravaging the remaining crops, consuming the little available water, and destroying fences (allowing other animals to enter farming land and create other problems), the emus have made life extremely difficult for those whose farms are in Western Australia, particularly around the towns of Chandler and Walgoolan. Some have tried to take matters into their own hands, but even these trained soldiers and now hardened farmers, could not put a dent in their numbers thus far. The question now: do we go to war to stop the emus? Many ex-soldiers have already requested meetings with the Australian Minister of Defence, Sir George Pearce…

Coming to some sort of solution in regard to the marauding emu population is imperative for the livelihood of these soldiers – those whose sacrifices in the Great War protected freedom across the globe. What precisely should be done? Topic A: State vs. Federal Government

It is imperative that the committee comes to some sort of understanding in regard to the role of the federal Australian government and the state-level government of Western Australia.

Relations between the federal and state governments are already fraught. The soldier settlement scheme has largely been a failure, and state governments have been disappointed and frustrated with the federal government administered program.

Further, many are quite discontented with the federal government’s handling of the economy and social programs in the midst of the Great Depression. Already, they failed to deliver assistance to farmers struggling, and many blame the realities of their post-war lives on the botched policies of the federal government. As in most nations with powerful state governments, there is the desire to make the federal government bend to Western Australia’s will…

Topic B: Conservation, Animal Rights vs. Removal of Emus

Despite calls for war – essentially extermination of the emus – there have been qualms with the ethical qualifications of such an undertaking. Further, there are some in Australia who believe strongly that the land was rightfully the emus to begin with and that their behavior is simply part of their nature. Others, perhaps, see this as an excuse to exact revenge on the federal government for what they believe to be a half-hearted policy set up to fail from the beginning. Should there be calls for conservation in hopes the federal government will abandon the soldier-settlement scheme altogether and be forced to move in a different direction?

Additionally, it is possible that activist organizations, international or domestic, might have a say in how to deal with the emus. Rather than, you know, declaring war. Dossiers:

George Pearce, Minister for Defence: A career politician, George Pearce has served a plethora of roles in government ranging while Senator for Western Australia. After training as a carpenter in , Pearce moved and helped to establish the Labor Party in 1901, which he won his first election under. Pearce has served as the Minister for Home and Territories and currently is the Minister for Defence. Pearce is a member of the United Australia Party and is firmly against the secession of Western Australia. As the 1923, Father of the Senate, Pearce has a large influence over politics on both the state and national levels. With a growing secessionist movement already threatening to fracture the country, will a war against birds bring Australia together?

Josiah Francis, Minister of the War Service Homes: Francis is currently an Australian politician who has served in the House of Representatives since 1922. He served in the Australian Imperial Force in the 15th Battalion in France during World War I sustaining minor injuries. After being discharged, Francis began to work with the Returned Sailors’ and Soldiers’ Imperial League of Australia. He is currently a member of the United Australia Party. As the Emu War is technically a war, how will he lead Australia (as one) to victory?

Joseph Lyons, Prime Minister of Australia: Joseph Lyons is the current Prime Minister of Australia and a member of the United Australia Party. Lyons began his career as a member of the but left after the 1931 ALP Split. After successful negotiation of a constitutional crisis in , he was elected to the House of Representatives in the 1929 election where he was appointed to cabinet for Prime Minister James Scullin. After the ALP Split, Lyons won the 1931 election in a landslide along with the UAP. In the wake of the Great Depression, how will you balance the needs of your constituents sith the need to pacify the secessionist movement?

James Scullin, Former Prime Minister: James Scullin was elected Prime Minister in a landslide victory for the ALP in 1929. However, things changed once the Great Depression left Australia deeply indebted, souring their popularity. The difficult act of balancing relief payments and foreign debt and citizen worry of overinflation is what ultimately cost the ALP the 1931 election. While not currently Prime Minister, Scullin is a largely respected senior member of the ALP whose progressive fiscal policy after the Great Depression did not mesh with the conservative mindset of the government. Will any of these policies be helpful in advising members of your party on the Emu War?

James Mitchell, Premier of Western Australia: James Mitchell began his political career as honorary minister for agricultural expansion in 1906. Mitchell also served as Premier once before from 1919-1924 where he was largely responsible for the establishment of the Western Australia dairy industry. After being elected again in 1929, Mitchell is sympathetic to the needs of Western Australia. As a member of the Nationalist Party, Mitchell is extremely skillful at dealing with the divide between the Country Party. Will you be able to cross this species divide?

Philip Collier, Former Premier: Philip Collier is the former Premier of Western Australia and served in this role from 1924-1930. A union activist since his youth, he eventually joined the Labor party to be elected into his role in 1924 but lost support over the conscription split, losing the 1930 election. He still is an active member of the Labor Party and has many close ties to politics still? Will the Emu War bring him back into the political limelight?

Billy Hughes, Former Prime Minister of Australia: is best known for being the Prime Minister of Australia during World War I, however his influence was felt in Australian politics for decades after. Billy Hughes is a quintessential career politician having served in five, led five, lasted longer than four, and was ousted from three. Hughes merged his party into the new UAP where he currently finds himself aligned. How will the emus change Australian politics?

Sir , Former Governor of Western Australia: After serving in World War I in France as a lieutenant colonel, Sir William Campion came to Australia and was appointed Governor of Australia. Although he is currently in London, Sir Campion is a strong advocate for immigration to Australia from the UK and is very involved in gold mining and immigration schemes. Will the Emu War end the gold rush before it begins?

Alira Jones, Wheat Farmer: Growing up on her family’s wheat farm in Walgoolan, Western Australia has given Jones the typical agrarian upbringing. Recently, however, the emu population has been breaking into her family’s fields and wrecking havoc on the crops. After attempting to deal with the problem herself, the emus still run rampant and her family has almost no wheat, one of Australia’s cash crops. Coordinating with the neighbors is almost impossible and shooting the emus is entirely a waste of ammunition for one family. After months, the emus still run free and have even begun to break through fences others have established. How will her unique perspective help Australia in the Emu War?

Charlotte Smith, Livestock Farmer: As a lifelong resident of Chandler, Western Australia. The recent Emu problems have begun to show up in the fields. Initially, scaring off one emu was not an issue. Now, hordes of them show up and terrorize the livestock. After working with the state government, it is up to the federal government to decide how this problem will be dealt with. Smith’s problem is far from unique and acts as a representative of all Western Australia livestock farmers whose livelihoods have been and will be severely impacted without some kind of solution. Without this kind of support, why shouldn’t Western Australia secede?

Dominic Serventy, Ornithologist: Dominic Louis Serventy resides in Perth Australia and is an ornithologist, someone who focuses on the methodological study and consequent knowledge of birds and all areas that relate to them. As that community is very small, you have intimate knowledge of its membership and work very closely with them to coordinate on all things bird. What role will you play in the Emu War?

Hubert Whittell, Ornithologist: Hubert Whittell did many different things during his lifetime. Hailing from London, having a father working in India, and attending school in Germany gives Whittell an extremely unique perspective on things, especially for the time. Whittell worked extensively as an ornithologist, someone who focuses on the methodological study and consequent knowledge of birds and all areas that relate to them. Will the activities in Western Australia cause the ornithology community to intervene?

James MacCallum Smith, Western Australia Secessionist: James Smith had a rocky start as a politician but currently enjoys his seat for North Perth that he won in 1914 and has not lost since. Smith is also a staunch Australian secessionist. Smith is currently working on the referendum to have Western Australia secede from the state of Australia. His claim that they are a ‘Cinderella state’ is echoed throughout most of WA. Will the Emu War kickstart any formal start to the secession?

Keith Watson, Western Australia Secessionist: Keith Watson was an Australian politician most known for forming the pro-secession Dominion League and serving as its secretary and treasurer. The League is working extremely hard to push for a YES vote on the referendum to secede and govern themselves. Will the Emu War usher in a new era of federal dependence or self- sufficiency for Western Australia?

Abigail McMurrary, Cinematographer: McMurray was born in Perth but recently moved to Sydney to work for Fox Movietone, one of the premier newsreel channels. The current Australian government has contacted you to produce footage on the Emu War and the effort of the federal government to tame the fires of secessionism. Fox Movietone has connections all over the broadcastable world, yet very few people even within Australia know about it. How will your presentation change the public image of the Emu War?

John Thomas “Jack” Patten, First Australian Military Activist: Patten grew up in New South Wales at, Cummergunja Reserve, an Aboriginal reserve. After unsuccessfully attempting to enlist in the navy, he became a public speaker and shortly thereafter, an activist. At the time of committee, Patten is currently beginning to organize Aboriginal rights events in Sydney and all over the country to allow First Australians to enlist in the military and receive equal benefits. How will Patten’s activism fare in a new age of heightened political awareness?

Pearl Gibbs, First Australian Labor Activist: Gibbs is the most prominent female activist of the time. She was born in Yass in 1901 and also grew up in the area. In 1917, Gibbs and her sister moved to Sydney to work as domestics. She later helped them make claims to the ABorigines Protection Board. This was the beginning of her commitment to activism. She currently works to support unemployed Aboriginal workers and works to unionize and mobilize workers being mistreated. With new war-induced labor demand, what role will these workers play in the Emu War?

William Cooper, First Australian Land Activist: Cooper has dedicated his life to Aboriginal rights, specifically land rights. In 1887, he petitioned the New South Wales governor to restore the land that was stolen by the Australian government to Aboriginal families in the Maloga Petition. Cooper recently moved to Melbourne where he is currently organizing a grassroots campaign for Aboriginal rights through his signature letter-writing ability. How will the movement in Western Australia disrupt any Melbourne-based activism?

Bill Onus, First Australian Social Activist Onus was born to a Wiredjuri father and a Yorta Yorta mother at the Cummeragunja Aboriginal Reserve in 1906. In 1928, he moved to Sydney where he originally worked as a rigger. The Great Depression forced him to take on a number of odd jobs. He currently works with other indigenous activists to promote indigenous Australians in media and the public eye as well as in politics which his experience as an actor helps with. Will his “superstar” connections push for a new agenda for Australia?

William Ferguson, First Australian Political Activist: Ferguson was born in New South Wales and worked many jobs, notably as a shearer, before becoming politically active through the Australian Workers’ Union. Ferguson works closely with the Australian Labor Party to ensure the protection of First Australians’ rights. His grassroots activism has provided protections for shearers, mailmen, and general laborers in Australia. Will he be able to impact lasting change on the government once again?

Margaret Tucker, First Australian Activist: Tucker was born to a Wiradjuri father and a Yorta Yorta mother in 1904. She was forcibly removed to attend a school for Aboriginal children where she was horribly mistreated. After completing school, she worked for a family who abused her before she ran away after failed intervention of the Aborigines Protection Board. She moved to Melbourne in 1925 where she is one of the founding members of the Australian Aborigines’ League. She is influenced by the Communist Party of Australia and fights for Aboriginal rights. What will she do during this time of heightened political activism?

Jack Miles, Communist Labor Activist: Miles, inspired by the Soviet Union, was a founding member of the Communist Party of Australia. He worked as a meatworkers and represented the Australian Meat Industry Employees’ Union before representing stonemasons. He and his party criticize the Labor Party’s “social facism.” With growing political dissent, many have joined the CPA, will this new wave of government criticism push the people in your favor?

Fred Paterson, Communist Labor Activist: Paterson enjoyed a comfortable middle-class life, graduating from the University of before serving in the military during World War I. After witnessing extreme poverty in Ireland and London while studying theology, he rejected Christianity and joined the Communist Party of Australia. Last year, he was admitted to the NSW Bar as works as a lawyer there while working with the CPA. How will this vast set of skills help him pull Australia to the left?

Adela Pankhurst, Feminist Political Activist: Pankhurst was born in Manchester in 1885 and joined the Women’s Social and Political Union founded by her mother and sisters. In 1909, she interrupted a talk given by Winston Churchill. She has also been arrested for slapping a police officer trying to evict her. Pankhurst moved to Australia in 1914 and continued her activism there. She recently became disillusioned with communism and founded the Australian Women’s Guild of Empire in 1927. With the Emu War changing all things political and Adela’s wide variety of political ideologies, which one will she take under her wing next?

Vida Goldstein, Feminist Political Activist: Goldstein was born in in 1877 before growing up in Melbourne. Goldstein and her mother both became prominent suffragettes known for their public speaking and editorials about suffrage. She was also one of four female candidates in the 1903 federal election, the first in which women were able to run. While she isn’t actively involved in politics, she still works on feminist activism projects such as the Women’s Peace Army. How will her activism shape the future of Australian elections?