Votes and Proceedings House of Representatives
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Dorahy Family
The Dorahy Family The Irish origins and Australian descendants of William and Ann Dorahy Helen Patterson The Dorahy Family: The Irish origins and Australian descendants of William and Ann Dorahy © Helen Patterson 2012 Published in 2012 for the 175th Anniversary of the arrival of the Dorahy family in Sydney in 1837 Helen Patterson 2/26 Wicks Rd North Ryde NSW 2113 (02) 8084 4721 [email protected] This work is copyright. No part may be reproduced without permission of the author. Cover: Image of Adam Lodge reproduced from Samuel Walters - Marine Artist: Fifty Years of Sea, Sail and Steam by A S Davidson, 1992, (ISBN: 0-947764-46-1) with permission of the publishers Jones-Sands Publishing, Warwickshire, UK ii The Dorahy Family: The Irish origins and Australian descendants of William and Ann Dorahy CONTENTS Part A Introduction - The Dorahy name 7 1. Dromore, Tyrone, Ireland 10 2. The Dorahys in County Tyrone 16 3. The 1837 Voyage of the Adam Lodge 21 4. Greendale, NSW 29 5. William and Ann Dorahy 37 6. Catherine Dorahy and John Lovat 47 7. Patrick Dorahy, Mary Pidgeon and Bridget Coffey 55 8. William Dorahy and Julia Coffey 67 9. Bridget Dorahy and Ludwig Anschau 74 Part B 10. Some Dorahy descendants 1837-1937 85 Dorahy family biographies 93 iii Preface When I was young I used to ask my grandfather, Joe Dorahy (son of Patrick), about our Dorahy forebears. Where did the Dorahys come from? Why was the name so unusual that no one could pronounce it or spell it correctly? He told me that our ancestors came from Ireland, that two Dorahy brothers came to Australia when they were very young, that these brothers married two sisters - and that he had no idea about the origins of our name! That was the sum total of his knowledge of our ancestry. -
The Importance of Boundaries
The importance of boundaries Colin Hughes Emeritus Professor of Politic Science, University of Queensland Research Paper 1 (November 2007) Democratic Audit of Australia Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia http://democratic.audit.anu.edu.au The views expressed are the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Democratic Audit of Australia. If elections are to be thought fair, their outcomes should correspond as closely as possible to the inputs of voter preferences. A particular percentage of the votes counted for a party should produce close to the same percentage of the seats won by that party. Down that path lie the topics of partisan bias and proportional representation with multi-member electoral districts as the most common solution. But there is a second criterion of fairness which is that outcomes should correspond to the numbers of electors or people to be represented. That criterion is often called equality, and down that path lie the topics of malapportionment and enforced equality as a solution. The two criteria may not work in the same direction.1 In Australia the problem of equality has been debated mainly with respect to the dichotomy of town and country, ‘town’ usually meaning the State capital(s) which have been invariably by far the largest urban center in each State and ‘country’ the rest, though sometimes the larger provincial cities and towns get lumped in with their local metropolis. Should town voters have the same quantity of representation, measured by the number of electors in the electoral districts, as country voters? There has also been a sub-plot, which is what this paper is about, that concerns the existence of a small number of electoral districts spread over exceptionally large areas in which the population, and consequently the numbers of electors, is relatively thin on the ground and widely scattered. -
Proposed Redistribution of the New South Wales Into Electoral Divisions
Proposed redistribution of New South Wales into electoral divisions OCTOBER 2015 Report of the Redistribution Committee for New South Wales Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 Feedback and enquiries Feedback on this report is welcome and should be directed to the contact officer. Contact officer National Redistributions Manager Roll Management Branch Australian Electoral Commission 50 Marcus Clarke Street Canberra ACT 2600 PO Box 6172 Kingston ACT 2604 Telephone: 02 6271 4411 Fax: 02 6215 9999 Email: [email protected] AEC website www.aec.gov.au Accessible services Visit the AEC website for telephone interpreter services in 18 languages. Readers who are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment can contact the AEC through the National Relay Service (NRS): – TTY users phone 133 677 and ask for 13 23 26 – Speak and Listen users phone 1300 555 727 and ask for 13 23 26 – Internet relay users connect to the NRS and ask for 13 23 26 ISBN: 978-1-921427-38-1 © Commonwealth of Australia 2015 © State of New South Wales 2015 The report should be cited as Redistribution Committee for the New South Wales, Proposed redistribution of New South Wales into electoral divisions. 15_0526 The Redistribution Committee for New South Wales (the Committee) has completed its proposed redistribution of New South Wales into 47 electoral divisions. In developing and considering the impacts of the redistribution proposal, the Committee has satisfied itself that the proposed boundaries meet the requirements of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Electoral Act). The Committee unanimously agreed on the boundaries and names of the proposed electoral divisions, and recommends its redistribution proposal for New South Wales.